• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
wings1110

Goon

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest Shoreline
When Johan Franzen can rip out your mouth guard without any punishment, no amount of old-man beating will make up for that.

At least it wasn't his pacifier. He would have thrown a s***fit then.

Edited by Shoreline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anything about goons here? Nope. Oh, but lots of posts about people who criticize goons being necessary for the Red Wings to win, on the other hand, only loving "soft european" teams. Kinda hard to be taken seriously when all you can do is caricature what you're trying to criticize. Try actually addressing points relevantly and with a bit of intelligence. A debate class helps. Right now this macho business isn't impressing nor convincing anyone of anything.

Proof of loving "soft hockey"? Definitions please. Posts please. I can give you plenty of posts of mine, and I already have given you several, of myself suggesting this team needs to hit more in the games they were passive in, and wishing to sign players who can certainly fight, but first and foremost actually contribute the most useful thing, which is scoring and bringing energy. Hence why Dallas Drake played in the playoffs. Downey did not.

Btw, this has been a "soft European" team by your standards for 4 cups. Either you're bulls***ting about knowing anything about hockey, or the Red Wings, or your views, like religion, do not represent reality with this team. You're a fan of a particular style of play, obviously, given your posts, far more than this team, and that's all you care to focus on. Time for your confessional visit. :lol:

You talk about me needing to address points instead of act macho but where exactly are all these fool hardy arguments you're placing before me from your debate class? Now you're talking about how Drake played but before when I've said we need a tough guy like Drake and it will help this team you argue we need to score goals not have a hard hitting, capable of playing grinder who can also stick up for himself and others.

You need to piick which side you're on. You clearly don't want a goon but when I talk about how having a Drake type wouldn't hurt you ramble on about religion and how we need to score goals. Then you try to say Drake could score. No, he was there for energy, hitting and his mean streak. He wasn't relied on for scoring at all. So when I say I want a Drake type you tal about how they're useless and then you go on to say it later. I'll say it again I don't care if we have a huge goon that gets 30 fights a year but a guy like Drake who can handle himself, hitsd and has a mean streak is what I want. Get your story straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You talk about me needing to address points instead of act macho but where exactly are all these fool hardy arguments you're placing before me from your debate class? Now you're talking about how Drake played but before when I've said we need a tough guy like Drake and it will help this team you argue we need to score goals not have a hard hitting, capable of playing grinder who can also stick up for himself and others.

You need to piick which side you're on. You clearly don't want a goon but when I talk about how having a Drake type wouldn't hurt you ramble on about religion and how we need to score goals. Then you try to say Drake could score. No, he was there for energy, hitting and his mean streak. He wasn't relied on for scoring at all. So when I say I want a Drake type you tal about how they're useless and then you go on to say it later. I'll say it again I don't care if we have a huge goon that gets 30 fights a year but a guy like Drake who can handle himself, hitsd and has a mean streak is what I want. Get your story straight.

You seem to have misunderstood Shoreline's position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
I don't recall anyone saying having an enforcer will put an end to ALL cheap shots; it'll more or less make some think twice before they go after any of our players...Besides - it's team toughness - not just 1 guy, and 1 guy alone. The Wings IMO could use several guys whom can play the game, and when neccessary drop the gloves from time to time (like we had with our Cup winning teams in 97/98).

This team has been throwing around it's body just fine, without fighting, and won a cup, and was one period away from a back to back. While the defense might be able to use a bit more oomph (boxing out in front of the net, for instance), the offense has done a fine job in the physical game. The only thing they're not really engaging in is fighting.

So, forget ALL cheap shots, how about any? Show me the deterrent. From the looks of it here, cheap shot artists don't care what goons are on a team. Remind me what goons were on Mikko Koivu's team when he got his leg broken in a slash. Did Scott Hartnell mind that Jiri Fischer could fight when cheapshotted Jiri, taking his feet out and causing his ACL to be torn? Did Pronger mind taking runs at Yzerman despite having some fighters on that team? There's lots to prove for those who think goons can accomplish much besides punching things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
Fighting throughout the playoffs has become almost non-existent (however these past few seasons we're starting to see more of the heat of the moment type bouts)...Still there's the 82 game reg season grind in which IMO there'll always be a need for a handful of guys per team able/willing for whatever the reason.

