Zetterberg leaves after 2nd Period; "upper body injury"

[hillbillywingsfan 792]

Answer me this. If fighting is pointless and is only for fun, why have enforcers ever existed in NHL history? Did coaches and GM's dress these players just to sell tickets and get their rocks off? Or did they believe that these players were necessary to protect the stars or necessary for some other purpose?

From now on I'm wearing my yoga pants when I go to the hockey games. I want the players to see and feel the love I have for them. I want Benn to know I am a fan of his and don't hold any ill will towards him for punching Z in the back of the head. I would just die if someone beat his face in. Such a pretty face.

[number9 3,297]

From now on I'm wearing my yoga pants when I go to the hockey games. I want the players to see and feel the love I have for them. I want Benn to know I am a fan of his and don't hold any ill will towards him for punching Z in the back of the head. I would just die if someone beat his face in. Such a pretty face.

IDK, personally I'd like to see his "pretty" face get beat in.

[Internet.Unknown 422]

Well as interesting as a bunch of anecdotal evidence is, actual scientific research suggests that fighting has no positive effect on the outcome of the game. The ol' eyeball test is good for finding a date on a Friday night, but if you want to find the truth about real world phenomena...you have to use science. Bummer.

https://georgetownsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2013/10/13/the-true-impact-of-a-hockey-fight/

"We can see in all four of these data sets that there is no evidence that winning a fight leads to better results in the immediate aftermath of the fight. In fact, it appears that the team winning the fight will score slightly less goals in the game than they did previously. In all four groups, the percentage of goals scored by the winning team is within 1.96 standard deviations of the percentage of its total goals scored, indicating that the results are negligible. Thus, we cannot reject the null hypothesis that winning a fight has no impact on a team’s momentum and goal differential."

http://blog.philbirnbaum.com/2012/01/do-hockey-fights-lift-teams-performance.html

So, I guess, our overall conclusion from this study isn't completely certain. We wind up with a summary like:

1. The effect doesn't seem to exist for run-of-the-mill fights.

2. When a goon fighter on a goon team fights when his team is down, it seems to benefit that team by 1/8 of a goal, or a bit less than a normal power play.

3. But, that effect isn't statistically significant, so we have some doubts that it's real.

4. And, with only 364 such datapoints qualifying out of around 5,000, only a small percentage of fights match the criterion for that kind of boost.

If you had to reduce that to one line, it might be: At best, there might be a small effect in certain specific circumstances ... but much, much less than sportscasters make it out to be.

Anecdotal evidence? Good grief. Don't play that card when you claim that fighting "doesn't have any impact on the sport." You're holding a handful of hyperbole.

Now I'm not going to argue about goon on goon action for the sake of goonery. I'm not going to argue about the kind of staged fights Tootoo engaged in while a member of the Wings. Unnecessary and pointless, both.

But to claim that the 97 brawl did not inspire the Wings is pure head-in-the-sand fantasy. That night forged a winner in Detroit. The team banished their demons from the previous year's loss to CO and ascended to the championship. Even the Avalanche agree with me. Consider Roy fighting Ozzie a year later. Why did he--a goalie, for crying out loud--throw down his gloves and scuttle down ice again if fighting were irrelevant to the sport?

Goals win games, we all know. So do momentum, belief, trust in the system, and comradery between teammates.

[number9 3,297]

Anecdotal evidence? Good grief. Don't play that card when you claim that fighting "doesn't have any impact on the sport." You're holding a handful of hyperbole.

Now I'm not going to argue about goon on goon action for the sake of goonery. I'm not going to argue about the kind of staged fights Tootoo engaged in while a member of the Wings. Unnecessary and pointless, both.

But to claim that the 97 brawl did not inspire the Wings is pure head-in-the-sand fantasy. That night forged a winner in Detroit. The team banished their demons from the previous year's loss to CO and ascended to the championship. Even the Avalanche agree with me. Consider Roy fighting Ozzie a year later. Why did he--a goalie, for crying out loud--throw down his gloves and scuttle down ice again if fighting were irrelevant to the sport?

Goals win games, we all know. So do momentum, belief, trust in the system, and comradery between teammates.

That brawl is beyond unique, and is no basis for a pro fighting argument. Nothing that led to that has, or probably will ever, happen again.

Still it's probably my favorite memory as a Wing fan, won't deny you that.

[The Greek 323]

Perhaps the clinical word isn't "racist" but the poster certainly had no qualms about accusing an entire nation's citizens of being racist themselves.

By all means, though, continue to defend the guy who made the nasty comment.

I never actually defended him. I just pointed out your poor understanding of a common idiom and the definition of racism.

