toughness

[gbdet 0]

A good read:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writ...lent/index.html

a link from the SI article:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEltpSMTDPM

This is probably the best one with players and coaches opinions:

http://broadband.tsn.ca/tsn/?id=349&vid=3967

Man am I glad that at least some people share my opinion....

The craziest thing happened thursday night, I went to go see the London Knights play the Guelph Storm in London on Thursday night. The Knights were down by a couple of goals and didn't look like they were to much into the game and you'll never guess what happened.... A FIGHT... Not only did the Knights come from behind to win the game, but that fight was the turning point in the game.

EDIT* HERE IS ANOTHER GREAT READ

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Brown...407244-sun.html

Edited February 6, 2007 by gbdet

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

A good read:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writ...lent/index.html

a link from the SI article:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEltpSMTDPM

This is probably the best one with players and coaches opinions:

http://broadband.tsn.ca/tsn/?id=349&vid=3967

Man am I glad that at least some people share my opinion....

The craziest thing happened thursday night, I went to go see the London Knights play the Guelph Storm in London on Thursday night. The Knights were down by a couple of goals and didn't look like they were to much into the game and you'll never guess what happened.... A FIGHT... Not only did the Knights come from behind to win the game, but that fight was the turning point in the game.

EDIT* HERE IS ANOTHER GREAT READ

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Brown...407244-sun.html

I think alot of people here want the same thing. We'd all like to have bigger, tougher players in the lineup who will fight and stick up for teammates. You aren't in any minority there. But whenever this topic comes up some folks tend to glorify the role of the fighter so much so as to make you think it will prevent our players from ever getting cheap shotted, run at, hit cleanly, slashed, face washed, cursed at or even looked at funny. In that video clip of Hemsky getting drilled...who is going to stop Boogaard from throwing that hit? The answer....Nobody. Now Pasta Man (yes, that is Stortini's new nickname) can mabye do something about it the next time they play but if anybody thinks Boogaard isn't going to throw more hits or try to destroy somebody because he's worried about the Pasta Man, then they're dreaming.

[gbdet 0]

I think alot of people here want the same thing. We'd all like to have bigger, tougher players in the lineup who will fight and stick up for teammates. You aren't in any minority there. But whenever this topic comes up some folks tend to glorify the role of the fighter so much so as to make you think it will prevent our players from ever getting cheap shotted, run at, hit cleanly, slashed, face washed, cursed at or even looked at funny. In that video clip of Hemsky getting drilled...who is going to stop Boogaard from throwing that hit? The answer....Nobody. Now Pasta Man (yes, that is Stortini's new nickname) can mabye do something about it the next time they play but if anybody thinks Boogaard isn't going to throw more hits or try to destroy somebody because he's worried about the Pasta Man, then they're dreaming.

Who is going to do something about it??????

Who could stop Boogard?????

How about Laraque, Godard, McGratton, Peters, Brashear, Simon, Shelley... etc,etc.

Are you opossed to our star players getting cheap shots less often???

I never said it would stop every cheap shot, but it would definetly reduce them.

How many times did you see Gretzky get run down??? Or how about Lemiux... or even Yzerman when Probie was around???

Do you think Crosby would have the problems he's having right now if Boogard were a Penguin???

If Boogard would have taken exception to Blake's spear do you really think Lapierre would have butt-ended Crosby???

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Who is going to do something about it??????

Who could stop Boogard?????

How about Laraque, Godard, McGratton, Peters, Brashear, Simon, Shelley... etc,etc.

Are you opossed to our star players getting cheap shots less often???

I never said it would stop every cheap shot, but it would definetly reduce them.

How many times did you see Gretzky get run down??? Or how about Lemiux... or even Yzerman when Probie was around???

Do you think Crosby would have the problems he's having right now if Boogard were a Penguin???

If Boogard would have taken exception to Blake's spear do you really think Lapierre would have butt-ended Crosby???

I've studied the art of fighting in hockey probably more than anybody i've ever met or played with. I've poured over countless hours of fight tapes and read books about it, blah, blah.....

One thing that has always baffled me is this perception that the enforcer can reduce punishment to your players. Part of me believes there's truth in that becuase so many people involved with hockey at the pro level will attest to that. But then there's a part of me that's always questioned that because how does one necessarily measure that?

Let's say the Pens have an enforcer from here on out for the rest of the season. I suppose somebody could review all 82 games and see if he took more hits or more stickwork with an enforcer in the lineup versus without one but i've never seen a study like that. I've never seen anything substantiated. How exactly do you measure something that may or may not occur? You take the statement that "an enforcer can lessen the amount of hits and cheap shots your star player takes"...Now, If you have an enforcer and your star gets hit or doesn't get hit how does that tell you what impact it has on lessening the amount of punishment your star might endure? If your star player takes 3 hits in one game how can you know if the enforcer's presence prevented those 3 hits from being 5 hits? How do you attribute something that seemingly isn't easily quantifiable to something as specific as the presence of an enforcer.