I'll answer your question with a question...If there wasn't a need for these guys (a pure goon, or guys who can play, and fight) why do so many GMs out there have these guys on their roster?

EDIT - as for our forwards these past playoffs - IMHO they had issues in the Finals with keeping the puck in the Pens end of the ice for any decent amount of time. Not trying to say that a guy whom is capable of throwing punches is gonna be the solution for this, but the need for more size/grit/etc/etc was apparent. That said having a guy who is a capable fighter tends to make those smaller guys playing on his line a little more brave; maybe even going into the corners for the loose pucks, and cycling the puck down low to get those dirty goals.

The boys never really had a problem keeping the puck down low. In Games 6/7 they were just simply gassed and out of energy. Clearly two long playoff seasons affected them greatly. Being tired, they wouldn't go to the front of the net, taking long shots or bad angle shots. The defense was slow and lethargic. It happens. The cycling game was fine for the most part throughout the playoffs, as was pretty much every other aspect -- hitting, forechecking, moving around the puck, defensive awareness. Things just did not come together for that last win and it sucks but any sort of a goon would not have changed the outcome at all, except maybe making that finals series much shorter, with the same outcome, if it even got that far.

I can't really answer for other GMs. I've never really seen their strategies. I've seen teams make it work with goons, though in cases like Anaheim I don't recall even Parros being utilized in their cup run much, if at all, come playoff time. I recall coach Lemaire of the Wild (I think that's who it was) talking about Boogaard and making a suggestion akin to Boogaard being a distraction on the ice who will bring attention to himself and free up teammates, or opponents simply knowing when he's on the ice and that providing an opportunity for linemates to get open. While I can see the logic behind this when he said it, now I kinda think he was more or less appeasing to Boogaard because he's on the team and really no coach is going to talk crap about one of their players. Guys like Pronger are big and tough and nasty and all, but what he does is one of the largest concerns of having a goon. He's got himself suspended at the worst of times, when his team needed him most, due to making stupid decisions these skill-based players are FAR more apt not to make.

I won't argue the Wings can use a guy like Drake, because while Drake didn't score a crapload of points, he did score on occasion, and did exactly what a grinding-type player (or really any forward) should do.. keep it in the offensive zone and give the team a chance to score. Drake had the keen sense of when the opposing offense was trying to break out of their defensive zone, he'd finish his checks to disallow opposing offensive players to fly up the ice and help create odd-man situations. This sensibility I'd say the Wings lacked for much of the first half of the regular season, but after then got it back and did just fine. Drake could also drop the gloves when need be, like when the cheap s*** starts happening, but this is one aspect that doesn't even need to be there if the refereeing is consistent about ridding of the cheap unsportsmanlike s***. I can see a bit of attitude helping the Wings, but then again they understand their role is of a skill team, and this is what Kenny Holland is building, and skilled teams don't get nasty in this fashion. Oh, and a big defenseman or forward might have helped around the front of the net. One of the problems the Wings did visibly have was clearing the front of the net of players. We didn't really have a big guy to put some oomph into punishing players who go to the front of the net whereas it's obvious Homer or Franzen faced quite a bit.

It's not like I don't agree with you that a big physical player can't provide what the Wings need, and it is certainly exciting to watch a player fly all over the ice like a wrecking ball when he can actually provide scoring changes or defend his end of the ice well. However, the fighting aspect really has little to do with this team not winning a cup and it's plainly obvious the Wings don't need a goon to win, nor is goonery or fighting a necessary element to winning a cup. It's a bonus to get a guy who, first and foremost, can score and defend, then can fight as a bonus. We all know how valuable Mac was, every year, before he went off to Calgary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest micah
Th However, the fighting aspect really has little to do with this team not winning a cup and it's plainly obvious the Wings don't need a goon to win, nor is goonery or fighting a necessary element to winning a cup. It's a bonus to get a guy who, first and foremost, can score and defend, then can fight as a bonus. We all know how valuable Mac was, every year, before he went off to Calgary.

