Kenny, Get an Enforcer Now!

[uk_redwing 495]

Calling this team "soft" b/c of they are missing one guy from previously mentioned post is way too much IMO.

Theyre not just missing Downey. Theyre missing Drake as well. And those two tough physical guys gave the wings a fearless physical mindset. Ive hardly seen any scrums this season, last year you could easily get a couple a game.

The Dallas game where Downey played is a testament to the energy the team can gain just by having him in the line-up.

[Drake_Marcus 890]

if the Sens were willing to send Chris Neil to the Wings for Mikael Samuelsson id jump all over that.

but im not sure if that's kenny holland's style.. trading for a hard nosed canadian, that is.

You're right- Kenny isn't stupid enough to trade a top six forward who can kill penalties and play on the pk for a hard-nosed Canadian fourth line player.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Calling this team "soft" b/c of they are missing one guy from previously mentioned post is way too much IMO.

But if Kenny can make a trade for fists w/o giving up more than 1 fourth liner, fine.

[sureWhyNot 19]

This sums up perfectly what I don't get about some of the posters here. You are more or less championing a statement that is flat out flawed at the least, and flat out untrue at the most.

The statement was:

"Calling this team "soft" b/c of they are missing one guy from previously mentioned post is way too much IMO."

As another poster pointed out the Red Wings are missing two players from last years team, not one - and while I don't think the Wings are necessarily "soft" in their play (with fighting aside of course), I don't see how it is so unfathomable to think that a team who lost the two players who were responsible for close to 75% of the teams 21 FM's, while adding no one in that department to take their spot - may have gotten a tad bit softer. But who knows, maybe I am missing something.

The other issue that confuses me on these boards is why in gods name do people think that winning games and having a couple tougher 3rd or 4th line guys willing to go from time to time are mutually exclusive? They aren't -- at all.

However time after time statements such as:

"You're right- Kenny isn't stupid enough to trade a top six forward who can kill penalties and play on the pk for a hard-nosed Canadian fourth line player."

I mean who ever called, or voiced a desire to trade one of our top 6 goal scorers, who kills penalties on top of it (even though anyone on our PK this year doesn't have much to be proud of, but that's for a diff. day) for a "hard nosed Canadian 4th liner?

But that truth doesn't really matter does it -- Some individuals here will continue on with their patronizing dismissal of both the reality, and what those who desire a slightly meaner lineup really want.

I'll tell you this much -- no one advocating for the tougher lineup wants any of our top 6 gone, they want them right where they are -- but they may not mind so much if a Kopecky or Maltby spot opened up for a grinder or two.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

This sums up perfectly what I don't get about some of the posters here. You are more or less championing a statement that is flat out flawed at the least, and flat out untrue at the most.

The statement was:

"Calling this team "soft" b/c of they are missing one guy from previously mentioned post is way too much IMO."

As another poster pointed out the Red Wings are missing two players from last years team, not one - and while I don't think the Wings are necessarily "soft" in their play (with fighting aside of course), I don't see how it is so unfathomable to think that a team who lost the two players who were responsible for close to 75% of the teams 21 FM's, while adding no one in that department to take their spot - may have gotten a tad bit softer. But who knows, maybe I am missing something.

The other issue that confuses me on these boards is why in gods name do people think that winning games and having a couple tougher 3rd or 4th line guys willing to go from time to time are mutually exclusive? They aren't -- at all.

However time after time statements such as:

"You're right- Kenny isn't stupid enough to trade a top six forward who can kill penalties and play on the pk for a hard-nosed Canadian fourth line player."

I mean who ever called, or voiced a desire to trade one of our top 6 goal scorers, who kills penalties on top of it (even though anyone on our PK this year doesn't have much to be proud of, but that's for a diff. day) for a "hard nosed Canadian 4th liner?

But that truth doesn't really matter does it -- Some individuals here will continue on with their patronizing dismissal of both the reality, and what those who desire a slightly meaner lineup really want.

