The Canucks don't need a fighter
by camcharron on Jul 8, 2011 10:27 AM PDT
in Statistics
Email
PrintI intended to show up a little more in the past week and expose judgment on all the free agent signings made by the Vancouver Canucks, but few are worth little more than mention. There's, as always, a certain degree of hopefulness that one of these players will be a difference-maker for the Canucks in Game 108 of the season, but the reality is that, when your General Manager is signing players to contracts that you can't even remember what team they play for, he's scraping the clammy substance out of the bottom of the free agent bucket.
Marco Sturm is serviceable and versatile if he can stay healthy and Alexander Sulzer is dependable as a bottom-pairing defenseman with somewhat sheltered minutes. It's absolutely fine with me that Mike Gillis has stayed quiet, since I do think that a lot of the younger Canucks have earned at least an open spot on the roster to step up, and, if they can't crack it with the big club, trade them while the championship window is open. They can't be spending the prime years of the Sedins and Ryan Kesler and Roberto Luongo babying Cody Hodgson and Jordan Schroeder into the lineup. Unless Mason Raymond's percentages turn around next season, the Canucks are dry on that second line and they'll need another guy who can score and provide the Sedins decent lineup protection and draw away at least a few matchups.
There's a noble sentiment that surrounds the fighter. He's the first line of defense against a superstar and risks his health to provide better space for the team's scorers. He doesn't make a lot of money and came from humble beginnings in hockey. He made the decision in his teenage years to one day become the security guard for a player he could only hope to be.
His role is diminishing, and the game, simply put, has no more use for the pugilist on ice. This is what Cam Janssen is, a player with no redeeming qualities to prevent him from being a total liability. Despite starting many of his shifts in the offensive zone, a large amount of scoring chances are counted against him regardless. This is not useful at any time, whether its Game One of the regular season or Game Six of the Stanley Cup Finals.
It wasn't long ago that a team needed to have a North American Captain to win the Stanley Cup. It was a belief so ingrained into our beliefs as sports fans and crept up every year that Markus Naslund would address the media from his locker after the Canucks' exit. That long-held belief has gone by the wayside after a four year span in which the Cup was initially lifted by a Swede and a Slovak. Fewer teams are employing the goon to keep their players protected, and with good reason. The r-squared (correlative) value between fights and wins this past regular season was .011. In the last ten years, the Canucks have shown an ability to win in seasons that they score a lot of goals (r-squared value of .582) and not necessarily an ability to win in seasons they rack up a lot of fight totals (r-squared of .081).
There's even a lower correlation in the previous 10 Canucks seasons between goal total and fighting majors (r-squared of .052). Oddly enough, one of the first signings Mike Gillis made as the General Manager of the Canucks was to bring aboard Darcy Hordichuk, but under Gillis' watch, the Canucks have seen their fighting totals dip from 63 in the 2009 season to just 33 this past season (this is including playoffs) and it has worked out quite well for them.
There are still some goons who have the ability to do other things which influence possession: Zenon Konopka, aside from being a total brainstem, is a faceoff wizard. Brandon Prust is a semi-reliable scorer in his own right for the New York Rangers. I maintain an ideology that these teams are better served by these thugs' actual talents. A post up on Puck Podcast does a great job at breaking down these players' talents. It is also required reading.
"After being one of the most-injured teams in the League last year, the Oilers brought in Steve MacIntyre to try to discourage players taking liberties with their stars, particularly the gaggle of youngsters who’d just joined the club. MacIntyre played in just 34 games, recorded only seven fights, and averaged three and a half minutes per game. Meanwhile, the Oilers were again one of the most-injured teams in the League. Their best player, Ales Hemsky, still missed significant time with concussion and shoulder problems, and in a cruel twist of irony, young star Taylor Hall wound up injuring himself for the rest of the season trying to fight one of the [top eleven fighters in the NHL]!* So much for that deterrent."
Determination does not buy wins. If it did, the last-place teams full of pluggers would be in the playoff hunt well-past the All-Star break and teams littered with well-meaning but effectively useless players such as Edmonton or St. Louis would not see their stars drop to injury. A lot of bad teams employ several of these characters since they have no ability to fill a hole with anybody else, and it is certainly not in Mike Gillis' best interest to follow that model. The Canucks have some cap space and a couple of young, scoring forwards who have the ability to play, something that Cam Janssen lacks. It's not like Janssen can win faceoffs or has anything but a low Corsi (on-ice shot attempt differential) even for a fourth liner. He's just a pretty poor player, whose one negotiable talent has become meaningless.
There may have been a time when a fighter was important, just as there was once a time when people listened to Glam Metal without a hint of irony. It's the end of an era, and the Vancouver Canucks are better off exploiting nostalgic teams who have yet to join the post-lockout NHL.
*The top eleven fighters were listed by number of fighting majors. None of them played for a team that made it past the first round, and only George Parros, Kyle Clifford and Kevin Westgarth played on teams that made the playoffs.
371 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
But think of how much more Leafs fans will hate you if Cam Janssen was a Canuck…
Hell on Ice/In Lou We Trust/Twitter
Talking toilet, you may call me Jane.
by Kevin Sellathamby on Jul 8, 2011 10:30 AM PDT reply actions
Agreed
I was at the game in St. Louis where Rypien destroyed Janssen. Absolute awesomeness. I’d hate to see that goon in a Canucks sweater…
I seem to remember Rypien having his hand taped in a fight with Janssen....
not to mention Rypien attacked a fan….and you’re calling Janssen a goon?
by nintendofan24 on Jul 10, 2011 5:04 AM PDT up reply actions
Ya. I remember Rypien fucking Janssen up even though he had tape on the hand he didn’t throw any punches with.
I also remembered that 30 year old Wilds fan who turned out to be nothing but a spot-light seeker. Please look deeper into what happened in the “fan attack”. I’ll be the first to admit. Any negative interaction between a player and a fan, whether it be verbal, squirting water, throwing a stick or even grabbing a fan’s shirt, is unacceptable player conduct. But if you think he attacked a fan like he did Cam… it wasn’t even close.
Frequent visitor to Nucks Misconduct.
by Vancouverguy on Jul 10, 2011 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions
Science!
I’m glad I agree with you on this. In fact, remind me to never disagree about anything with you. Your science hurts my head.
The other thing that bears mentioning is that getting a fighter represents a significant change in strategy for this group. It seems like a reactionary change of strategy and those are usually not the ones that work out. Especially in a case like this where you might be missing what the real problem was.
I tried to stay away from the reasons the Canucks might want to employ a fighter, but I agree with that as well.
If Cam Cole gets his wish, I may lose all faith in the Mike Gillis era. It’s not like the Canucks lost fifty games this year; they lost two biggies, and apparently that’s because they didn’t have a fighter in the lineup.
I tried to stay away from the reasons the Canucks might want to employ a fighter, but I agree with that as well.
If Cam Cole gets his wish, I may lose all faith in the Mike Gillis era. It’s not like the Canucks lost fifty games this year; they lost two biggies, and apparently that’s because they didn’t have a fighter in the lineup.