If fighting has little to do with winning, why is fighting a "bonus"? Wouldn't you prefer that our players, even if one of them hypothetically could fight, didn't? It has no effect on the outcome of the game and is an injurry risk. You're an internet tough guy, compensating for your small wang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is one aspect that doesn't even need to be there if the refereeing is consistent about ridding of the cheap unsportsmanlike s***.

Can't say I agree with this one little bit right here. I think today's game involves a game within the game in regards to the officials in which a team simply cannot expect 'fair' officiating in any respect. ( Just an example off the top of my head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMGuIZE-rO4 ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
If fighting has little to do with winning, why is fighting a "bonus"? Wouldn't you prefer that our players, even if one of them hypothetically could fight, didn't? It has no effect on the outcome of the game and is an injurry risk. You're an internet tough guy, compensating for your small wang.

As I've mentioned about 100 times, and you and your goon friends have mentioned too, the bonus is the "entertainment" of fighting. And for the sake of not ruining what sarcasm stands for, can you please stop? You're very bad at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
Can't say I agree with this one little bit right here. I think today's game involves a game within the game in regards to the officials in which a team simply cannot expect 'fair' officiating in any respect. ( Just an example off the top of my head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMGuIZE-rO4 ).

Of course. One of Yzerman's best qualities as a captain was playing "the game" (no, not that one, and yes, you lost it) involving the refs. I don't think Lids is as good with the schmoozing and BSing, i.e. gamesmanship. Nonetheless, these are highlight reel examples of penalties opposing teams get away with, whereas the ones the Wings get away with are numerous and subtle. As a Wings fan, I hate the refs, but just about every team's fans hate the refs. Except maybe the Penguins'. I kid, I kid. Pretty sure they do too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest micah
As I've mentioned about 100 times, and you and your goon friends have mentioned too, the bonus is the "entertainment" of fighting. And for the sake of not ruining what sarcasm stands for, can you please stop? You're very bad at it.

I don't know what that last bit means. I'm trying to understand your position. What does sarcasm "stand for"? Did you think it was an acronym?

You never answered the question: Wouldn't you prefer that our players, even if one of them hypothetically could fight, didn't? It does increase the risk of injurry and does not often effect the outcome of the game.

When Mac was an okay player and was fighting fairly often, did you find yourself wishing he would quit fighting, to make it more likely that he'd be in prime shape throughout the season and playoffs, or did you value the entertainment of Mac's fights so much that you were willing to accept the increased injurry risk so that you could get your fight fix?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest E_S_A_D

Lol, 19 pages on having an enforcer, not many Goons exist anymore...

These threads crack me up anymore, I don't even get upset at the anti-enforcer sentiment here. What cracks me up even more though is our putrid line up next year and it's ballet on ice stature. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know what that last bit means. I'm trying to understand your position. What does sarcasm "stand for"? Did you think it was an acronym?

You never answered the question: Wouldn't you prefer that our players, even if one of them hypothetically could fight, didn't? It does increase the risk of injurry and does not often effect the outcome of the game.

When Mac was an okay player and was fighting fairly often, did you find yourself wishing he would quit fighting, to make it more likely that he'd be in prime shape throughout the season and playoffs, or did you value the entertainment of Mac's fights so much that you were willing to accept the increased injurry risk so that you could get your fight fix?