I'll tell you this much -- no one advocating for the tougher lineup wants any of our top 6 gone, they want them right where they are -- but they may not mind so much if a Kopecky or Maltby spot opened up for a grinder or two.

I haven't read this thread in detail because it isn't worth it, and threads like this in here are the same stupid s**t every time.

But basically what I don't like is when people act like little spoiled drama queen teenage girls because ZOMG the Wings don't fight all the time as much or ZOMG the Wings don't always run people out of the building, that ZOMG because the Wings don't have one more extra big bully that ZOMG we are so fricken screwed and so fricken soft and ZOMG this team is a joke when this team has been so consistently good for the longest time. Because that is the attitude that some people bring on here to such extremes acting like a big bunch of babies and that is a fricken joke to me personally.

Spare me the card that everybody has this type of player. I get it. Still the Wings makeup over for a while now is generally more skill less brawn. The Ducks try to win their way with brawn. The Wings try to win their way with more skill typically, and have been fairly successful with it over the years.

If a big guy or two can be had, great, let's all sing kumbayah. But I'm not crying myself to sleep like some would in here if it doesn't happen.

Edited February 21, 2009 by SouthernWingsFan

[boomer 0]

I definitely agree that Downey and Mac are useless when in the lineup, thats why I titled this thread, "Kenny, Get an Enforcer Now!" I am implying that the ones we have in our system are not legitimate NHL players. They don't belong! But players like Laperriere or Neil do belong in the NHL. And if Laperriere was on our team he wouldn't have injured Lidstrom

No my whole point here is that there are available players out there that can truly help this team, just as Stuart helped us last year at the deadline. If we stand pat with what we have, we will still be a force in the playoff's, but to add a player that has grit, energy and scoring ability at the deadline it would make us a Juggernaut going into April. Echolalia, would you trade Filppula or Stuart for one of these kind of players?

I think your right were lacking that threat in the line-up. That to me was clear how this weakness could be exploited back in the playoffs against Anaheim a couple of years ago with the double team goon hit by cheap shot Pronger and co. He got one game suspension Homer was out for 2 and that was the turning point in the series. It made cringe that we couldn't reply. I always loved Probert and Kocur I wish we had an enforcer type now- especially since we might meet the Sharks with cheap shot Lemieux and the new bruising Bruins potentially in the finals; its gonna be war all the way.

[uk_redwing 495]

[esteef 2,679]

I haven't read this thread in detail because it isn't worth it, and threads like this in here are the same stupid s**t every time.

And yet you showing up to post the same dribble without taking the time to read if any new ideas or takes have been offered in the thread only perpetuates the problem, no?

esteef

[13datsberg40 0]

see thats why hossa didnt fit in pittsburgh. crosbys the enforcer there.

but enforcers just take away ice time from people that actually do stuff.

[Ms_Hockey 0]

Nope, I am sorry but you are 100% wrong. Fighting has rose steadily every year since the instigator rule was introduced. Sorry about that.

All I'm saying is that with fighting being looked into for the player's safety as of late, who knows what is going to happen with it from here?

I don't understand why you're getting snippy about it. I don't like it anymore than you do. But the reality is that there's major conflict going on over whether fighting should be in the NHL or not - and Bettman's job is to draw more fans into the game. I'm not saying this WILL happen - It's just food for thought. If he starts imposing rules as safety measures, he may water it down so much that there'd be no real NEED for an enforcer because anybody could drop their gloves and skate around each other.

I wasn't trying to cause a huge argument, here. I was just saying that I'm interested to see what's going to happen with the rules of engagement.

Edited February 21, 2009 by Ms_Hockey

[Heroes of Hockeytown 694]

The instigator rule which he cited with a link to the NHL, and referred to as the prime entity weeding out "headhunters" was introduced in 05-06.

