I don't disagree with their sentiment, but they picked the wrong hit to get outraged about. There have been several more serious hits where the head was actually targeted.
- EuroWing likes this
Male
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 09 March 2011 - 10:49 PM
I don't disagree with their sentiment, but they picked the wrong hit to get outraged about. There have been several more serious hits where the head was actually targeted.
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 09 March 2011 - 10:40 AM
That overhead angle shows Chara grabbing him with his free hand, probably trying to slow him down from getting to the puck so his defensive partner would have time to make a play. If not for the stantion it should've been two for interference.About 3/4 the way through it shows the angle I'm talking about.
More than pro-enforcer or anti-enforcer (I don't consider myself either), two better categories to determine how people view this hit is probably "I dont like Chara" and "I like/have no opinion about Chara."He was against the boards, he could have just rubbed him off, but as soon as the stantion came up he literally shoved him into it. Chara is not a dirty player, but clean players have been known to have mental lapses.
But this thread is going to go the same way as all dirty hit threads go, pro enforcers don't see anything wrong, anti-enforcer see's the world falling down and then the general masses see it as dirty (the poll on HFboards is 60% to 40% calling for a suspension).
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 06 March 2011 - 07:14 PM
sounded like Zetterberg is not motivated
You get that from one quote? He's not motivated because of his big contract?Exactly. The wings blow a 3 goal third period lead, and he is making up excuses like that? And this is the heir to the captaincy? Doesn't sound good at all, oh well I guess those big contracts will do that too you
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 06 March 2011 - 01:00 AM
That's my biggest beef with him. He's 6'5" 220 lbs, but doesn't use it to his advantage nearly enough. He needs to watch game tape of Pronger to model himself afer.Does Ericsson actually realise he's 6'5? Needs to use his size!!
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 05 March 2011 - 09:35 PM
Actually, it already is. The sections you made up or are completely unsupported are highlighted in bold.Babcock is a firm believer in keeping the defensive pairings constant. That's why the pairings are the way they are.
Look what happened when Rafalski went down, Big E is failing pretty bad out there. Past 6 games, where Kindl turned the corner, Kindl has 2 points and is a minus 1 while E has been w/o a point since early November and is a minus 2. Without Rafalski's elite puck moving skills, we can clearly see that Big E is not better than Kindl. Kindl has out performed him lately and will out perform him through the playoffs.
Yes, Ericsson is playing more minutes than Kindl, but that more has to do with Babcock liking to keep his D pairings constant and about who Ericsson's D partner is. Ericsson lucked out to be paired with Rafalski when he did because Ericsson was in deed higher on the depth chart and the better player at the time. Now, not so much.
Kindl > Ericsson. No matter how many times you refute that equation, you won't be able to get it to be false.
Agreed. Maybe it's because E's development seems to have stalled a bit, but I think Kindl does have the potential to be a better D man the Ericsson. He already seems to play more physical than Ericsson and is looking more and more comfortable out there.I think Kindl sees the ice better than Big E, and this is why some of you are saying he is a better player. Ericsson has more of the physical tools needed to be a defenceman, and that is why he plays a better game currently. As long as Kindl keeps learning and improving, he should end up a better player than Big E IMO.
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 03 March 2011 - 12:41 AM
Right. Because that rarely happens in the NHL.PP setups are tough with bad ice.
Howard was a left-handed glover facing a right-handed shooter. That's rough.
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 01 March 2011 - 10:39 AM
The Kings beat the Wings 5-0 and 3-2 earlier this season, and I think split the regular season series with the Wings before that.This is the same guy that gave up a ton to get Dustin Penner. He's just pissed because he thought he built the Kings to contend for the Cup this year and that were getting killed by one of the best teams in the West and it showed just how far the Kings still have to go before being a serious contender. "Its Detroit". Whatever. How about, "why are the Kings losing?" "Well it's the Kings".
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 20 February 2011 - 05:48 PM
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 20 February 2011 - 11:53 AM
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 16 February 2011 - 11:23 AM
He scored 23 points in the playoffs in 02.I think Stevie said the 97' team mostly because he didn't have a big part in the 02' season.