Exactly
Although I would argue that the losses in the Chicago series were “biggies” too and the reasons for the losses in the Bruins series were the same.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Also
As much as they were one win away from the Stanley cup, they were also one ot loss away from being knocked out by Chicago in the first round. Hard to ignore, especially if you think, like I do, that the problems were exactly the same.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
The days of the ‘pure’ fighter is dead… guys like Colton Orr, Georges Laraque, George Parros etc are useless and a drain on the cap.
However, fighters are still key… they just have to bring more to the table whether it be faceoffs (Konopka), minute-eating defense (Carkner) or physical play and leadership (Thornton). Thus guys are all useful to their team if signed for the right price and utilized properly.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 11:39 AM PDT reply actions
I think thornton gets far more credit than he deserves
From Canuck fans. The signs that the Bruins could win were there before he stepped on the ice and in fact some of his shenanigans led to a couple of the very few Canuck goals.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
Was it because of Thornton that Luongo kept getting beat top shelf and five hole?
Was it because of Thornton that the powerplay couldn’t score?
Was it because of Thornton that the forwards kept getting boxed out and the defense kept getting turnstiled?
And if the cheap shit that the Bruins did got to the Canucks and led to any of the above then the team is nowhere near as mentally tough as they led us to believe.
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
No, no, and no.
Now, what are the reasons Boston played a far more aggressive and effective game after he was added to the line up? Why is it they played a disinterested and cautious game until Rome’s hit on Horton and Thornton’s explosive response? Why is it Vancouver simply didn’t respond to the “cheap shit” – as you say, why do they lack that mental toughness?
Flying that Nerd Flag high!
by Thursday on Jul 8, 2011 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That, my friend, is the Million Dollar question.
Because it was the exact same thing in Games 4 and 5 against Chicago. They didn’t have the mental toughness to deal with those games either.
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
It's like I said in the last thread
Our stars need to realize that it’s not about their pride or getting revenge. It’s about sacrifice and playing through the hacks, not letting them bother you and the fact that it so obviously bothers them only throws fuel on the fire. But like I said before I’m pretty confident the Sedins will prove their doubters wrong once again by finding a way to do just that. Even Kesler saying in an interview after the WCF that he played on one leg shows a sort of immaturity and need to be recognized, rather than the confidence that Stevie Y had the last half of his career. That’s what makes champions. Playing through the BS and the injuries without bothering to give it a second though because it’s beneath you. Yzerman played on broken legs and didn’t need recognition for it because he didn’t think it was anything extraordinary.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
It's because
… they went into those games with teh wrong approach. In each case, it was a thought process that said “Guys, lets weather the forst ten minutes, get through that ’casue these guys will come out strong, and then we move on form there” In fact, that gets you back on your heels, and you never really recover. The Canucks were one of the best rad teams in the league this year. They should have been going into those games with a gung-ho “Let’s score four early” approach. We’d be rioting over wins, not losses, in that case.
As far as the goons show goes, Cam, you’re right on the mark. You don’t need fighters, you need guys who show up when it gets tough. And I don’t have a lot of concerns about the C’s on that score.
wow
Drinking while writing really goofs up grammar and spelling, doesn’t it?
oh sure, blame booze :)
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think they were as disinterested as you make it seem
winning 1-0 twice and 3-2 in ot were hardly decisive victories. In retrospect Boston controlled the whole series in the sense that everyone played their type of game.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Don’t get me wrong… I don’t think he turned the series around or anything but he is a big part of that team. Good physical presence, reliable player in all three zones with some scoring ability (10-10-20) who can handle more minutes than most (10 ATOI last year) and I think he’s a big leader in the lockerroom. Helps keep everyone loose and had won the Cup before.
He’s the ideal 4th liner in my opinion.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
And yet...
…Would you call Thornton a “Fighter”? Oreskovich (should he re-sign) or recent addition Mancari (should he make the club) are both players who can be in that role. Bieksa was certainly a member of that group, and still does occasionally drop the gloves: does he follow the description?
Flying that Nerd Flag high!
Oreskovich has 3 NHL fights and 2 AHL fights… don’t see him filling that role.
Mancari hasn’t had more than 3 fights since ’06… again, not a good fit for that role.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't get that
You are not able to fight if you don’t drop the gloves all the time?
Number of fights is not THAT important, is it?
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
Generally if the guy COULD be a fighter he would have been one by now. Fighting in the AHL is a means of getting a shot at the big club.
I mean, by that logic couldn’t you just label anyone on the roster as a fighter? I mean, the Sedins never fight but that doesn’t mean they can’t do so, right?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
On the other hand...
…Cam Neely fought a lot less later in his career than he did at the start because word had gotten around, not because he gave it up! 8)
Flying that Nerd Flag high!
Hey Cam cut it out! I’m starting to agree with you! :)
Great post!
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
But I am old school. I like seeing a good hockey fight for entertainment value. I just have to retract some of what I was saying last night because..well look at Tanner Glass. 4th liner, fighter, death to scoring chances 2, really good at getting a double word score. I wanted his head on a platter during the playoffs.
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Me too
I love a good hockey fight and the clips in the last thread were epic but I just don’t necessarily need it to happen for the Canucks. I’d rather enjoy it in clips.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions
That’s what Cam was getting at. If you’re going to bring in a guy to “enforce” or whatever, make sure he can actually play decently, like Konopka or Prust
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
I know that’s what he was getting at :)
Uh-oh, Puck Daddy linked to your post, Cam…
Why the Vancouver Canucks don’t need an enforcer. It must be because of the way they pushed around the Bruins in brutalizing their way to the Stanley Cup. Oh, wait … [Nucks Misconduct]
Why that little son of a …
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, his intention worked, the Canucks are a polarizing team. If you call out a polarizing team, their supporters jump to their defense and the Haters pile on. More reads for Puck Daddy, more views for NucksMisconduct. Win/Win
by Skuba7 on Jul 8, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
A man who gets it ^
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait
Drama sells papers and gets links? Why have I always been writing stats posts here? Dammit!
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
by Semi_Colon on Jul 9, 2011 8:27 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Sorry, Cam
While you’ve made your point clear and concise, I just can’t help thinking that a player of this type might of afforded the twins, et al, a little more room to operate. If you want to call me a dinosaur, I understand.
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
by Smoboy41 on Jul 8, 2011 12:14 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Wouldn't he have to play with them?
Or at least a significant amount of time on the ice? Janssen is not that guy. If you can find THAT guy, I for one am all for it.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions
A guy who can fight but play on the top line? Um…. Joe Thorton? Todd Bertuzzi, circa 2001-2002? How many top line players fight?