The 5 minutes thing? If that's what he's arguing, that's silly. That constitutes a whopping 8% of a hockey game.

[sureWhyNot 19]

I haven't read this thread in detail because it isn't worth it, and threads like this in here are the same stupid s**t every time.

But basically what I don't like is when people act like little spoiled drama queen teenage girls because ZOMG the Wings don't fight all the time as much or ZOMG the Wings don't always run people out of the building, that ZOMG because the Wings don't have one more extra big bully that ZOMG we are so fricken screwed and so fricken soft and ZOMG this team is a joke when this team has been so consistently good for the longest time. Because that is the attitude that some people bring on here to such extremes acting like a big bunch of babies and that is a fricken joke to me personally.

Spare me the card that everybody has this type of player. I get it. Still the Wings makeup over for a while now is generally more skill less brawn. The Ducks try to win their way with brawn. The Wings try to win their way with more skill typically, and have been fairly successful with it over the years.

If a big guy or two can be had, great, let's all sing kumbayah. But I'm not crying myself to sleep like some would in here if it doesn't happen.

You haven't read the thread in detail? OK, that still doesn't change that fact the quote you originally were replying to was incorrect. And then there you go again, doing the same s*** I was talking about in my post -- you are not only patronizing and borderline obnoxious with rant, but you dismiss the argument that 99% of the people sitting on my side of the fence are attempting to make. No one said, at least in this thread (the same thread you pompously exclaim "is filled wit people running around like teenage girls") that the Red Wings are "screwed", or that the team is a "joke".

But that doesn't really matter to you now does it? Anything that would hinder your ability to play this bulls*** angle instead of looking at the reality of what people are saying just isn't going to fly -- So keep applauding statements that are not true, keep replying to the threads you claim sicken you so much, keep up your same patronizing "I am above everyone who disagrees with me" -- it obviously makes you feel better seeing as though you do it non stop on these boards anyways.

You know I have gone out of my way lately to point out I am fine with the makeup of this team even though I am a fan of the grittier parts of the game, and that while I would love to see guys brought in that would be more willing in the less pretty aspects of the game -- I would rather not tamper with the winning formula we have going on.

For what though? So guys like you can come on and sum my argument up for me, so you can twist and contort my statements and point of view to the point of changing it all together? Good god, if these posts are so annoying to you then I have a suggestion -- DON'T GET INVOLVED THEM WHEN YOU ARE READING THROUGH THE BOARDS.

You know it's kind of funny -- I have noticed a trend on these boards that is unique for a sports forum of any kind. Pretty much every topic has now become (at least in the eyes of some folks, like the individual I am replying too for instance) "boring", "repetitive", "stupid", "more whining", etc, etc. I mean you complain when there are threads on Osgood's performance, you complain when there is threads on team toughness, you complain when there are threads on Kopecky being worthless, you complain when there are threads on anything to do with Flip outside coddling him, I mean this is a Red Wings board right? It's simple, don't take part in the discussion if it annoys you. No one cares that you are sick of this topic -- we don't need to hear about it -- it simple, and as I stated above, I will state again: DON'T GET INVOLVED THEM WHEN YOU ARE READING THROUGH THE BOARDS

Before we go I figured I would share with you what I am sick of seeing as though you let us know what you don't like about the posters and their choice of topics here oh so frequently.

I am sick of people saying "we don't have room for a goon who will only play 3 minutes" or "if there was a guy who could produce as well as enforce we would be all for it", etc.

First of all half the "goons" people on hear refer too (I am going ahead and considering "goons" guys with 9 plus FM's) have better numbers then anyone on our 4th line -- so do me a favor, and spare me this recycled, and fundamentally incorrect logic from now on. As far as the whole "if we could find a guy to do both" statement that gets thrown around here so much, all I have to say is that they aren't hard to find. People who always use this argument draw on the comparison of what they would like in an enforcer to what Darren McCarty was in the late 90's. I always laugh when I see this because the truth be told I could give you a list of 20 plus players who are currently in the league that would fit the bill in terms of adding to our team what McCarty did years back.