And others are mixing up "most HOFers" with "best."'02 was hailed as one of the greatest teams all time even before they stepped on the ice. To me, it's not really an argument. As for that fan bracket on Sporting News, I'm not surprised that it comes down to the '70s Canadiens and '02 Wings. However, I remember a lot of experts at the time saying Montreal was better so I'm betting that is the team that will win that particular vote.
I think an interesting debate would be the '52 or '02 Wings, though. Had the team not been dismantled the Wings could've gone on to challenge or even beat Montreal in total Cups won. Those 50's Wings teams were among the greatest ever in my mind.
EDIT: Some people are mixing up "best team" with "best storyline" I think. '97 was great, but there's no way it can stack up to the '02 team in talent, which is what "best" generally means in my mind.
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 16 February 2011 - 10:28 AM
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 15 February 2011 - 10:35 AM
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 14 February 2011 - 09:49 PM
His comments may have been about this specific type of game, but they were also about player safety and the integrity of the game so, yes, employing Cooke is absolutely relevant. And Cooke is much worse than any of those other current players you listed. He has a career full of incidents where he deliberately tries to injure players. We're not talking about a Bertuzzi moment, or a questionable hit or two. He's done it over and over and over.Not at all. One player doesn't make a team. If they Wings had Cooke (ewwww) and he continually was doing dirty stuff, the Wings wouldn't be known as goons, just for having a goon. Mario didn't call out goons, he called out a team playing with the intent to take a pound of flesh from their opponents during that night.
If I had a problem child, there is no reason I shouldn't be able to call out a family of O'Doyles. It's hypocritical, but it doesn't invalidate my argument. Smokers are right when they say smoking is bad, alcoholics are right when they say alcoholism is wrong.
I do agree, though, his comments were melodramtic. But having Cooke isn't the same thing and it isn't hypocritical since Cooke can pot you 40 points a season if he really tried. he does the same stuff OV does and same stuff Briere does, and hell, even Mike Richards throws those exact same hits.
Mario was right, and Matt Cooke is completely irrelevant. Cooke has never tried to Bertuzzi anyone and never began to pummel a guy he just blindsided that was clearly hurt. All of Cooke's cheapshots, you can find identical hits delivered by highly reputable players, but again, he's never suckerpunched or hit a down opponent who was obviously injured.
Plus, Cooke can continually pot at least 10 goals a season and put up 30 points. Gillies has 9 goals in his entire 12 year career. Matt Martin, thus far in his early early career is a goon. Cooke is a dirty version of Steve Ott basically.
So no, it really doesn't pertain to what Mario was saying. Matt Cooke walks the line and crosses it sometimes, but what Mario is arguing is that an entire game shouldn't be all about cheap shots. So either you (not specifically you) cannot see that or your (not specifically you) pure unadulterated hate for everything Penguins and Crosby is getting in your way. I hate Crosby and the Penguins as the next person, but at least I can see it from mario's/an owners point of view.
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 14 February 2011 - 10:46 AM
It absolutely pertains to Mario's comments. Mario releases a sanctimonious statement about protecting players and the integrity of the game, then he walks into his office and signs Cooke's paycheck. The Pens lead the league in major penalties. They lead the league in PIMs.Heaven forbid an owner stands up for his team. It was clear on the intentions of the Islanders, and Mario called them out on it. He'll get fined, but the whole fallacy of "But they have Matt Cooke and Cindy Crysby blah blah blah" doesn't pertain to Mario's argument or comments, so why even bring them up? Just because the Pens have Cooke, that doesn't mean Mario can't complain when a game turns into a goonfest.
I think Mario was overly dramatic with the James Harrision "I'm out" comment, but it was good to see an owner stick up for his team.
Posted by haroldsnepsts
on 13 February 2011 - 02:23 PM
It is too bad for his development. Sitting in the press box is not going to help his progress.i saw kindl win some nice battles that period. hell be okay. he was pretty good when he first got called up. now hes just being dumb. too bad he cant be sent down once wings are healthy to have some more playing time
Find content