Where were team-mates on the Smith headshot

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Wouldn't McGrattan need to spend more than 6:30 minutes with him per night to have any sort of impact at all? I literally spend more time on the toilet per day than Brain McGrattan does playing hockey on game night.

Oh, is the toilet where you get the idea for your posts from?

[kipwinger 8,520]

Oh, is the toilet where you get the idea for your posts from?

yes.

[kipwinger 8,520]

So if there's a brawl during a Wings game this year and the fans are into it, are you going to come here and post about how boring, stupid and pointless it all was? Or are you going to chant and be entertained like everyone else?

You're right. I'll order another Miller Light and yuck it up with all the other low brow dips***s. Because it's obvious how interested I am in agreeing with the crowd.

Afterward I'll head home and jack off to all the pass interference calls I missed on Monday night football, because penalties are totally awesome bro!

[Mckinley25 677]

Yeah because the direction the game is going is so much more fun to watch.

Lets take the action out of every sport. Then we will be left with a bunch of under sized pansies passing flowers to each other.

The game is not going in the direction you claim it is, absurd hyperbole aside, today's players are stronger, faster and more skilled than ever before. Certainly there are less elbows and fists being thrown, but that's not part of the game.

McGrattan and Engelland will make a man out of him yet.

So if there's a brawl during a Wings game this year and the fans are into it, are you going to come here and post about how boring, stupid and pointless it all was? Or are you going to chant and be entertained like everyone else?

I think Kip has been doing exactly that all season. (The former not the latter) Every thread tangents into a fighting/anti-fighting argument.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

You're right. I'll order another Miller Light and yuck it up with all the other low brow dips***s. Because it's obvious how interested I am in agreeing with the crowd.

Afterward I'll head home and jack off to all the pass interference calls I missed on Monday night football, because penalties are totally awesome bro!

So we're all low brow dips***s because we happen to like that part of the game and the players who have historically been linked with hockey pugilistics? I like that part of hockey history as much as I like the skilled players who made up the game's history.

You need to get off your high horse.

Edited December 16, 2014 by GMRwings1983

[hillbillywingsfan 792]

I like how in your mind "the action" of hockey and penalties are the same thing. You want the league to leave game misconducts alone, so that you can enjoy the "action". Lol. Nevermind what happens between the whistles, that s***'s boring. The real stuff comes after the play is dead. And one day, if we're really lucky, all the fun stuff about hockey will happen after the game is completely over. Then we can just watch Dan Carcillo and Zac Rinaldo beat the s*** out of each other in the parking lot. What a sport that will be.

hahahahahah wow. Yeah because that's what I said. hahahahaha Oh man. Comedy cold Jerry.

You're right. I'll order another Miller Light and yuck it up with all the other low brow dips***s. Because it's obvious how interested I am in agreeing with the crowd.

Afterward I'll head home and jack off to all the pass interference calls I missed on Monday night football, because penalties are totally awesome bro!

The thing is the lengths you go to NOT agree with the crowd is very obvious. You don't have to convince us any on that one.

Next game Kip you should get with whoever is creating the GDT and have them add in what you personally think we should all be excited about seeing just so we all know ahead of time going into the game.

So we're all low brow dips***s because we happen to like that part of the game and the players who have historically been linked with hockey pugilistics? I like that part of hockey history as much as I like the skilled players who made up the game's history.

You need to get off your high horse.

Yeah I'm a low brow dips*** from ten-o-see what do I know what I like to see.

Edited December 16, 2014 by hillbillywingsfan

[kipwinger 8,520]

So we're all low brow dips***s because we happen to like that part of the game and the players who have historically been linked with hockey pugilistics? I like that part of hockey history as much as I like the skilled players who made up the game's history.

You need to get off your high horse.

You need to stop fetishizing penalties.

[kipwinger 8,520]

Here's a comparison I'm sure the two of you will no doubt understand completely. Watching hockey for the fights is a lot like watching NASCAR for the crashes. It's too bad The Joe doesn't have an infield full of underage girls in halter tops, that way the two of you could go hog wild the next time Brendan Smith oozes machismo after a crosscheck.

[number9 3,297]

McGrattan and Engelland will make a man out of him yet.

So if there's a brawl during a Wings game this year and the fans are into it, are you going to come here and post about how boring, stupid and pointless it all was? Or are you going to chant and be entertained like everyone else?

If there's a fight at a Wings game, heck yeah I'm gonna be pumped. I love a good scrap. But I don't want a McGrattan on the team JUST because he scraps. He's got to be useful when he's not scrapin too.

Take the Smith-Panik fight we're supposed to be talking about. Things got heated and Smith stood up for himself and threw down, atta boy Smitty. I love it. But before and after that fight Smith still brings solid hockey to the team. McGrattan doesn't do that at all.

I get the feeling that you guys wanna see more of the heavy-weight bouts like in the 80s, but those bouts frankly have nothing to do with hockey, just two guys fighting over an imaginary belt. Even so, they don't exist anymore! If they did Perry and Lucic would have a formal square off at every Bruins Ducks match-up.