I'll go ahead and answer if you don't mind. If a Datsyuk or Zetterberg character was capable of fighting, I still would not want them to drop the gloves. A player can get injured in a fight, in this day and age moreso than ever, and to jeopardize the future of the team as well as the individual for 30 seconds of pride is not worth losing a key player for. McCarty was groomed for fighting. He wasn't a scorer, he wasn't a playmaker, he wasn't speedy, he wasn't defensive. What he did was fight, so throwing in his name is a bit unfair in my opinion. It's also unfair to compare a pre-salary cap scenario with today's environment, but I would definitely prefer that he fight rather than avoid confrontation. Having said that, if I had the option of having a player just like McCarty today or someone who is more relevant to the scoresheet, I would pick option B ten times out of ten. Scoring goals and preventing goals is important in 82 games per regular season. A confrontation that shifts momentum or protects the weak is important in maybe 5, and a waste of capspace in 77. Sure its entertaining. I absolutely love seeing fights. But I'm not ready to sacrifice the good of the team for my own occasional, often irrelevant entertainment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll go ahead and answer if you don't mind. If a Datsyuk or Zetterberg character was capable of fighting, I still would not want them to drop the gloves. A player can get injured in a fight, in this day and age moreso than ever, and to jeopardize the future of the team as well as the individual for 30 seconds of pride is not worth losing a key player for. McCarty was groomed for fighting. He wasn't a scorer, he wasn't a playmaker, he wasn't speedy, he wasn't defensive. What he did was fight, so throwing in his name is a bit unfair in my opinion. It's also unfair to compare a pre-salary cap scenario with today's environment, but I would definitely prefer that he fight rather than avoid confrontation. Having said that, if I had the option of having a player just like McCarty today or someone who is more relevant to the scoresheet, I would pick option B ten times out of ten. Scoring goals and preventing goals is important in 82 games per regular season. A confrontation that shifts momentum or protects the weak is important in maybe 5, and a waste of capspace in 77. Sure its entertaining. I absolutely love seeing fights. But I'm not ready to sacrifice the good of the team for my own occasional, often irrelevant entertainment.

Mac was much more than just a fighter. He was very solid defensively (albeit, overshadowed by 4 Selke winners and a few more very good defensive forwards while he was here), skated well, could hit and agitate, and was good enough offensively to occasionally step into a scoring role. He pretty much did everything decently, but nothing, not even fighting, great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac was much more than just a fighter. He was very solid defensively (albeit, overshadowed by 4 Selke winners and a few more very good defensive forwards while he was here), skated well, could hit and agitate, and was good enough offensively to occasionally step into a scoring role. He pretty much did everything decently, but nothing, not even fighting, great.

agreed. Mac in his prime was a poor mans shanny,,,,, does that even make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
I don't know what that last bit means. I'm trying to understand your position. What does sarcasm "stand for"? Did you think it was an acronym?

Sarcasm is usually humorous. Not dumb and unfunny. Just saying. :P

You never answered the question: Wouldn't you prefer that our players, even if one of them hypothetically could fight, didn't? It does increase the risk of injurry and does not often effect the outcome of the game.

You ask lots of hypotheticals, and I don't care for them.

When Mac was an okay player and was fighting fairly often, did you find yourself wishing he would quit fighting, to make it more likely that he'd be in prime shape throughout the season and playoffs, or did you value the entertainment of Mac's fights so much that you were willing to accept the increased injurry risk so that you could get your fight fix?

And just a repeated asking of the same hypothetical.

I never had a fight fix. I had a "let's win the Stanley Cup" fix.

Several years back Calgary made the cup finals and went thru the Wings in the process. I remember them as one of the most undeserving, goonish teams the Wings have had to face since they won that first cup in over 40 years. They had far more speed and nastiness than skill, and obviously flattening Cujo purposefully was part of their MO. Nonetheless, they did what they did and they did it effectively, and I wouldn't have told them to do it any differently. Sadly, as we've seen with the New Jersey Devils and their overly defensive trap system, a winning system is/was a winning system. Same thing with the Wings, but they do it without the goonery and dirty play, which some, like yourself, have a very hard time grasping.