Frequent visitor to Nucks Misconduct.
by Vancouverguy on Jul 8, 2011 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
He is on Boston’s 1st line but his pugilism has steadily declined every season. He and Horton (the other first line wing) had 7 fights apiece in the regular season.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
are you including the sucker punches? heh..
as a first liner i wouldnt expect him to fight every game, but i cant see him not standing up for his line mates if something was to happen. personally he is the type of player i want with the sedins, or kesler for that matter
Agreed. Don’t have to fight often to be feared for your abilities. And he certainly does protect Krejci… well other than when Hansen slashes the knee to get open for a goal.
He would be a great fit with the twins… dirty goal scorer who can block out the goalie and do the dirty work in the corners and along the boards. Hell, Recchi would have been a good fit there too.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions
can we clone him maybe?
yes yes we all know that the canucks like to hack and slash their way thru games, poor krejci =p
That was just to balance out the sucker-punch comment…
And I don’t think the twins will still be around in 20 years when the clone would be ready. Besides, if you’re gonna clone a Bruin why not Cam?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m afraid that if we cloned Cam Neely we’d probably trade him away for Barry Pederson!
/drumroll
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions
And the irony is that Boston indirectly acquired Horton and Lucic from that very trade…
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Woa woa enlighten me
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions
The trade was Pederson for Neely and a first.
The first was Glen Wesley
Wesley was traded for 3 or 4 firsts… one was Samsonov, one was McLaren
Samsonov was traded for a second that was used to draft Lucic
McLaren was traded for Jeff Jillson and Jeff Hackett
Jillson was traded for Brad Boyes
Boyes was traded for Dennis Wideman
Wideman and a 1st was traded for Horton and Campbell
Weird how this shit works…
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Holy effing shit….
We’ve been kicked in the nuts
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Even then
It doesn’t “prevent” anything, just provides revenge. If a guy wants to run a Sedin he’s going to run one no matter who is on the ice with them, or on the bench. If he knows harassing them gets them off their game, he’s going to keep doing it
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Yes that's it
They need to find a way to make the bullies lose interest, not have some dude fight their battles for them.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
They need to find a way to make the bullies lose interest,
Just scratch diving and embellishing off the list :)
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
They need to score
That’s really the only effective way to respond in the end. Make the other team pay, period.
I just don’t get how having a fighter is going to prevent the Sedins from getting manhandled. If a guy stops doing it because he gets challenged to a fight he’s an idiot. If you can do something to take the top players in the league off their game, you do it, even if some guy playing 4 minutes a night tries to get you to fight with him about it afterwards.
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
And lets not forget you usually need to accept a challenge in order to fight… most true fighters won’t go after non-fighters or unwilling combatants. Both are against the code. The only way around it is if fight comes in immediate defense of star player which means the enforcer has to be on the ice at the time of the incident.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
I meant
along the lines of, you go after our stars, we go after yours. I realize my argument is full of holes, but it’s hard to change a mindset that I’ve had for so long.
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
by Smoboy41 on Jul 8, 2011 12:33 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I call this the John Scott effect
by which I mean he has no impact. A lot of times, and in our case, the fighter isn’t on ice, ever, with the guys who are manhandling your top players anyway.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
He is the perfect example of a fighter who has no place in the league and whose role is quickly disappearing.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions
yup exactly
a fighter with skills is worthwhile, a fighter who can only fight (while other players skate circles around him) shouldn’t be in the league. I do think its unfortunate for some of the players who get placed in that role and don’t learn (or have the opportunity to learn) the fundamentals and hone the skills necessary to play in the league in a more worthwhile role – yes they do it willingly so they can play in the NHL, but it has to suck.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
I'm sorry, I don't know who that is
He was a fighter with skills, or the latter?
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
oh wow, yeah
quite the stride indeed!
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
i was at one of the games he faught may
he stumbled all over the ice, i remember asking my dad how someone who couldnt skate make it to the nhl
Well if they fight they are off the ice for at least 5 minutes
sometimes 5 plus 10. And if they fight enough they are out of the game. Lets not forget that. Maybe not the biggest impact. But if Marchand or someone is in the Sedins grill and then has to fight because of it that’s 5 minutes plus where the Sedins don’t have to worry about dealing with Marchand.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 8, 2011 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, they also don’t have to fight
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Then you beat their fucking brains in
so they can’t take any more shifts. Simple solution. Wanna run around and be a cheap dirty cunt? Then our goon is gonna knock your teeth into the back of your head whether you like it or not. And while you are getting your jaw fixed our stars are running up the score.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 8, 2011 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Which means the other teams goon does the same to your star players. It becomes a matter of attrition… someone pounds Marchand mercilessly then someone pounds Sedin in the same fashion.
And most fighters won’t do such garbage since they obey the code.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Its the exact same logic used to explain why teams rarely make offers to RFAs and why teams never cross the line running the goalie… they don’t want to see the same thing happen to them.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Marchand is a star playter?
Holy fuck must our team be shitty if we made Marchand look like a star player.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 9, 2011 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Its called escalation. Also known as mutually assured destruction.
You take out a top-6 forward (he did finish 2nd in goals for the playoffs btw) in such a fashion and the opposing team is going to do the same to you.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 9, 2011 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions
I was impressed with Marchand’s grit and skill during the SCF. I’d have him on my team in a minute. Reminds me of Burr.
"Why are we so quick to blame? What is the attraction in that?" - Carmela Soprano
He stunned everyone, Bruins included. He started the year as a borderline roster guy and 13th forward.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 9, 2011 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Easy to say
a lot tougher to do.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 10, 2011 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions
This is the old NHL
now in the new NHL, cunts get away with crap like that #instigatorisretarded
<3 Boobies!
#WinitWithManny
notafullcolon CS: Well obviously I meant we were snorting blow off hookers at the time of the goal
I miss that rule. If the refs are doing such a shitty job governing the game… give the power back to the players. It’s not like the refs are doing a bang up job either.
Frequent visitor to Nucks Misconduct.
by Vancouverguy on Jul 10, 2011 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
The Sedins cannot allow some punk - ass rook take liberties with them
What Marchand did in game 6 was beyond ridiculous – hell, even Toews finally had enough a few times where he dropped ‘em. He could’ve given Marchand’s face a nice mash – up, if he just took the opportunity.
why not go after goonish players that can play too? scouring the FA list, i see brad winchester still available, the dude is 6’5" and scored 10 goals last year… mike grier, jerred smithson, jarkko ruutu are also listed as still available… im thinking we can sign one of these guys for 1 mill or less? id much rather have winchester than janssen… unless of course we get one of these guys PLUS janssen on a 2 way contract, then i wouldn’t mind…
Ruutu
on a line with LaPierre and Burrows would be amazing. Just saying.
a ginger ball hockey player... no wonder I'm a Canucks fan
on a 2 way contract
FYI – Contracts just determine if the player gets payed less in the AHL and has nothing to do if they are eligible to pass through wavers. (just clarifying)
a ginger ball hockey player... no wonder I'm a Canucks fan
I blame the NHL series of videogames for this
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
by Semi_Colon on Jul 9, 2011 8:28 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Pass on Janssen
He just sounds like a slightly younger version of Darcy Hordichuk.