[number9 3,297]

I never actually defended him. I just pointed out your poor understanding of a common idiom and the definition of racism.

Why do you only have 454 posts on this forum? Come around more often. I always enjoy your presence.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Why do you only have 454 posts on this forum? Come around more often. I always enjoy your presence.

Because he agrees with you?

[number9 3,297]

Because he agrees with you?

Grasping at straws huh?

Edited February 24, 2015 by number9

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Grasping at straws huh?

How come you only have 3,000 posts? I feel like I've seen your avatar here for years?

[number9 3,297]

How come you only have 3,000 posts? I feel like I've seen your avatar here for years?

Lotta drinking

[hillbillywingsfan 792]

How come you only have 3,000 posts? I feel like I've seen your avatar here for years?

Why do you have such a high # of posts....Are you one of those people that don't know when to hush? haha

[The Greek 323]

Why do you only have 454 posts on this forum? Come around more often. I always enjoy your presence.

Thanks. I'm in law school, so I try to avoid this place when I'm reading. It's too easy for me to get sucked into a debate.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Anecdotal evidence? Good grief. Don't play that card when you claim that fighting "doesn't have any impact on the sport." You're holding a handful of hyperbole.

Now I'm not going to argue about goon on goon action for the sake of goonery. I'm not going to argue about the kind of staged fights Tootoo engaged in while a member of the Wings. Unnecessary and pointless, both.

But to claim that the 97 brawl did not inspire the Wings is pure head-in-the-sand fantasy. That night forged a winner in Detroit. The team banished their demons from the previous year's loss to CO and ascended to the championship. Even the Avalanche agree with me. Consider Roy fighting Ozzie a year later. Why did he--a goalie, for crying out loud--throw down his gloves and scuttle down ice again if fighting were irrelevant to the sport?

Goals win games, we all know. So do momentum, belief, trust in the system, and comradery between teammates.

Because he was pissed off and it was a rivalry game? I'm not sure why you think that's some sort of objective standard by which to measure fighting's impact on the game. Furthermore, as I've stated before, if you want to understand how one variable impacts another, you use science...not an interview with Claude Lemieux. Scientific research has consistently shown that fighting does not positively impact the game. The fact that a bunch of people say otherwise doesn't mean anything unless they're qualified to say so professionally and empirically. For quite a long time everybody just "knew" that the sun orbited the earth, and the world was flat. It was common knowledge...duh.

Science says fighting is harmful for the individual and unnecessary for the game. I don't really give a s*** what the athletes say. These are the same types of guys who still regularly use sterdoids, chewing tobacco, etc. They're not exactly to be trusted for their keen insights and objective thinking.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Kip - stop with the science stuff already.....You're making my brain hurt.

Yeah, good point. I concede. Fighting rulez cuz it makes the hockey good.

[Nevermind 363]

Because he was pissed off and it was a rivalry game? I'm not sure why you think that's some sort of objective standard by which to measure fighting's impact on the game. Furthermore, as I've stated before, if you want to understand how one variable impacts another, you use science...not an interview with Claude Lemieux. Scientific research has consistently shown that fighting does not positively impact the game. The fact that a bunch of people say otherwise doesn't mean anything unless they're qualified to say so professionally and empirically. For quite a long time everybody just "knew" that the sun orbited the earth, and the world was flat. It was common knowledge...duh.

Science says fighting is harmful for the individual and unnecessary for the game. I don't really give a s*** what the athletes say. These are the same types of guys who still regularly use sterdoids, chewing tobacco, etc. They're not exactly to be trusted for their keen insights and objective thinking.

I agree that fighting is harmful in that it can leave a player with long-term issues related to concussions, brain trauma, etc. If that's your only argument, fine.

But to say a genuine fight doesn't impact a hockey game is silly. That's like saying a big hit or shot block doesn't affect the momentum of a game either. Or the crowd even. There are too many variables and differing scenarios that a scientific study won't be able to capture this.

Also, chemistry and camaraderie are vital to any hockey club. Sticking up for your linemate after a dirty hit is part of being a good teammate. You don't think that brings a team closer together?

Edited February 24, 2015 by Nevermind

[number9 3,297]

I agree that fighting is harmful in that it can leave a player with long-term issues related to concussions, brain trauma, etc. If that's your only argument, fine.

But to say a genuine fight doesn't impact a hockey game is silly. That's like saying a big hit or shot block doesn't affect the momentum of a game either. Or the crowd even. There are too many variables and differing scenarios that a scientific study won't be able to capture this.

Also, chemistry and camaraderie are vital to any hockey club. Sticking up for your linemate after a dirty hit is part of being a good teammate. You don't think that brings a team closer together?

