Jump to content

toby91_ca's Photo


Member Since 28 Jun 2002
Offline Last Active Today, 11:44 AM

#2215629 Veterans Players Choosing to Wear visors/ Younger Players Going Withou

Posted by toby91_ca on 15 October 2011 - 09:55 PM

Their grown ass men, they can make that decision.

Well, in pretty much all other industries on the planet, the grown ass men have no choice whether to follow saftey precuations if they want to be employed.

Edit...oh yeah, forgot to mention, was Franzen lumped in with that "younger" player group? He's older than 4 of the 5 players mentioned in the "older" player group. Morrow is as well.
  • Nev likes this

#2214306 Bouchard suspended 2 games

Posted by toby91_ca on 12 October 2011 - 10:25 AM

I just don't get it. Shanny's video spells out, literally, why the suspension is being handed down, but the reasons he gave are for a double minor penalty. It even sounds like he is explaining why he wouldn't suspend Bouchard, stating that he has never received supplemental disciplinary action before. I just don't understand why it wasn't four minutes in the box, call it a lesson learned and move on. It just seems that clean hits are going to be punished if they have an unfortunate outcome. This "new NHL" is going in the crapper if you ask me. It's almost more exciting to watch women's Olympic hockey...ok, scratch that last part.

*edited for spelling.

The difference is that the double minor would apply for an accidental "high stick" - this was a slash....big difference.

#2214299 NHL Marketing

Posted by toby91_ca on 12 October 2011 - 09:48 AM

Can someone help me understand why we should care about marketing? I could understand if I was an employee with a Company that isn't doing as well as they should and it was attributed to poor marketing, jobs on the line, etc. But, why the hell should I care about NHL marketing?

#2214067 Bouchard suspended 2 games

Posted by toby91_ca on 11 October 2011 - 08:14 AM

This is awful, in my opinion. Give him a 4 minute penalty, 2 games for this is way overboard. I don't think it was reckless by Bouchard, I think they were just jostling and chopping at each other and Calvert's stick lift made Bouchard hit him up high unintentionally.

How many games would this have gotten?


The difference is that Foote's was clearly unintentional as he simply tried to lift Yzermans' stick and missed. Yes, you need to be in control of your stick, which is why he got the penalty. In Bouchard's case, again, unintentional to hit him in the face, but he was swinging his stick at the player to slash him....he had intent to hit the other player with his stick, quite a bit different.

I'm torn a bit though as suspending him for that is tough, but if he was deemed that he swung at his head on purpose, he would have been gone for 20 games, so the suspension of 2 games kind of takes that into account.

Was watching hockey central today at noon and apprently a lot of GMs are pissed at the overdone suspensions, not just us fans.

Pretty soon someone is gonna speak out.

I dont see how a player basically lifting a guys stick into his own face should be worth a suspension, I can see a penalty here obviously but 2 games to one of the cleanest players going?

Something needed to be done Shanny but come on man, the old saying is let the boys play after all

I for one am not upset at all about the suspensions. For once, maybe the suspensions will actually mean something, perhaps even be seen as a deterent.

#2212924 Tell the Illitch Family to Drop "Presented by Amway"

Posted by toby91_ca on 07 October 2011 - 12:39 PM

It's a good point Oz... I guess I view the fan involvement as an ongoing investment: merchandise, games, my Center Ice subscription. Not to much the possibility of the new stadium being partially subsidized by the city. I know the last point is really what this is all about, but still, the fans do invest in the team just as much as the sponsors.

Most fans don't really "invest" in the team. Maybe they invest emotionally, but that's about it. Yes, fans buy tickets, they buy merchandise, etc. But that isn't investment, that's simply purchasing goods and services. If the fans actually want to invest in the team, then send your money in without expecting anything in return except for a small stake in the team.

The sponsors don't invest in the either and they really have no ownership over anything. They pay money, in return they get advertising.

The owners are the ones that actually paid to purchase the team. They need to run their business (i.e. the team) to make money hopefully, otherwise, that team may not last forever (Atlanta). This sponsorship deal actually helps the fans be able to watch their team play. Without such sponsorship deals, the ability for teams to operate would deteriorate.

#2212596 Caps, Pens schedule benefit

Posted by toby91_ca on 06 October 2011 - 08:10 AM

If what I think is happening than I'm disgusted to see this. The Benefit is Fantastic and that's not what I'm upset about; but WHY is it the Pens and Caps doing this. Something tells me that Bettman set this up to make these two teams look this classy. It just so happens that it's Crosby's and Ovechkin's Teams that are doing this. How many players on the plane actually played on the Pens or Caps team?? 3 Former Red Wings died on the plane and yes the Wings went to the Funeral but why aren't they doing something like that. That's more of a thing that I would imagine that Mr. Illitch would set up with the Wings since I truly believe that he is a classy guy. I hope I'm wrong and if I am I'll eat Crow but it just makes me believe that it wasn't truly the idea of these two teams to do this and that there is a mastermind behind it. I know the plane crash did have an effect on Ovechkin at least that's what I heard but it just smells a little fishy to me to make Crosby and Ovechkin and their teams out to be the good guys. If something is going to be done it should envolve the entire NHL. If I'm out of line I apologize.

One of the dumbest posts I've read...honestly.

#2210770 Numbers to be placed on FRONT and back of helmet

Posted by toby91_ca on 30 September 2011 - 08:14 AM

visors cause just as many injuries as they prevent, the get pushed down and cut ur face. and for *******.

Anyone that thinks wearing a visor is for ******* is basically an idiot.

#2209467 Matt Cooke already!