The so-called "fighters" these days barely offer quality hockey at the AHL level. Those guys exist purely to put butts in seats.

Now if it's guys who will stand up for their teammates you want, I'm all for a Simmonds type on this team. That would be AWESOME. But Mcgrattan is no substitute for that. All he brings is an on ice liability, which means we can no longer roll all 4 lines against whomever. He's not out there protecting Joakim Andersson, he's putting on a spectacle for the fans.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

You need to stop fetishizing penalties.

Fighting is the only penalty that's treated as a "fetish" by a certain group of hockey fans. You can compare it to other penalties all you want, but the popularity isn't quite the same. Guys like Probert, Odjick, Schultz, Brown, and many others have always been popular with the fanbases that root for those teams. Not many people have historically been in love with guys who trip or hook someone on the ice.

Your high horse is really a rocking horse, but you still need to get off it. Not all pro-enforcer posters are as dumb as you think they are.

If there's a fight at a Wings game, heck yeah I'm gonna be pumped. I love a good scrap. But I don't want a McGrattan on the team JUST because he scraps. He's got to be useful when he's not scrapin too.

Take the Smith-Panik fight we're supposed to be talking about. Things got heated and Smith stood up for himself and threw down, atta boy Smitty. I love it. But before and after that fight Smith still brings solid hockey to the team. McGrattan doesn't do that at all.

I get the feeling that you guys wanna see more of the heavy-weight bouts like in the 80s, but those bouts frankly have nothing to do with hockey, just two guys fighting over an imaginary belt. Even so, they don't exist anymore! If they did Perry and Lucic would have a formal square off at every Bruins Ducks match-up.

The so-called "fighters" these days barely offer quality hockey at the AHL level. Those guys exist purely to put butts in seats.

Now if it's guys who will stand up for their teammates you want, I'm all for a Simmonds type on this team. That would be AWESOME. But Mcgrattan is no substitute for that. All he brings is an on ice liability, which means we can no longer roll all 4 lines against whomever. He's not out there protecting Joakim Andersson, he's putting on a spectacle for the fans.

Oh I know those guys are dinosaurs who don't exist anymore. Doesn't mean I can't have nostalgia for that part of the game. Holland won't sign any fighter, whether that player can score goals or not. He signed Tootoo, but never played him because he didn't fit our style of play (which makes me wonder why we signed him). There are plenty of young guys who can hit, fight and score occasionally. We just don't look for that kind of player.

Edited December 16, 2014 by GMRwings1983

[kipwinger 8,520]

Fighting is the only penalty that's treated as a "fetish" by a certain group of hockey fans. You can compare it to other penalties all you want, but the popularity isn't quite the same. Guys like Probert, Odjick, Schultz, Brown, and many others have always been popular with the fanbases that root for those teams. Not many people have historically been in love with guys who trip or hook someone on the ice.

Your high horse is really a rocking horse, but you still need to get off it. Not all pro-enforcer posters are as dumb as you think they are.

Sure they are, they're just too dumb to know it. I bet you get all antsy in your pantsy whenever you see a foul ball at a baseball game too.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Sure they are, they're just too dumb to know it. I bet you get all antsy in your pantsy whenever you see a foul ball at a baseball game too.

You're not worth any more of my posts in this thread after that kind of response.

[number9 3,297]

So we're all low brow dips***s because we happen to like that part of the game and the players who have historically been linked with hockey pugilistics? I like that part of hockey history as much as I like the skilled players who made up the game's history.

You need to get off your high horse.

That's the thing. Heavyweights are history. I love and miss that part of the game too, but the reality is, it just doesn't function like that anymore. Mcgrattan can fight, sure. But he'll never be a Probert, or even a Dmac. He's just not useful in any department besides fighting. He's butterbean with skates on.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

The game is not going in the direction you claim it is, absurd hyperbole aside, today's players are stronger, faster and more skilled than ever before. Certainly there are less elbows and fists being thrown, but that's not part of the game.

I think Kip has been doing exactly that all season. (The former not the latter) Every thread tangents into a fighting/anti-fighting argument.

How is physicality not part of the game? If you're going to have hits, you're going to have guys who fight. It is part of the game. There's less fighting now, but there's more headshots and cheap players like Cooke, Ruutu, Orr. I'd rather have enforcers than those people.

[number9 3,297]

Fighting is the only penalty that's treated as a "fetish" by a certain group of hockey fans. You can compare it to other penalties all you want, but the popularity isn't quite the same. Guys like Probert, Odjick, Schultz, Brown, and many others have always been popular with the fanbases that root for those teams. Not many people have historically been in love with guys who trip or hook someone on the ice.

Your high horse is really a rocking horse, but you still need to get off it. Not all pro-enforcer posters are as dumb as you think they are.