I don't want to pick a fight with anybody who truly believes an enforcer is a good thing or we need one...God knows i'm in agreement wholeheartedly. Its just part of me thinks that if we had a guy or a couple of guys like that it would make retribution much more likely but I don't know what impact it can have from a deterrent aspect and I don't know how you can say definitely either way.

As for the enforcers you listed, can you prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that their presence would've prevented Boogaard from hitting Hemsky? I don't see how you can. I think an argument can be made that one of those guys could then challenge Boogaard to a fight but I don't think you can PROVE that the initial hit would've never ocurred. If you can please explain.

[gbdet 0]

I've studied the art of fighting in hockey probably more than anybody i've ever met or played with. I've poured over countless hours of fight tapes and read books about it, blah, blah.....

One thing that has always baffled me is this perception that the enforcer can reduce punishment to your players. Part of me believes there's truth in that becuase so many people involved with hockey at the pro level will attest to that. But then there's a part of me that's always questioned that because how does one necessarily measure that?

Let's say the Pens have an enforcer from here on out for the rest of the season. I suppose somebody could review all 82 games and see if he took more hits or more stickwork with an enforcer in the lineup versus without one but i've never seen a study like that. I've never seen anything substantiated. How exactly do you measure something that may or may not occur? You take the statement that "an enforcer can lessen the amount of hits and cheap shots your star player takes"...Now, If you have an enforcer and your star gets hit or doesn't get hit how does that tell you what impact it has on lessening the amount of punishment your star might endure? If your star player takes 3 hits in one game how can you know if the enforcer's presence prevented those 3 hits from being 5 hits? How do you attribute something that seemingly isn't easily quantifiable to something as specific as the presence of an enforcer.

I don't want to pick a fight with anybody who truly believes an enforcer is a good thing or we need one...God knows i'm in agreement wholeheartedly. Its just part of me thinks that if we had a guy or a couple of guys like that it would make retribution much more likely but I don't know what impact it can have from a deterrent aspect and I don't know how you can say definitely either way.

As for the enforcers you listed, can you prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that their presence would've prevented Boogaard from hitting Hemsky? I don't see how you can. I think an argument can be made that one of those guys could then challenge Boogaard to a fight but I don't think you can PROVE that the initial hit would've never ocurred. If you can please explain.

Of course you cant PROVE Hemsky would never have been hit.

I never claimed that he never would have been hit, I never claimed dirty hits would dissappear.

I claimed there would be fewer dirty hits. Perhaps there is no exact scientific study to prove this, but perhaps the wisdom of the greatest non-violent hockey player of all time carries some weight. Wayne Gretzky himself said there are more injuries now because there is less fighting.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Of course you cant PROVE Hemsky would never have been hit.

I never claimed that he never would have been hit, I never claimed dirty hits would dissappear.

I claimed there would be fewer dirty hits. Perhaps there is no exact scientific study to prove this, but perhaps the wisdom of the greatest non-violent hockey player of all time carries some weight. Wayne Gretzky himself said there are more injuries now because there is less fighting.

That's the difficulty with this subject. As I stated, part of me believes in this school of thought because of how many players, coaches, etc... claim that the enforcer role is still necessary and does provide some relief. And still part of me thinks it prevents nothing and eats up valuable roster space. If we signed Georges Laraque tomorrow i'd be doing cartwheels with everybody else, believe me. I just don't think the argument can be proven one way or the other so I try not to make claims that it will definitely have an impact. Will it keep guys from getting hit? I don't know. Will it make it easier for us to answer in kind and hold teams accountable? No doubt. And that's why i'm for bringing in some tougher players. I just don't know that it solves our problems.

Carolina won the cup last year and they had no enforcer, not even for the playoffs when the hitting and chippy play really picks up so what does that tell us?

I still hope we pick up a tough player who can log some good minutes before the deadline but I won't lose sleep over it if we don't. But that's just me.

[BlueMonk 102]

It's a legit question. I think the change in the culture of the league runs pretty deep. Guys really never did hit Gretzky back in the day, and that was attributed to his linemates. Of course, at that time, it wasn't uncommon to see an enforcer just grab the guy who hit his teammated and pummel the sh** out of him. Today, you just don't see that. I guess Hordichuk pounding Avery into the ice for a marginal hit last year is one of the very, very few exceptions.