Darren McCarty:

1995-96: 15 goals, 14 assists

1996-97: 19 goals, 30 assists (career year)

1997-98: 15 goals, 22 assists

1998-99: 14 goals, 26 assists

2000-01: 12 goals, 10 assists

2001-02: 5 goals, 7 assists

2002-03: 13 goals, 9 assists

2003-04: 6 goals, 5 assists

For comparison purposes we will go ahead and average these totals -- that comes out to 12.3 goals & 15.4 assists on average, per year in Detroit (I did not include the '94 and '95 seasons, however if you look at the numbers you will see it doesn't effect the average numbers either way. I also didn't include his time in Calgary for obvious reason.)

Here are a couple names of guys that would fit the bill in terms of being able to put up equivalent point totals, as well as having an ability to chuck knuckles.

* Arron Asham

* David Clarkson

* Ian Laperierre

* Steve Montador

* Brian Sutherby

* Greg Campbell

* Ryan Clowe

These are just a couple, I mean there is so many guys out there, and the majority of the are under a million bucks a year (Clowe being the highest on this specific list at $1.6M -- he does have 20 goals and 27 assists though -- what's Flip getting?)

I am just saying, stop with the "if there was a guy who could do both" rap. There are guys, a lot of them who can do both -- there always has been and there always will be -- we just don't seem to seek them out.

[sureWhyNot 19]

All I'm saying is that with fighting being looked into for the player's safety as of late, who knows what is going to happen with it from here?

I don't understand why you're getting snippy about it. I don't like it anymore than you do. But the reality is that there's major conflict going on over whether fighting should be in the NHL or not - and Bettman's job is to draw more fans into the game. I'm not saying this WILL happen - It's just food for thought. If he starts imposing rules as safety measures, he may water it down so much that there'd be no real NEED for an enforcer because anybody could drop their gloves and skate around each other.

I wasn't trying to cause a huge argument, here. I was just saying that I'm interested to see what's going to happen with the rules of engagement.

I see what you mean. But fighting isn't going anywhere in the NHL, not a chance. As for the various junior leagues (OHL and other first step "pro" leagues) I don't know, that is a whole different discussion.

[boomer 0]

Theyre not just missing Downey. Theyre missing Drake as well. And those two tough physical guys gave the wings a fearless physical mindset. Ive hardly seen any scrums this season, last year you could easily get a couple a game.

The Dallas game where Downey played is a testament to the energy the team can gain just by having him in the line-up.

Ya got it right guy, the wings are missing oveall toughness in all departments. Look at the Bruins up front and defense - Lucic , Thornton , Wheeler, Chiarra, Ference a host of others ; there a tough bunch if you have to play them night after night in the playoffs. Look up the Sean Thornton against the so -called heayweight Laraque in MTL , he didn't do to bad and this guy can play as well. Just like Lucic who destroyed Komisarek of Mtl. Plus the Sharks are a tough bunch as well and chances are we will meet them, and they got a score to settle with us. I'm with you were a tad wimpy we could use a Colton Orr or two.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

And yet you showing up to post the same dribble without taking the time to read if any new ideas or takes have been offered in the thread only perpetuates the problem, no?

esteef

Sometimes a necessary evil.

You haven't read the thread in detail? OK, that still doesn't change that fact the quote you originally were replying to was incorrect. And then there you go again, doing the same s*** I was talking about in my post -- you are not only patronizing and borderline obnoxious with rant, but you dismiss the argument that 99% of the people sitting on my side of the fence are attempting to make. No one said, at least in this thread (the same thread you pompously exclaim "is filled wit people running around like teenage girls") that the Red Wings are "screwed", or that the team is a "joke".

