Jump to content

toby91_ca's Photo


Member Since 28 Jun 2002
Offline Last Active Aug 23 2016 08:36 PM

#2218153 Veterans Players Choosing to Wear visors/ Younger Players Going Withou

Posted by toby91_ca on 25 October 2011 - 10:30 AM

that stick still would have hit him as it would have gone up and under it. i stopped getting facial cuts when i stopped wearing one. thats the main reason i hate them so much, they can cut u, and direct sticks that would have just gone right in front of your face, into you face, it the stick is going is an upward direction. Different guys like different things, i guess.

There is absolutely no way of knowing whether a guy would still have gotten hit in the eye even if he was wearing a visor.

#2218152 Crosby GIF

Posted by toby91_ca on 25 October 2011 - 10:26 AM

Does anyone think Crosby will come out and perform like he has in the past again?

His concussion problem just seems so severe to me that he wont be the same, still good, but not the same.

I get the feeling he will play more reserved and cautious, or he'll get injured again and aggravate an already bad concussion problem.

Who knows? However, I'm sure there will be many jumping to that conclusion if he comes back and isn't playing that well right away....you know.....instead of simply chalking it up to him not playing a game for 10+ months.

#2216143 2 games scheduled today

Posted by toby91_ca on 18 October 2011 - 09:13 AM

Friday nights have never been a big night for hockey, there are rarely many games, it's always been that way. Saturday night is the big night for the NHL. It should be obvious why there are few games on Sunday. You'll see Sunday games increase in February or so....i.e. after the NFL season.

#2215901 Asham KOs Beagle

Posted by toby91_ca on 17 October 2011 - 09:10 AM

While we've learned new stuff about concussions, concussions are nothing new at all. I was warned of what could happen if I were to play football again after sustaining one, as a teenager. I understood just fine. These are adults.

As far as the business perspective goes, remember, "business" bottomline, 1) teams are insured for players, 2) injured reserve doesn't count against the cap in such a way that if it were long term the player could be replaced presuming value is the same or less regardless of cap status.

Fighting, hitting, is part of the entertainment value of hockey, along with core parts of the sport itself.

The politically correct aspect is not criticizing the league for it's excessive nanny-like handling of concussions, because if they didn't take it as such, the media would be all over their ass. It's pretty similar to the PC flipping out over a fan tossing a banana on the ice. If the team doctor, who is there for a reason, says the player is fine, let them play. Whatever happens to the player when they're retired, they knew the risks of playing a physically violent sport, and much like those who fight for the UFC or box or even do fake rasslin' for WWE, there's little logic in blaming others -- they're paid to take those risks, not skate around in such a politically correct safe manner.

Obviously the problem is leaving it up to a league's rules when players understand that a concussion, like any wound, might have other complications beyond that. Laich's attitude comes from the fact that playing in the NHL is certainly a risk as far as physical health goes, and guess what, if you stick your face out there to fight, or play stupidly and keep your head down admiring a pass or following the puck without paying attention, take a random puck to the head, lose one's balance and hitting head in the boards, and one of the many other ways for such an injury to happen, that is part of the inherent risk of playing the game, and one cannot ever guarantee safety in such a fashion given the physicality and speed of this sport. Players aren't that stupid as to not know the possible consequences, just because we're now learning more about the long term effects of concussions. This is getting well out of hand, and I'm glad Laich spoke out about it.

What you are talking about is the risks that players take out there and you basically have to live with them, can't avoid the issue all together.

But what Laich really doesn't like is the protocal about having to go get checked out and cleared before you go back out there if you take some sort of head shot. Beagle was knocked unconcious and had to be helped off the ice. I'm sorry, but why is there a problem with then having to go sit a few minutes and get cleared before heading back out there?

Ingoring the players own stupidity and not caring whether he has a quality of life past the age of 40, ignoring potential impact on his kids, etc, I'll just take the blunt approach. If I'm the owner of the team and I have invested millions in this player and I have him under contract (guaranteed) over the next 5 years, I don't want my investment risk to be beyond what it inherently has to be.

#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?

#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.