Of course it effects the game in some intangible ways. A fight is not an event inside a vacuum.

However their doesn't appear to be any statistical significance when it comes to fights and the outcome of a hockey game.

[kipwinger 8,524]

I agree that fighting is harmful in that it can leave a player with long-term issues related to concussions, brain trauma, etc. If that's your only argument, fine.

But to say a genuine fight doesn't impact a hockey game is silly. That's like saying a big hit or shot block doesn't affect the momentum of a game either. Or the crowd even. There are too many variables and differing scenarios that a scientific study won't be able to capture this.

Also, chemistry and camaraderie are vital to any hockey club. Sticking up for your linemate after a dirty hit is part of being a good teammate. You don't want think stuff like that brings a team closer together?

The research shows that after a fight there IS an offensive surge. For one, or both teams, and not necessarily for the team that starts, or wins, the fight. Both teams get amped up. I never said guys didn't get amped up after fights. Sure they do. But it doesn't reliably make your team play any better, AND it might actually make the other guys play better.

Secondly, I certainly agree that chemistry and comraderie are important. But there are tons of ways to develop chemistry and comraderie. The Wings are always near the bottom of the league in fights, but don't seem to noticeably suffer from a lack of team cohesion, while a team like Edmonton (which fights much more often) does. Given how many other methods there are to accomplish team unity, and given that fighting doesn't seem vital to achieving it, I'm going to err on the side of caution and suggest we dispense with the method that kills people's brains slowly.

Edited February 24, 2015 by kipwinger

[Internet.Unknown 422]

I never actually defended him. I just pointed out your poor understanding of a common idiom and the definition of racism.

So when someone defames an entire nation's people, what word would you use to describe it?

The research shows that after a fight there IS an offensive surge. For one, or both teams, and not necessarily for the team that starts, or wins, the fight. Both teams get amped up. I never said guys didn't get amped up after fights. Sure they do. But it doesn't reliably make your team play any better, AND it might actually make the other guys play better.

Secondly, I certainly agree that chemistry and comraderie are important. But there are tons of ways to develop chemistry and comraderie. The Wings are always near the bottom of the league in fights, but don't seem to noticeably suffer from a lack of team cohesion, while a team like Edmonton (which fights much more often) does. Given how many other methods there are to accomplish team unity, and given that fighting doesn't seem vital to achieving it, I'm going to err on the side of caution and suggest we dispense with the method that kills people's brains slowly.

I wonder how long it will be until we outlaw boxing. Someone's gotta protect the athletes from themselves!

Edited February 24, 2015 by Internet.Unknown

[kipwinger 8,524]

So when someone defames an entire nation's people, what word would you use to describe it?

Xenophobia. The word is xenophobia. "Canadian" is a nationality, not a race. So defaming Canadians, or any other nationality, isn't racism. It is, however, stupid and wrong.

[number9 3,297]

So when someone defames an entire nation's people, what word would you use to describe it?

I wonder how long it will be until we outlaw boxing. Someone's gotta protect the athletes from themselves!

The day I go to a boxing match and a hockey game breaks out.

[Euro_Twins 4,476]

The day I go to a boxing match and a hockey game breaks out.

[The Greek 323]

So when someone defames an entire nation's people, what word would you use to describe it?

He didn't defame anyone, but that's irrelevant. He was stereotyping Canadians as racist. That is not racist in and of itself.

Either way, I probably shouldn't have made the comment, and I regret doing so. It really didn't contribute anything to the thread.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Thanks. I'm in law school, so I try to avoid this place when I'm reading. It's too easy for me to get sucked into a debate.

Meh, I started law school one year before I joined this forum. You can post here and do school at the same time. Just need to know how to multitask.

Speaking of, I was studying for the bar in law school when we lost game 7 of the SCF. You're more than welcome to read my post game comments that night. You'll see what you have to look forward too.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

Why do you have such a high # of posts....Are you one of those people that don't know when to hush? haha

Has anyone ever told you that you and kipwinger have very similar avatars? One would think you'd learn to get along.

[The Greek 323]

Meh, I started law school one year before I joined this forum. You can post here and do school at the same time. Just need to know how to multitask.

Speaking of, I was studying for the bar in law school when we lost game 7 of the SCF. You're more than welcome to read my post game comments that night. You'll see what you have to look forward too.

I should have known you're a JD. It explains so much. In all seriousness, you deserve some kudos. The legal market is still pretty bad, but you got in at the worst possible time.

I try to avoid multitasking, especially when I'm working on something that is particularly dry, like reading for corps. I'm too ADD. I prefer to just buckle down and get it over with, not that it always works.