Better alternatives :
Cal Clutterbuck
Tuomo Ruutu
Brian Boyle
Chad LaRose
Brian Bickell
None of these guys are fourth liners, I’d have them on the second or third, raisning havok, softening up the defence 15+ minutes a game. I’m happy with using the fourth line as a carrot for outstanding Wolves.
do these players
fit within the Canucks cap-hit requirements? IE 3rd line player for 4th line money?
a ginger ball hockey player... no wonder I'm a Canucks fan
LaRose – 2yr, 1.7per
Ruutu – 1, 3.8
Boyle – RFA, due big raise
Clutterbuck – 2, 1.4per
Bickell – 2, 550K per
LaRose and Bickell were just resigned this past month I believe.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions
You do realize that all of those listed are already signed, right? Only Boyle is unsigned but he is RFA so you’d have trouble getting him.
Never mind the fact those listed are pests more than fighters and the Nucks are all set for pests with Burrows and Lap.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I’d pick them up through trades son, and all of them scored 15-20 goals last season. I don’t think we need fighters, what I think we need is physical, gritty forwards who can score, and that’s what all of those guys are.
Okay mother… if you say so. (son?)
Don’t see any of them but Ruutu being on the block though… their teams also like physical forwards who can score (as does EVERY team). Prying away those guys via trade would be a costly endeavor.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
"I think we need is physical, gritty forwards who can score"
Like Kesler or Burrows perhaps?
also
How could you ever have too many players like Lapierre and Burrows? Those boys leave it all on the ice.
Effin’ love ’em!
I take it you have no issue with Lucic or Marchand then?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions
marchand is a nob gobbler
lucic is good in my books, hes dating a girl i went to high school with, shes a couple years older, but pretty easy on the eyes. my mom works with her mom actually. and he owes my friend a case of beer haha
You realize Burrows and Lap play the exact same style as Marchand, right?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions
it’s true. We just love our dirty guys and hate yours
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Thats fine… its the case for most every fanbase. To me the important thing is to recognize that the double standard exists.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions
i wont argue the kid can play
i just dont like the extra shit he does…ok im not gonna lie i hate his face, you know, when you look at someone and just hate their face and your not sure why?
i didnt see lappy or burr submarine people on multiple occasions
yes there was other stuff that they did… but come one, submarine/CLIPPING is dirt.
I take it you are referring to the time when Sedin skating directly at him a full second after the whistle had blown so instead of taking the hit he ducked it?
Yea, thats a real dirty play… how dare he duck under a late hit.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
yea i mean i wouldnt expect him to take a hit
thats not hockey at all, and he did it more than once, i think the other one was on raymond, and that was during the play
the “turtle” on sedin was after he took errorhoff out with a forearm to the head, but i guess he was just making sure he didnt get hit
All I am saying is if Sedin didn’t want something to happen there he shouldn’t have been skating directly towards someone after the whistle.
I mean, when you are mad about a play after the whistle you don’t skate into them and check them… you grapple or fight them. Both require stopping short of the player, not skating right into him. If he doesn’t want to get flipped he should stop or skate away.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions
you often see people skate into someone like that TO grapple them
the 1 time one of the sedins decides to protect his teammate and he gets submarined, hes obviously doing it wrong
But you would pull up a foot or two away to start the grappling. You don’t skate at speed into them.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Right
because every player stops dead at the whistle.
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
World class skaters can turn easily to avoid contact with other players…
Or are you telling me that the Sedins are such poor skaters they can’t turn away in time?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Dude
I’m not interested in getting into a pissing match with regards to Marchand. It was a cheap thing to do. You disagree. I can live with that.
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
Yea, thats a real dirty play… how dare he duck under a late hit.
Fuck that. He low bridged him. It was a Sedin FFS.
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Ok,
it looks like almost everybody believes that fighting is the thing of the past, and there is no need for it. Mind you, that I disregard those who say that they like to see fights, but NOT on the Canucks team. That is double standard, or hypocrisy, or whatever you want to call it. If the Canucks don’t need it, nor does any other team.
That’s fine.
In that case, our players need some serious coaching in this area, or we end up looking like fricking wussies again.
There should be some clear guidance from the coaching staff, regarding the following:
-what to do if repeatedly punched in the face? – Punch back? Yes? No?
-what to do if getting slashed on the back of the leg? – Return the slash? Complain to the ref? Crosscheck in the face, as a retaliation? Do nothing?
- is it worth reacting to facewashes, and fingers in the mouth?
It seems like our top players lost composure every single year, when, facing these types of adversities. I think the reason for this, is that they are not sure how to respond. They are not sure what will and will not be called. People, in general, freak out when they don’t know what to do.
If our coaches want the Sedins to turn the other cheek, and just absorb the punches from the likes of Marchand, then that’s what they need to do, and better not complain about it. Also, there should be zero tolerance for diving, yapping, and head-jerking.
The complaints should be done not during the game, but after the game, in the form of videos sent to the League.
Los Angeles, CA
Yes.
I didn’t really have time to touch on the proper way to stand up to adversity, but we know that the Director of Hockey Ops is a tool who wants to favour certain teams with refereeing assignments and reacts to angry emails, so the proper way to protect your stars is yelling at other execs from behind closed doors.
I agree,
the only way to protect our players, is to raise hell with the league management. It doesn’t have to be something open to the media (because the media will make it into a circus, and there we are again, looking like whiners), but the league has to be accountable for banning it, or officially tolerating it. I don’t care which way they go, as long as they have a clear policy.
Los Angeles, CA
Also, there should be zero tolerance for diving, yapping, and head-jerking.
NHL REALLY needs to crackdown on that crap. I honestly feel it is the biggest problem in the game today and it is league-wide.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Amen
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
The problem is this
-what to do if getting slashed on the back of the leg? – Return the slash? Complain to the ref? Crosscheck in the face, as a retaliation? Do nothing?
- is it worth reacting to facewashes, and fingers in the mouth?
The answer is we as fans shoudn’t even be talking about slashes and facewashes. If it was a non-issue for the players it would be a non-issue for the fans. The problem is the Canucks feel the are being specifically wronged in some way. As if none of the other great players had to play through slashes. What do you think Kesler is doing behind the play to Toews and Kane? The punches to the head that Dank took were just an exclamation point proving he had no idea how to respond. Punching him back with your glove on after the first one but not letting it get you mad would have done the trick.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sounds goo to me.
This is why I think that the coaching staff should address these issues with the team, once and for all.
Los Angeles, CA
agree, has to go from the top down with any team
and that includes what you’re talking about above and even things like players who keep laying the dirty hits. If coaching staff and management doesn’t address it, or participates/encourages that kind of behavior, it trickles down into seeming acceptable.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
it looks like almost everybody believes that fighting is the thing of the past
I disagree. Goons are a thing of the past. Fighters that play hockey / Players that fight are fantastic as long as they can chip in with other skills:
-penalty kills
-scoring
-passing
-faceoffs
If they can ONLY fight and are a liability, then they just hurt the team.
a ginger ball hockey player... no wonder I'm a Canucks fan
You have a good point
but the problem is, that you don’t want Kesler or some other star break a hand during a fight, and be out for 3 months (especially in the playoffs). This is the whole point of having a goon: if he breaks his hand, nothing is lost, since we don’t miss him.