Oh I know those guys are dinosaurs who don't exist anymore. Doesn't mean I can't have nostalgia for that part of the game. Holland won't sign any fighter, whether that player can score goals or not. He signed Tootoo, but never played him because he didn't fit our style of play (which makes me wonder why we signed him). There are plenty of young guys who can hit, fight and score occasionally. We just don't look for that kind of player.

It's clear Babcock discourages fighting and hits behind the play. Tootoo was that in a nutshell, though I was sure excited to see that when we first signed him lol.

EDIT: As Babcock should. And I believe it's his D-men he doesn't like fighting.

Edited December 16, 2014 by number9

[Mckinley25 677]

How is physicality not part of the game? If you're going to have hits, you're going to have guys who fight. It is part of the game. There's less fighting now, but there's more headshots and cheap players like Cooke, Ruutu, Orr. I'd rather have enforcers than those people.

Physicality is part of the game, and "part of the game" is poor phrasing that I've mistakenly used before. I mean simply the fighting part shouldn't have a place in the game. Edited December 16, 2014 by Mckinley25

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

It's clear Babcock discourages fighting and hits behind the play. Tootoo was that in a nutshell, though I was sure excited to see that when we first signed him lol.

Hits behind the play is basically a guy finishing his check. He takes himself out of the play, but he also takes the other guy out. He fought to spark his teammates, not just for his sick amusement. He knew his role. I don't think he did anything differently in Detroit than he did in Nashville. Apparently, Holland and Babcock never saw him play before and expected something else.

[number9 3,297]

How is physicality not part of the game? If you're going to have hits, you're going to have guys who fight. It is part of the game. There's less fighting now, but there's more headshots and cheap players like Cooke, Ruutu, Orr. I'd rather have enforcers than those people.

We seem to be adding more physical players via prospects slowly but surely

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Physicality is part of the game,

I know. My point is, it's hard to have a physical sport with a fighting history, and expect people not to fight when there's an elbow or a cheap hit. The Smith fight was necessary. He doesn't want a guy running him again like that. He was sticking up for himself. If you take fighting out of the game completely, I'm afraid it'll encourage more cheap hits.

[kipwinger 8,520]

How is physicality not part of the game? If you're going to have hits, you're going to have guys who fight. It is part of the game. There's less fighting now, but there's more headshots and cheap players like Cooke, Ruutu, Orr. I'd rather have enforcers than those people.

Like in the playoffs? When all those guys fight after hard hits? Lol. You're grasping at straws. Why not just admit you get your jollies off watching guys punch each other? At least it would be honest.

[number9 3,297]

Hits behind the play is basically a guy finishing his check. He takes himself out of the play, but he also takes the other guy out. He fought to spark his teammates, not just for his sick amusement. He knew his role. I don't think he did anything differently in Detroit than he did in Nashville. Apparently, Holland and Babcock never saw him play before and expected something else.

Better go let Babs know then eh?

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

It's clear Babcock discourages fighting and hits behind the play. Tootoo was that in a nutshell, though I was sure excited to see that when we first signed him lol.

EDIT: As Babcock should. And I believe it's his D-men he doesn't like fighting.

None of our D-men fight a lot, though. When they do, it's usually for a reason. I don't know how Babcock can get upset about that? Would he let Panik hit him high and not do anything about it?

Better go let Babs know then eh?

Like I said, I'm not sure what they expected Tootoo to do differently? He's always played the same game.

[number9 3,297]

I know. My point is, it's hard to have a physical sport with a fighting history, and expect people not to fight when there's an elbow or a cheap hit. The Smith fight was necessary. He doesn't want a guy running him again like that. He was sticking up for himself. If you take fighting out of the game completely, I'm afraid it'll encourage more cheap hits.

I don't think any of us are arguing that. At least I'm not. I just don't understand yours and Frank Grimes man crush on Mcgrattan lol

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

I don't think any of us are arguing that. At least I'm not. I just don't understand yours and Frank Grimes man crush on Mcgrattan lol

How can you not? He's the most beloved non-Wings player on LGW.

I

Edited December 16, 2014 by GMRwings1983

[Mckinley25 677]

I know. My point is, it's hard to have a physical sport with a fighting history, and expect people not to fight when there's an elbow or a cheap hit. The Smith fight was necessary. He doesn't want a guy running him again like that. He was sticking up for himself. If you take fighting out of the game completely, I'm afraid it'll encourage more cheap hits.

I agree it will be difficult to eliminate fighting from the game, otherwise it would have been done already. The thing that bothers me is that fighting is still often perceived as the only solution to the problem of cheap shots. As kip pointed out, there is virtually no fighting in the playoffs and it's the fastest, hardest hitting, engaging hockey to watch!

Even if fighting did reduce cheap shots (if it does its marginal, cheap shots were the norm in fighting's hey day) it doesn't mean we have to stop trying to find a better solution that doesn't involve punching someone in the face. I mean say that out loud and listen to how ridiculous it sounds.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Mckinley25