But that doesn't really matter to you now does it? Anything that would hinder your ability to play this bulls*** angle instead of looking at the reality of what people are saying just isn't going to fly -- So keep applauding statements that are not true, keep replying to the threads you claim sicken you so much, keep up your same patronizing "I am above everyone who disagrees with me" -- it obviously makes you feel better seeing as though you do it non stop on these boards anyways.

You know I have gone out of my way lately to point out I am fine with the makeup of this team even though I am a fan of the grittier parts of the game, and that while I would love to see guys brought in that would be more willing in the less pretty aspects of the game -- I would rather not tamper with the winning formula we have going on.

For what though? So guys like you can come on and sum my argument up for me, so you can twist and contort my statements and point of view to the point of changing it all together? Good god, if these posts are so annoying to you then I have a suggestion -- DON'T GET INVOLVED THEM WHEN YOU ARE READING THROUGH THE BOARDS.

You know it's kind of funny -- I have noticed a trend on these boards that is unique for a sports forum of any kind. Pretty much every topic has now become (at least in the eyes of some folks, like the individual I am replying too for instance) "boring", "repetitive", "stupid", "more whining", etc, etc. I mean you complain when there are threads on Osgood's performance, you complain when there is threads on team toughness, you complain when there are threads on Kopecky being worthless, you complain when there are threads on anything to do with Flip outside coddling him, I mean this is a Red Wings board right? It's simple, don't take part in the discussion if it annoys you. No one cares that you are sick of this topic -- we don't need to hear about it -- it simple, and as I stated above, I will state again: DON'T GET INVOLVED THEM WHEN YOU ARE READING THROUGH THE BOARDS

Before we go I figured I would share with you what I am sick of seeing as though you let us know what you don't like about the posters and their choice of topics here oh so frequently.

I am sick of people saying "we don't have room for a goon who will only play 3 minutes" or "if there was a guy who could produce as well as enforce we would be all for it", etc.

First of all half the "goons" people on hear refer too (I am going ahead and considering "goons" guys with 9 plus FM's) have better numbers then anyone on our 4th line -- so do me a favor, and spare me this recycled, and fundamentally incorrect logic from now on. As far as the whole "if we could find a guy to do both" statement that gets thrown around here so much, all I have to say is that they aren't hard to find. People who always use this argument draw on the comparison of what they would like in an enforcer to what Darren McCarty was in the late 90's. I always laugh when I see this because the truth be told I could give you a list of 20 plus players who are currently in the league that would fit the bill in terms of adding to our team what McCarty did years back.

Darren McCarty:

1995-96: 15 goals, 14 assists

1996-97: 19 goals, 30 assists (career year)

1997-98: 15 goals, 22 assists

1998-99: 14 goals, 26 assists

2000-01: 12 goals, 10 assists

2001-02: 5 goals, 7 assists

2002-03: 13 goals, 9 assists

2003-04: 6 goals, 5 assists

For comparison purposes we will go ahead and average these totals -- that comes out to 12.3 goals & 15.4 assists on average, per year in Detroit (I did not include the '94 and '95 seasons, however if you look at the numbers you will see it doesn't effect the average numbers either way. I also didn't include his time in Calgary for obvious reason.)

Here are a couple names of guys that would fit the bill in terms of being able to put up equivalent point totals, as well as having an ability to chuck knuckles.

* Arron Asham

* David Clarkson

* Ian Laperierre

* Steve Montador

* Brian Sutherby

* Greg Campbell

* Ryan Clowe

These are just a couple, I mean there is so many guys out there, and the majority of the are under a million bucks a year (Clowe being the highest on this specific list at $1.6M -- he does have 20 goals and 27 assists though -- what's Flip getting?)

I am just saying, stop with the "if there was a guy who could do both" rap. There are guys, a lot of them who can do both -- there always has been and there always will be -- we just don't seem to seek them out.