So, I hate to see our great players fight, for the above reason. Also, I don’t want to se Bieksa or Edler fight either, they are invaluable, and the difference between winning and losing. Fighting is a very, very risky business, and our “good” players should not be exposed to such useless risks.
Los Angeles, CA
But your points aren’t really related. He wasn’t advocating that the stars fight… just advocating that the fighters be competent in some other aspect of the game.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Well
what if a fighter is too competent in other aspects of the game? Why not just have only players with a high level of competency? Can they fight then?
What you are saying, is that let’s have good players, who should not fight, and not so good players, who can fight.
I say, let’s have only good and very good players, and nothing else.
Los Angeles, CA
1 – Salary cap makes that difficult.
2 – I take it you don’t want any fighting then?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions
2 – I take it you don’t want any fighting then?
Actually, I was for hiring a goon, just as a deterrent. But this thread advocates the opposite, and people seem to agree.
Los Angeles, CA
But here is my question…
Would you rather pay Colton Orr 1M a year to play 5 a night and net 2-0-2 and be your fighter?
Or pay Shawn Thornton 800K to play 10 a night and go 10-10-20 to be your fighter?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
We need more toughness
We didn’t have an answer to the bruins muscle. They knew they could get away with taking liberties on the canucks without any consequences. We are built to play great in the regular season but they call the playoffs differently. The Cup finals did not resemble a regular season game in terms of the on ice officiating. We can’t ignore the fact that the Nucks PP dried up but we could not compete with their toughness.
When Marchand repeatedly punched Sedin in the face and not one Canuck responded by either going after Marchand or taking a hack at a Bergeron/Thomas etc. we lost the series. Who responded to the hit on Raymond? NO ONE. They obviously had a better goaltender but they also beat up the nucks, end of story. We need someone to stand up for the Sedins as they obviously can’t do it for themselves (regardless if you think it is not part of their game, Crosby and Ovenchicken can do it).
Fighters are liabilities to the team? Well, Tanner Glass hardly played so why not replace him with a fighter? Glass wasn’t willing to stick up for the Sedins so perhaps a fighter will
Who responded to the hit on Raymond? NO ONE
It merited a response? And remind me again… who responded to the hit on Horton?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Breaking a guys back?
Yeah, that needs a response. Regardless of the intent.
The Horton hit? I would say they responded to that in that game. They just could not target Rome, obviously.
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
By response I took you to mean fight since that seemed your meaning. There was no fighting in that game or any kind of revenge (other than scoreboard).
And last I checked, it was unknown the severity of his condition at the time. Otherwise he would never have skated off the ice.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Come on CH?
Milking it? The guys back was broken. No one “milked it”. I still get pissed off just watching the replay!
I am not milking that, I am honestly still pissed!
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
But you had NO idea at the time that the back was broken. Its revisionist to say the Canucks should have flipped out then because a back was broken when no one knew that at the time.
Whatever rationalization works for you
They knew the next shift that something very bad had happened, when the trainer came to the bench and said "he has to go to the hospital, and i suspect his back is broken.
Nothing revisionist about that at all.
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
I get that you are
But the series was lost before that play happened. We just didn’t know it yet. Re-watching it in slo mo is always going to make you mad but I would like to believe that no NHL player would purposely try to hurt another to that degree. It was an awkward hockey play that had shitty consequences for Raymond. Nothing more.
Gotta agree with that
It was an awkward hockey play that had shitty consequences for Raymond. Nothing moreCertainly sucks that it happened, but…
same
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions
To me it was an unfortunate hit and situation but not a dirty play. As I read somewhere else recently, it was at most 2 for interference.
Was stunned they let him up off the ice given the nature of the hit.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions
romes hit was interference...
and caused serious injury, nhl said no intent. i think thats the most fustrating part is the inconsistency that is the nhl. if you use the rome criteria on the raymond play, there would have been a suspension, thats why myself and im sure others get heated about it, not because the play on raymond should have been a suspension, but because the rome hit was at most was interference..that caused serious injury.
btw any update on horton?
Come on
As you read somewhere recently? It was definitely interference.
Without getting into a huge back and forth, and you can keep believing what you want, but it was for from indiscriminate and innocent. Dude wrapped up his neck and head so he could not move, and drove him 10 feet into the boards in that position.
he knew what he was doing. he obviously did not want to break the guy’s back, but he intended to hurt him, at the least. There was no reason for it, the puck was long gone.
That was the play that showed me we had the refs and the Bruins to beat. Fucking guy was right there, and did not call it.
Note ; not calling it does not make it a “good play”.
But its in the past…so, lets get them next year!
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
I disagree he intended to injure. Its not his style.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I know Bruin fans try to downplay that
The severity was known when the guy had to be helped off. I know you guys think it was unintentional, but after watching that several times, I have to disagree.
Downplaying it as “he skated off the ice….”…sorry. What he did was not skate. I honestly think he and the guys helping him off refused more because of the guys chanting flopper when his back was broken.
You know how hockey players are. Regardless of intent, or anything else, someone should have done something the very next shift.
Moreso to this Canuck fan than the Marchand/D. Sedin thing
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
Yes they should have done something
Gotten Raymonds name on the cup by winning.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
If the severity was known at the time he would have been taken out on a backboard. You NEVER let a neck injury move let alone get up and skate.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
As for your view on the play, you are welcome to hold it and we will disagree just as I wager we disagree on the Rome hit.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
That hit was legal then
It was a half second from being totally clean!
To me, bastard, that is why the Rome thing pissed me off more. I was sad for Horton getting hurt, but it was a late play, and a fine hit otherwise.
There is no hockey reason for wrapping up a guy’s head so he cannot move and skating him 10 feet backwards into the boards, except to do some damage…
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
by vancitydan on Jul 8, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely agree with VCD
In watching the Raymond hit, it is clear to me that the Bruins player widened his stance providing a lower center of gravity and better leverage to control Raymond.
He also leaned forward at the waist providing more downward force, control, and pressure on Raymond.
As they got very near the boards he clearly extended/straightened his arms even more creating more down and back force on Raymond.
To me there is no question of intent to cause serious injury (there was none) just as I believe there is no question that he knew he had Raymond in a disadvantageous position and exploited with disregard for Raymonds safety.
I have played many sport, worked years in various construction disciplines, and spent time rock climbing etc.
Leverage is everything and it tells the whole story here.
I done.
Hockey players try to hurt their opponent with every hit they throw. Its called finishing your check. Youre hitting him with the intent to shake him up and if he lies on the ice for a moment it’s satisfying. Not if he’s really hurt but a little hurt? For sure. Do you really think he thought about all thw things you listed above in the 2 seconds it happened? He was just taking out his man and it happens a hundred times a game. This one just happened to be awkward.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 8, 2011 8:12 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
agreed
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Actually
I dont, at all, think that he pondered all these things as he was making the hit.