The fighting aspect is just about entirely emotional and reactionary -- if you read the posts coming from people who want the Wings to, first and foremost, fight more, and to engage in post-whistle scuffles, this is exactly where it comes from -- ZOMG HE FACEWASHED Z, KICK HIS ASS. The Wings, being called a machine, were called so because of their unwavering ability to stay away from goonery and win with skill (lots and lots of scoring, and good defense) and professionalism. So it's funny to me that just about 100% of the teams fight more than the Wings in the last 10+ years, and are/were significantly dirtier, yet this team is being called tough in those regards. Wow. It's pretty mind-boggling.

Edited by Shoreline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest micah
You ask lots of hypotheticals, and I don't care for them.

You do not like them because they reveal the flaws in your argument. You do not like betting because you are not confident in the things you say. You frequently find yourself at home, alone on weekend nights. Once in third grade you ate a booger and one of the cool kids saw it and you were mocked mercilessly everyday until graduation. Then you went to college where you majored in something short-sighted and today you live with your parents and are sad.

Edited by micah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest micah
Shoreline and Micah, you two need to get a room.... :unsure:

We use shoreline's room. It's in his parents' basement. It's cool, he has his own 13" TV and these rad Christmas lights he keeps up year round. He has a hotplate for when you're in the mood for canned soup but don't want to go all the way upstairs. It smells musty, but otherwise it's pretty nice. He has an awesome Queensryche poster. Sometimes we play Super Mario 2. Usually I just watch, the 2nd controller only works if you hold the cord just right, and even then it doesn't work that well.

Edited by micah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest micah
Just a reminder to those still posting in this thread.... The above is the original topic....

(just pointing fun that a 4 word post has developed into a 19 page thread)

Do I hear 20?

I've grown up alot in the last few days. I no longer like fighting in hockey. Fighting is stupid and doesn't help you win, so fighting is dumb and barbaric. This will be my stance for at least the remainder of the week.

I can't wait for Traverse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do I hear 20?

I've grown up alot in the last few days. I no longer like fighting in hockey. Fighting is stupid and doesn't help you win, so fighting is dumb and barbaric. This will be my stance for at least the remainder of the week.

I can't wait for Traverse.

Because that is what everyone here thinks....

Perhaps some of you do need to grow up, because all I ever see when a thread pops up about signing players or the future of our team, one of you guys comes in with a sarcastic comment about how soft our team is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarcasm?...Maybe so, but for some of us we'd still love to see a team resemble what we had i n the late 90's...I know it's wishful thinking, but hey - it's a site for Red Wing fans to praise, or ***** about our beloved team - right?

Sure, and I would have no problem with having a tough guy on the fourth line. They bring energy, have a lot of work ethic, and would put butts in the seats.

But sometimes you need to know when to stop with the sarcastic jabs about the team being "soft like ballerinas" or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because that is what everyone here thinks....

Perhaps some of you do need to grow up, because all I ever see when a thread pops up about signing players or the future of our team, one of you guys comes in with a sarcastic comment about how soft our team is.

I totally agree with you on that point, and I hate it how certain posters here (whose names I won't mention) constantly talk about the Wings being a soft team.

For some inexplicable reason I always get grouped in with these pro-enforcer slappies, but I've never actually said anything about our team being soft, or even alluded to it in distant ways. However, some of these other posters, as you mentioned, do need to grow up and stop making fun of our European boys.

BTW, it's been a while since I posted my favorite Franzen moment, so have a look see. How can anyone call this man soft or compare him to a ballerina?

Youtube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That video is a good example of why the Wings shouldn't outsource when it comes time for tuffness when there's good lads from Canada just a stones throw away :hehe:

Edit - Interesting comment from Mickey Redmond; "don't blame him for trying to protect himself" in reference to Vandameer knocking the Mule on his keester...Gotta love the old-school attitude, calling it like it is, and non-homerish look at the game that Redmond brings...He's 1 of the best (if not the best) color guy out there :thumbup:

Too bad Redmond didn't call Franzen out for diving like he should have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this