I don't believe having a tough guy will stop all the dirty hits. Teams with tough guys still have to deal with hits to their star players. But I do believe it makes other teams think twice. I don't think Ovechkin has taken nearly as much abuse as Crosby, and he does have an enforcer (albeit a sometimes reluctant one) in Brashear on his team. More importantly, I think an unwillingness or inability to answer the physical bell sends a message to the rest of the league that it's ok to cheap shot their guys, or at least commit questionable plays without too much thought. When playoff time comes, all teams attack the Wings the same way: Just keep hitting them. They rely on that strategy wearing the Wings down. Even teams that don't normally play that kind of hockey try it against Detroit. The past few years, it's worked.

[Earthhuman 8]

When playoff time comes, all teams attack the Wings the same way: Just keep hitting them. They rely on that strategy wearing the Wings down. Even teams that don't normally play that kind of hockey try it against Detroit. The past few years, it's worked.

If it works, people will sacrifice their body for it. They're f***ing hockey players. I doesn't matter whether there's a guy on the ice that would KO them, as long as they have the time to hit the guy. And you better believe they'll take the opportunity if it arises on the very next shift.

An enforcer will just do it back, but we couldn't employ that strategy team-wide, as Lidstrom, Zetterberg, Datsyuk, and Williams don't have the capability.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

That's the difficulty with this subject. As I stated, part of me believes in this school of thought because of how many players, coaches, etc... claim that the enforcer role is still necessary and does provide some relief. And still part of me thinks it prevents nothing and eats up valuable roster space. If we signed Georges Laraque tomorrow i'd be doing cartwheels with everybody else, believe me. I just don't think the argument can be proven one way or the other so I try not to make claims that it will definitely have an impact. Will it keep guys from getting hit? I don't know. Will it make it easier for us to answer in kind and hold teams accountable? No doubt. And that's why i'm for bringing in some tougher players. I just don't know that it solves our problems.

Carolina won the cup last year and they had no enforcer, not even for the playoffs when the hitting and chippy play really picks up so what does that tell us?

I still hope we pick up a tough player who can log some good minutes before the deadline but I won't lose sleep over it if we don't. But that's just me.

I dont believe you need the prototypical basher, ala Boogaard, unless its for spot duty situations to neutralize a rival's heavy. But, I do think you have to have guys on your team who will fight. Carolina wasnt very tough, but they did (do) at least have Commodore and Craig Adams (and to a lesser extent Kevin). There were a few others who were at least willing to mix it up if need be as well. What this team needs are guys like Travis Moen...who Anaheim acquired for not much at all (Holmqvist). Why dont we ever take shots with guys like this? Thats what i hate the most! Instead we have schmos like Hussey who you know will never be ANYTHING at the NHL level. It may just be the minors but i still consider that a wasted roster spot! Now look at Moen, not only providing toughness and physical play but also 7 goals. We need to start getting physical players like this into the system. I wish we would trade for someone like Eager, I think theres enough ability there that we could develop him into a solid contributor.

Edited February 6, 2007 by Lou_Siffer

[Guest Crymson]

I think alot of people here want the same thing. We'd all like to have bigger, tougher players in the lineup who will fight and stick up for teammates. You aren't in any minority there. But whenever this topic comes up some folks tend to glorify the role of the fighter so much so as to make you think it will prevent our players from ever getting cheap shotted, run at, hit cleanly, slashed, face washed, cursed at or even looked at funny. In that video clip of Hemsky getting drilled...who is going to stop Boogaard from throwing that hit? The answer....Nobody. Now Pasta Man (yes, that is Stortini's new nickname) can mabye do something about it the next time they play but if anybody thinks Boogaard isn't going to throw more hits or try to destroy somebody because he's worried about the Pasta Man, then they're dreaming.

You can thank Gary "the dips***" Bettman for making such players borderline useless.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

The craziest thing happened thursday night, I went to go see the London Knights play the Guelph Storm in London on Thursday night. The Knights were down by a couple of goals and didn't look like they were to much into the game and you'll never guess what happened.... A FIGHT... Not only did the Knights come from behind to win the game, but that fight was the turning point in the game.

While it definitely must've been cool to see them rally, and I'm not denying that the fight had some affect in momentum swing, toughness/fighting isn't the end-all solution to completely prevent hard hits, runs, or any significant advantage in getting more wins IMO.

I like intensity, I like your regular 1-on-1 fight every now and then. I'd always try to stick up for a teammate if it looks like he deliberatly got run over or was intentionally injured (or attempted injury).

I get irked though of the perception in here that it only happens with this team though and that it is a problem that happens nearly every game.