And yes, I do understand what finishing a check is.
I also happen to think that he took the ice that night with a certain mind set that made these “manner of finishing the check” decisions for him ahead of time and I think he knew the play had long since passed him and that Raymond was not only not a threat, but unable to defend or protect himself in anyway.
So, lack of (serious) injurious intentions aside, he has been playing long enough to know when something crosses that dangerous line by instinct alone. In fact, I think the league and the players count on other players having that “too far” instinct that prevents the game from becoming simply a fuck him up!, Kill the Bitch! Free for all.
Unless I am very misguided and mistaken, these actions are the type of action that demand a penalty for the protection of all players (notice I didnt say suspension).
I didnt call for his head on a platter, but certainly a penalty and recognition somewhere that he was out of line.
By the way, as a long time fan, I understand and agree with the idea of shaking somebody up on a hit and hurting him a little bit (silly me, I thought that went without saying) so I think there is a little bit of nitpicking here.
I don’t really make him a villain… certainly no Cooke or Torres. It was a late, bad hit by an otherwise clean player. Had the league policed the Burrows situation then Rome would have likely gotten 2 instead of 4.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
WTF
The Burrows situation?
Come on, don’t kill all the good points you made with that!
One has nothing to do with the other. Period.
Nuck’s Misconduct Bishop, 1st United Church of Luongod. "For true believers, the bile you spew is our fuel, and when the Canucks raise the Cup next year, we shall drink it, mixed with your tears like the sweetest wine." WAACH' 6/26/11
I think it does since the league overreacted to Rome in the wake of the overwhelming criticism of their handling Burrows bite.
Had Burrows been suspended a game or the bite simply never happened then Rome gets 1 or 2 games.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 8, 2011 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
(regardless if you think it is not part of their game, Crosby and Ovenchicken can do it).
This is exactly what I recommended a while ago, that the Sedins should start looking out for themselves…and then I was booed off the forum, with responses like “the Sedins don’t play that way”
Well, they should start playing that way. How come kid Crosby can do it?
Los Angeles, CA
No
You suggested they should learn how to fight by taking MMA classes. Have you seen crosby fight? It’s not pretty.
But he stood up for himself regardless
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree
That Sedin should have stood up for himself when Marchand was punching him in the face. Of course. But that doesn’t require MMA training.
Not sure why
are you hung up on the MMA training. My point about the MMA training was that if you decide to punch back, what’s wrong with learning how to punch properly, so that the opponent actually feels it.
Los Angeles, CA
Only the suggestion that learning to fight is something the Sedins need to focus on. It’s more a matter of learning to play through the same shit every star plays through and stand up for yourself without getting “spazzy” Like Sedin did with Bolland.
a matter of learning to play through the same shit every star plays through
And how do you “learn” to play through that? Increase your pain tolerance? Meditate, to stay calm? What exactly do they have to learn?
The thing is, each player reacts differently to such adversity. Some players (like Iginla) would just fight back. Others retaliate (and get penalized).
In case of the Sedins, I have the impression that they can’t take the pain, but they also don’t fight? So, take pain medicine? Something has to give.
And if they haven’t learned in the last ten years, I doubt that they will magically learn this summer. So, we end up with the same shit next year.
Los Angeles, CA
get faster so you can skate through some hits,
get a little bigger so you don’t get pushed around as drastically, pull a taylor hall (sans injury) just once so people know you won’t be pushed around? And sometimes you just have to take the penalty, or hope the bigger guys on your time have your back. We have the same problem with Kane, but like CH said, just have to figure out how to play your game through that.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
This summer
their top priority should be to figure this out and do something about it. They have a few years left to win it all, and it’s all over.
Los Angeles, CA
agree completely
i mean its a fine line – because the last thing you want is for them to get into a brawl and get injured, but damn seeing them pushed around and do nothing is hard to watch. But its the NHL, skilled guys like that are going to have the puck a hell of a lot – have to find a way to get around that to still be effective because the hits are going to keep coming.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
Really?
“In case of the Sedins, I have the impression that they can’t take the pain”
Have you spent much time watching them? Can’t take the pain? Have you ever spent an hour or two getting crosschecked in the small of the back by a 220 lb guy with lumber in his hands? We’ve been lucky enough the last several years to watch a show that is simply unequalled anywhere else in the NHL today. There is nothing, I mean nothing, like the magic those two produce night in and night out. Ask anyone who plays with them. Ask anyone who has ever played the game at a high level. And we knock them as not tough enough? They are, in fact, two of the toughest guys in the league. They take shit on a regular basis, and throw up 100 point seasons rather than “stick up for themselves”. Sit back and enjoy it, you may never see something this entertaining again in your life.
Daniel Sedin also won the Ted Lindsay award
for the league’s MVP as voted for by the players. I don’t believe he would have won that award if the rest of the players in the league (the guys who beat on him on a nightly basis) considered him to be soft.
Excellent point. It’s the only way, really. Gretzky had Semenko but those days are long gone.
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
We chew and spit you out. We laugh, you scream and shout. All flee, with fear you run. You’ll know where we come from:
Damage incorporated.........GO!
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 8, 2011 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I would make out with this post if I could. YES.YES.YES. Ideally I would like the Sedins with someone tougher than Burrows but it needs to be someone that can you know…skate. We don’t need a useless meat sack.
It's all hot bishes, naps, and dance parties
A power forward with the Sedins would be awesome, but hard to get (cap hit and we’d have to give up a lot). I’d love to see Iginla in there, but that’s never going to happen… and maybe a power forward wouldn’t have the same chemistry that Burr has. Samuellson is 215, he’s not exactly small, but he’s no brawler.
a ginger ball hockey player... no wonder I'm a Canucks fan
Do you think...
That the Thorntons and Eagers of the world are usually lauded or criticized based on the result of the game?
I think undue credit is given to the Eagers/Thorntons when a team wins…
There goes the Caps' cap problems
@mirtle
James Mirtle
Capitals get a fourth-round pick and winger Danick Paquette from the Jets for winger Eric Fehr.
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Good work from the Caps, something they had to do, and quickly. Still need one more move to get Alzner in.
Poti on LTIR
Is all they need now
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Yard Ape Needed?