Nice stats there, but sorry I just don't care that badly to read it. I don't care. You value people of toughness/fighting etc. very highly. That's fine. I do to a lesser degree. That's fine as well. It's not going to kill me if the Wings don't consistently dress one. The Wings still typically win on a consistent basis without a big tough guy consistently in their lineup.

[uk_redwing 495]

Nice stats there, but sorry I just don't care that badly to read it.

Dont reply then.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Dont reply then.

I'll reply to whatever I want, when I want to sunshine.

[uk_redwing 495]

I'll reply to whatever I want, when I want to sunshine.

And we'll complain about whatever aspects of the team we want, when we want

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Sometimes a necessary evil.

Nice stats there, but sorry I just don't care that badly to read it. I don't care. You value people of toughness/fighting etc. very highly. That's fine. I do to a lesser degree. That's fine as well. It's not going to kill me if the Wings don't consistently dress one. The Wings still typically win on a consistent basis without a big tough guy consistently in their lineup.

Not the Stanley Cup they don't.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

Not the Stanley Cup they don't.

Ah, GMR why'd you have to go there. Now about a hundred posters are going to come on and discredit the play of Mac, Downey and Drake from last year. Havent you heard enough of that bull already, you really are just trying to stir up a storm here arent you?

[ManLuv4Clears 7]

Not the Stanley Cup they don't.

QFT. Proof's in the pudding.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Ah, GMR why'd you have to go there. Now about a hundred posters are going to come on and discredit the play of Mac, Downey and Drake from last year. Havent you heard enough of that bull already, you really are just trying to stir up a storm here arent you?

Let them spew their denials and try to discredit whomever they want. It's not my fault they don't understand hockey that well.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Not the Stanley Cup they don't.

No team has consistently won the Stanley Cup since the Edmonton Oilers in the late 80s.

Let them spew their denials and try to discredit whomever they want. It's not my fault they don't understand hockey that well.

I understand hockey a good bit. For example,

You score goals in hockey.

Penalties are commited when you hook a player with the end of your stick, trip them with their stick. There are high-sticking penalties when you clip people in their faces. A double minor happens with a high stick yields blood on a guy's face.

You are offsides in hockey when the puck isn't the first object to pass the opposing team's blue-line.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

No team has consistently won the Stanley Cup since the Edmonton Oilers in the late 80s.

I understand hockey a good bit. For example,

You score goals in hockey.

Penalties are commited when you hook a player with the end of your stick, trip them with their stick. There are high-sticking penalties when you clip people in their faces. A double minor happens with a high stick yields blood on a guy's face.

You are offsides in hockey when the puck isn't the first object to pass the opposing team's blue-line.

Actually, the Wings have won almost as many Cups in the last 10 years as Edmonton did in the 80's. It's harder in today's league to have that kind of success.

However, our biggest playoff successes came in seasons where we dressed some kind of tough guy either in the regular season or in the playoffs. It's tougher to win the Cup when a team hasn't shown any consistent grit all year. This year the Wings haven't shown any consistent physical play to match that of last year.

So yeah, you were right about the Wings being successful year in and year out, but that hasn't always translated into playoff success. I just want this team to play with more attitude like they did last year, so that it can hopefully result in more grit for the playoffs. It's tough to do that with such a soft 4th line, and would be easier if we had a Downey or McCarty in the lineup.

Yeah, skill is more important than toughness, but we already have plenty of skill. The Wings have yet to show me that they can win the Stanley Cup with just skill on their roster all year and no toughness of any kind. Who knows, if they win the Cup without any consistent tough guy or figher in the lineup this year, maybe then I'll change my mind. Until then, this is my position.

[HOCKEY MATTERS 167]

It's a board. People can say whatever they want. People can respond however they want. Some are stupid and all are stupid, comparatively. Big, fat, hairy deal. People will get passionate (and that's a good thing, no?). They will probably say some stupid things, in your humble opinion. Get mad and call them names or ignore them. Who's not guilty of typing something dumb in the past?

me.

and only me.

dickheads.