Maybe it does happen a little more with the Red Wings since they aren't as physical a team as others. Maybe it doesn't...you can't make me believe that having 5 more tough guys on your team, for all other teams in the NHL, is going to significantly help everybody improve in the standings, stop taking runs, and so forth.

I'd like to see people sticking up for each other and for somebody to hold Johnson accountable for his actions when he ran over Hasek for instance, with a fight or something, but I'm not worried constantly about sticking up for a guy who might get ran at once every 30 games.

It just seems a less frequent event to me versus how it's portrayed in here by others.

[Guest micah]

The first time the Flames and Wild played, Boogaard was running everyone in sight. For the next game Calgary did not want a repeat performance so they called up Goddard, he gave Boogaard a concussion, Boogie spent the rest of the game in the lockeroom. Sometimes a tough guy DOES prevent cheap shots by other tough guys. Every fight takes an opponent's tough guy off the ice for 5 minutes, some much longer. Having a person willing to take on a guy who either has or might run your guys can prevent trouble before it happens.

[BlueMonk 102]

If it works, people will sacrifice their body for it. They're f***ing hockey players. I doesn't matter whether there's a guy on the ice that would KO them, as long as they have the time to hit the guy. And you better believe they'll take the opportunity if it arises on the very next shift.

This is true with some players, but not all of them. The problem is, the Wings have zero players who exhibit this kind of toughness and determination. If they did, we wouldn't need to keep bringing up this glaring weakness on the team.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

article about the Ducks view on toughness

Love the comment from Burke

[Heaton 1]

article about the Ducks view on toughness

Love the comment from Burke

What's your problem with Lebda now?

[Lou_Siffer 1]

What's your problem with Lebda now?

lol, just the thing about him not immediately tossing the gloves and fighting Ryan Johnson after he steamrolled Hasek.

[Miller Brew 0]

Our powerplay is our enforcer... oh, wait. I don't think having May (or Newbury) in the line-up really changed anything. I don't think fighting serves more of purpose other than entertainment value. Not talking anything away from May, I think he's a good 4th liner and brings some energy.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Wow.

This is two years old, man.

[Miller Brew 0]

I like to read the entire boards and stumbled across this thread. It needed to be bumped.

[eva unit zero 271]

The only thing an enforcer does, other than provide entertainment value when there are fights, is put a little thought in the back of the opposing player's mind that they MIGHT have to answer for a cheap hit or an effective hit. Or, alternatively, their team's heavy would have to serve in their place, as often occurs.

The problem with a true enforcer is that most play 3-5 minutes per game. Are you going to just keep them on the bench, just in case something does happen, and then throw them out the next time the offending player is on the ice? That's a 2-5-10-game right there. The chances they are on the ice just through their normal line matchups are very unlikely, so just having one is not really a deterrent. What you need is not a Brad May or a Donald Brashear, guys whose primary purpose is fisticuffs.

What you need is a guy or two like Kevin Stevens, Bob Probert, Brendan Shanahan, Gary Roberts, Scott Stevens, Eric Lindros, Wendel Clark, Kevin Hatcher, Rick Tocchet. Guys who can play effectively on the top two forward lines or defense pairings and can pound the s*** out of someone if they happen to run one of your players, because you KNOW they'll be on the ice again together a whole bunch of times later on just by chance, if not on the ice at the time.

[Guest micah]

What you need is a guy or two like Kevin Stevens, Bob Probert, Brendan Shanahan, Gary Roberts, Scott Stevens, Eric Lindros, Wendel Clark, Kevin Hatcher, Rick Tocchet. Guys who can play effectively on the top two forward lines or defense pairings and can pound the s*** out of someone if they happen to run one of your players, because you KNOW they'll be on the ice again together a whole bunch of times later on just by chance, if not on the ice at the time.[/font]

Hudler wouldn't be afraid of Kevin Stevens.

[Guest micah]

Well many coaches/GMs/players at the professional level would disagree with ya concerning the purpose of fighting in the game of hockey.

But those coaches, GMs and players don't have the understanding of the game that people on the internet do.

[up2here 41]

I've been on the fence on the enforcer debate for a very long time now. I tend to think that people who are actually IN hockey know more than I do or any other fan for that matter. Whenever this debate rages on here (About 2 or 3 times per minute) I notice that no one ever mention how poorly most tough guys actually play the game and how that affects the team. I watched the Minnesota game the other night and Boogard must have given the puck away at least 3 times in his 4 minutes of ice time and took a minor penalty causing his team to be short-handed. Not to mention that my 5 year old nephew could outskate him.

I would love to have another Bob Probert or Darren McCarty but those guys are rare tough guys who can play a regular shift and maybe us Wings fans have been spoiled by them.