First the Sedins will never be the ones sticking up for themselves in the way that Ovi and Sid do (yes not pretty I agree), both those players have that fire to their game that when they have had enough they have had enough. This is in no way a knock on the twins but I am sorry after this long in the league we are not going to wake up next season and see this side, which should really not come as a surprise to anyone, should it???? However realizing their type of game and how much they mean to the team, someone has to be accountable for standing up for the Canuck’s top investments. Yes we can sit here all day and say “score on the pp, score on the pp!”, but guess what, sometimes that is going to dry up or fall into a slump, it happens. I was disgusted as I am sure most of you were watching multiple shots landed to Sedin’s face by that lil pest, who was doing exactly what he gets paid for or seeing a blatant cross check from behind by Eager. We can talk mental toughness or playing through it but at the end of the day the constant abuse on them isn’t helping their playoff performance. Some players like Iggy, Sid and Ovi are better left sleeping, you ignite them with something like that and watch out, this isn’t the twins however. I do not want a 3 min a game monkey on the end of the bench as the game has evolved and your resume has to include more that knuckle dragging to be truly effective. The market is not exactly flooded with power forwards who are not a defensive liability, can fight, chip in the odd point and skate but I do have faith in GMMG to address the issue that the twins are a crucial part of the team and deserve to be protected.
by huntmaster83 on Jul 8, 2011 2:25 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Taylor Hall’s season ended because he stood up for himself. Nobody else on the Oilers roster did. I’ll need tangible proof that having Janssen (or any other guy) on the bench would prevent that from happening.
It's tough to prove something like that
because if the Oilers did have a guy like that and Hall didn’t get hurt because that guy fought instead of Hall, we wouldn’t be discussing it to begin with. There really is no tangible way to prove or disprove that having goons in your lineup lessens the risk of injuries to your star players.
But the fact of the matter is roughly two-thirds of NHL teams employ at least one goon (correct me on that if I’m wrong, just an estimation), so there must be a reason for it. And quite frankly I don’t buy your logic that it’s because they don’t have more skilled players to play in their place – if they wanted a skill player in that spot, they’d just call one up from the AHL. Every team has skill players they could call up if they wanted to, but they choose to fill up the bottom roster spots with goons. And there’s a reason they do that – to protect their star players and to intimidate opponents into reverting to less physical play. Whether or not that actually works is another story entirely, but I see no clear-cut evidence that directly suggests its effectiveness or lack thereof. The majority of teams seem to believe it is effective though, or they wouldn’t be employing such a strategy.
People seem to like to point to the Red Wings for evidence that goons are useless. Yes, the Red Wings have no goons on their roster. Yes, they’re a perennially successful team and won a Cup with that strategy. But by no means does that indicate that goons are useless, just that it is entirely reasonable to win without one. For every example of a team’s success without the use of goons, there are a handful who have success with goons (and sometimes in abundance). The Cup-winning Bruins, for example, employ one Shawn Thornton, who is essentially a goon with a slight shred of talent. The 2010 Blackhawks weren’t afraid to use Ben Eager and Adam Burish with regularity, even in the playoffs, and it got them a Cup.
That’s not to say that having goons on the roster was a major factor of winning the Cup for the Bruins or Blackhawks at all. But it is equally valid to suggest it helped them as it is to say having no goons on their roster helped the Red Wings win a Cup.
I think the statistics you use to prove your point are flawed as well. Simply comparing fighting majors to in-game statistics year-to-year for one team won’t tell you anything; the sample size is far too small and considering how much the team changed and developed over that time, implying the fighting majors should be a major and direct cause of the improvement in goal-scoring or winning percentage is ludicrous in my opinion. I don’t think that the number of fighting majors should strongly influence scoring at all – it’s not like it’s an integral aspect of the game. But that’s not to say that having goons in place of skill players on the fourth line of a given team doesn’t help the team – I see no evidence to suggest that this is not the case.
Personally, I don’t think the Canucks necessarily need a goon or fighter by any means, but I am not vehemently opposed to the idea either, like some people seem to be. Where’s the harm in signing a goon for a near-league-minimum contract, giving him 40 games and seeing if he’s capable of actually playing hockey? If not, well, sit him in the press box in favor of a skill player in the playoffs, and leave him as an insurance option in case it appears the team is getting beaten badly physically at any point. Signing a goon for cheap, assuming the cap space exists, is no more harmful to the team than signing the next Jeff Tambellini, and if anything could prove to solve the “Sedins getting pushed around” problem we seemed to see in the Cup Finals – after all, I see nothing that suggests otherwise.
Like your take on it
I agree, injuries are going to happen with goons in the line up and out. Tough stat to prove and say how many injuries were prevented because of the presence on someone on the end of the bench. Not to help the other side of the argument but Dorsett fought Strudwick before Hall in that game so who knows. Yes Detroit can win without an enforcer and yes the Bruins can win with one and frankly, I’ll take the Canucks doing it either way.
We don't need fighters - we need more beast mode!
I think I mentioned in one of the threads immediately after the SCF that what the team needs to do is beg Kesler over the summer and teach them the beast mode. The weird thing is that we know the Twins have it in them – see Hank in 09-10 when Dank was out – he carried the team on his back during that mid-season stretch by efforts like these (1st | career | hat trick against Avs) (leading the team night in and night out) – we all saw that and that’s why he won the Hart.
As I’ve said, it doesn’t have to be often. But desire to push through checks, when you know you will be pounded, but still go for it, is what leads to insane 6th / 7th effort goals like this by Toews. The desire to not lose is the last part of maturation process for the Twins and actually most of the entire skilled forwards crops, and the funny thing is, it’s all in their heads.
Play like the beast and engage the beast mode!
by nucklinBadger on Jul 8, 2011 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions
You don't think the twins wanted to win badly enough?
Honestly I think the whole idea of having “an extra gear” in the playoffs is a load of crap. Pretty much everyone in the league wants to win more than anything else in the world. Whether they show it (Kesler) or not (the Sedins), they’ve been playing hockey all their lives for the opportunity to win the Cup; to think they aren’t determined enough to do it is ludicrous. What DOES matter is how they respond to the pressure and intense desire to step it up in the playoffs. Some people handle that stress and passion better than others, and it’s generally those people who go down as “clutch” players or “playoff legends”. Of course, sample size is still a huge factor in this – players go on streaks or enter scoring droughts all the time – but generally speaking, it’s the players who know how to best handle the high-pressure, high-intensity situations in the playoffs who succeed most.
You’re right in that maturity factors in to that – more experience helps alleviate the stress of the playoffs and allows you to figure out under which circumstances you play best – but my point is that the idea of a “beast mode” or being “clutch” is little more than a convenient narrative to fall back on when a player happens to succeed in key situations. The reason the Sedins failed to step it up during the Finals, in my opinion, is simply because the Bruins had them figured out and checked them to hell, and because Henrik was pretty badly injured by Game 7. Not that they aren’t mature enough (I think they’re some of the most mature players around) or that they aren’t “clutch”, simply because they were outplayed and were unlucky in the situation they happened to be placed in when it came down to the most important 7 games of their careers.