Posted by toby91_ca on 24 September 2011 - 11:06 PM

Calling that a penalty is borderline, writing an article and linking a video + potetial suspension is simply pathetic.

#2209022 Top 3 Players in Each Team's History

Posted by toby91_ca on 22 September 2011 - 08:41 PM

Actually, Richards is supposed to be second. I was throwing around what I felt the order should be, and forgot to change it. As for Howe, he was as good as Bourque or Coffey through the 1980s, and retired in the mid 1990s Parent had two great seasons, and was otherwise a very good goaltender. But he was not one of the top three goaltenders in the NHL during his career; Ken Dryden, Ed Giacomin, Tony Esposito, Gump Worsley, Jacques Plante all played through a significant portion of Parent's career and were considered better goaltenders. Parent was excellent, but ranking him based on his 74 and 75 runs would be equivalent to saying that Tim Thomas is one of the three best Bruins based on his two Vezina years and one Conn Smythe. Howe was one of the top three defensemen in the NHL during his career, and should have won the 1983 Norris. Parent was named First Team twice, and Second Team no times. Howe was named First Team three times, with no Second Team selections.
As for other Flyers, I also thought about Tim Kerr and Ron Hextall in addition to Parent as guys who were left off. I was tempted to add Brad McCrimmon as well as a tribute, as well as the fact that he made up the second half of the best defensive pairing of the 80s.

You know, I knew you had a lot of love for Mark Howe. There's is absolutely no question he was a great player, but I think you may be the only person on the planet that actually think he's a better Flyer than Bobby Clarke, that's just insane.

I won't bother mentioning anything about your comment that he was as good as Bourque in the 80s.

#2208819 Mike Modano announces retirement

Posted by toby91_ca on 22 September 2011 - 11:49 AM


He wasn't better than Chris Chelios. He wasn't better than Mark Howe. He wasn't better than Frank Brimsek. He wasn't better than Pat LaFontaine. I'd probably put him fifth though, just ahead of Beezer and Barrasso. Ryan Miller is quickly moving up that list though.

What I find interesting is how you pretend that your "opinions" are facts, it's strange.

By the way, no love for Brett Hull? Or do you consider him Canadian and not American?

#2207584 Will Ericsson Earn His Raise?

Posted by toby91_ca on 14 September 2011 - 01:20 PM

The problem is when will the cap hit look good? It's only a 3 year deal, so he better get better quickly, otherwise, the cap hit may look okay later, but that doens't mean it was a good deal. Kronwall's was a 5 year deal, so if you overpay for the first year or 2, that's okay if you are getting a good deal in the remaining 3 or 4 years. You don't have that situation with this deal.

It's not that Holland knows more than most, he knows he's taking a risk here, he's just hoping it pays off. Some work, some don't, but if you don't take those risks, you remain average.

#2206300 Best One-Two Punch?

Posted by toby91_ca on 05 September 2011 - 09:03 PM

Sadly, I think Crosby and Malkin when they played together.

Two of the best players maybe, but they very rarely play together.....I'd be leaning more towards guys that more chemistry as those noted above.

#2205458 Crosby's 2012 Season now in Question

Posted by toby91_ca on 29 August 2011 - 10:55 AM

"Because Crosby showed no immediate signs of a concussion after being drilled by a blindside hit from the Capitals' David Steckel during the Winter Classic on Jan. 1 at Heinz Field, he stayed in the game."

Bias much? :rolleyes:


Bias? Where's the bias? The statement is "fact." I suppose it depends on what you are reading into it. I don't think the writer was trying to say that Steckel went out and drilled him with a vicious hit, otherwise, the writer would have gone on to say more about. I know there are some out there that think the contact was on purpose, but the vast majority think it was accidentaal contact...but either way, he was "drilled by a blindside hit."

If you step back and think about things now though, you have to really question the Pens medical staff, reasons as follows:

- When I was watching the game on TV, after seeing that hit, I was thinking concussion immediately, surely the medical staff must have had concerns as well. Regardless of what Crosby may have said to them, why on earth wouldn't they keep him out of the rest of the game? One period of a regular season game...keep him out just for precaution. Perhaps he continued to play just because of the nature of that game.

- I've read that he did experience some symptoms before the TB game, which was somehow explained away, but again, combining the fact he took that headshot, had some sort of headaches/illness afterwards, surely you think you'd hold him out of hte next game for precautionary reasons.

- Then, in the TB he takes the hit from behind into the glass. If you watch that play, he doesn't look well at all after the hit. Again, I'm pretty sure he finished the rest of the game....what? How is that possible.

Anyway, my line of thought is to take a lot of caution when you see something that could be potentials for concussion. Knowing everything we know now and don't know, why wouldn't you be as cautious as possible. There is a lot of people out there that think he would have been back playing last year if they had just kept him out after the Steckel hit. Not playing the next game, but definately not out this long.

#2205169 Oilers - Red Wings 2004

Posted by toby91_ca on 25 August 2011 - 10:00 PM

seems like you became fans after 2004

What are you talking about? Why are you posting a video from 2006 (it's now 2011), get it wrong and say the video is from 2004 and then question whether the rules are different because there was no evidence there was a goal???? The was clearly a goal, but even if it wasn't clear at all, it would still have been a goal, even 20 years ago and even today.

You've totally confused the hell out of me.

#2204442 Crosby's 2012 Season now in Question

Posted by toby91_ca on 19 August 2011 - 10:11 AM

Did they have player polls when yzerman played and how many times did he win the biggest whiner by his peers? Yzerman was pretty much respected in all aspects of the game so thats a non argument. Theres a difference in complaining and just flat out whineing.

No idea on player polls, but he did make #4 on a referrees list of biggest whiners of ALL-TIME.