Stupid iphone
I’m not so sure they won’t be able to make some kind of mental adjustment. If it was any other players I would agree but all the sedins have done their whole career is make the necessary adjustments to their game to prove their critics wrong. If this version of the Canucks is going to win they are going to have to find a way to play through the things we’ve been talking about in a way they haven’t yet. The pp simply can’t dry up like it did and getting a tough guy won’t change that but I’m confident they will find a way to.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 9, 2011 9:28 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I'm not saying they can't at all
by all means, I think the Sedins are fully capable of adapting and proving their critics wrong, what I’m saying is that just because they ostensibly weren’t “clutch” enough during the SCF, does not indicate that they somehow don’t have what it takes to win or whatever other lazy narrative the MSM comes up with these days. That the Bruins had their PP strategy figured out and checked them to hell does not mean that the same will happen in any future SCF appearances they may (hopefully will) make. I think the combination of injuries and excellent defensive play (and perhaps excessive physicality) by the Bruins is what led to their scoring droughts in the SCF; who says that any future team(s) they may meet in the playoffs are capable of doing the same? Or that the Sedins cannot adapt their game to counter such strategies employed by the Bruins? I refuse to accept the “change for the sake of change” people so desperately want when we lose – I think with a shot at redemption in, say, next season’s playoffs, the Sedins (and the rest of the team for that matter) are fully capable of going all the way and correcting any mistakes they made in the SCF in the process.
Canuckk,
I think we’re on the same page here – if I can clarify I know everyone including the Sedins want it bad enough, it’s just that in my mind, they haven’t demonstrated it completely on the ice yet. I also agree with you that:
the Bruins had them figured out and checked them to hell,
I guess what I am envisioning, whether by diagramming 10 special plays to be used only in the playoffs or changing their game styles or buff up to run though the D like Kesler – it doesn’t matter HOW they do it, I just know that at least in this SCF, they only had 1 way and I was suggesting that perhaps they should work with Kesler for a power beast mode. Of course, if they come up with at least 7 crazy set plays to be used in absolute desparate situations only, like off-the-linesman pass to self, off the scoreboard-and-back-of-the-net deflection, or a crazy pass off the stachion (no wait, used), they have to have more than 1 way. Again, they can run through ppl like a Marshawn Lynch or dink it down the field like the Packers – both ways, you gotta have at least two ways of beating teams, and this is the summer they figure out how to find a second method.
by nucklinBadger on Jul 9, 2011 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
How would they draw up those plays with no practice? Remember AV held no practices between the wcf and SCF. I even saw an interview where Hank was joking about how they don’t like practices then got “serious” and explained how their power play was “unpredictable”
by Canuckelhead on Jul 9, 2011 12:50 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
maybe work on them in practice a little all year but only use them in certain situations?
I know the point was that they should have been practicing between the WCF and the SCF and I agree with that, they should have been. I am sure if they make it to the finals this season they will be practicing :)
Yeah unpredictable
I would have never predicted they would give up more shorties than score PP goals in the final
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
I think you have a point
yes, the Sedins likely became too predictable during the SCF, but I don’t think “set plays” are the answer. The Sedins play a style of hockey that best utilizes their strengths – carrying the puck in the zone, making an excessive number of passes down low while playing keep-away with the defense on their tails, and eventually finding an open passing lane to a Sedin or Burr out front for the easy tap-in. It plays to their strengths and led to back-to-back Art Rosses, so it’s not like the strategy’s ineffective. But yes, because the Bruins had them figured out during the SCF, they absolutely needed to somehow change their game in order to adapt to the strategy the Bruins were employing. Again though, set plays are not the answer – you simply have to figure out where the opposing team is shutting you down, and adjust your strategy accordingly. For example, I remember noticing the Sedin PP unit struggled to even enter the Bruins zone at times, and this was because they were carrying the puck in while the Bruins had a 4-man line set up to counter it. The appropriate adjustment would have been to dump the puck in and go in on the forecheck to retrieve the puck (which the Sedins actually do quite effectively despite their lack of hitting) and continue setting up from there.
Likely the biggest issue for the Sedins offensively, however, was Tim Thomas. I remember a good dozen opportunities generated by the Sedins where, with any other (orthodox) goaltender, they would have been sure goals (and token Sedin goals for that matter). But because Thomas was so adept at reading the play and anticipating what the Sedins would do to try and get him out of position, he prevented most of those goals. What the Sedins likely should have done instead would be to adapt more of a grinder-style offensive strategy – create chaos up front, shoot whenever the shot looks decent and pounce on the rebounds. Simply by shooting the puck a lot and making the simple plays rather than getting fancy, I believe at least a few of those opportunities would have a bounce go their way and end up in the back of the net.
Of course, there are arguments both for and against any strategy the Sedins could choose to employ, but I do think it would have made sense for the Sedins to try and adapt rather than stick to the same futility resulting from their standard strategies. I’m no NHL coach, so maybe I’m way off-base, but that’s what I would suggest the Sedins do. And in doing so, they could very well have scored more and perhaps shed that supposed “playoff choker” label the MSM loves to use.
But because Thomas was so adept at reading the play and anticipating what the Sedins would do to try and get him out of position, he prevented most of those goals.
Thomas indeed was the problem, but who knows when another goalie decides to pull a Thomas?
My point with pointing out Kesler’s goal vs. the Preds and Toews goal against us is – they just went with it – Kes a 1-on-2 and Toews a 1-on-3 shorthanded. You can read the intent in their moves – they’ll just take whatever tiny inch of space the D gives and once in a while, brilliance happens. Remember, Toews was about to be hipchecked by Juice, but by the narrowest of inches, a 1-in-1000 chance Juice missed, Hossa’s rebound went to Toews and Toews was in position on his stomach and had enough leverage to swipe the puck in.
If I can put it in football terms, the Twins and more or less most of the 2010/11 Nucks team was a passing team. But when you go up a team that has the personnel to harass your receivers all over the field – ironically Bill Belicek’s Patriots come to mind – I was thinking where’s our running back workhorse running smash mouth downhill? The B’s were waiting for our passes to be intercepted and counter. But waiting for our passes mean they have to be backing off – thus the analogy to football, you gotta have some semblance of a run game to have the passing game to function, and vice versa.
I don’t have the “right” answer to this question, but I do think it’s valid. And to hear all the words that we’re like Detroit – yes to a certain extent our passing is exquisite. But we have no brawn in quantities like Bert, Mule, and Draper. Pens figured that out in 2009 and took it right back to the Wings. I’m just hoping we do whatever we can secure some brawn with skills and storm back in 2012.
by nucklinBadger on Jul 9, 2011 9:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Arg,grrrrrrrr
I got so busy writing the damn post it should have been included in the 1000 replies above to the topic, apologies!
heh, I enjoy this drama
more lombardi: "The bottom line for me, I would have rather invested my money with Bernie Madoff than invest in Edmonton’s word
Our owner may have dropped F bombs at reporters and our GM may whine about officiating, but at least they’ve never lied to another GM about the health of a player
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Just cause they haven't
doesn’t mean they wouldn’t. We aren’t exactly running the classiest organization here Semi. Glass houses and all that.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 8, 2011 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
I know that they aren’t the classiest hence why I qualified that at the start. Sure they could lie in the future, but they haven’t yet. And the GMs of the league just gave Gillis GM of the year. So he must be doing some stuff right with the old boys’ club.
I look forward to certain Edmonton bloggers no longer throwing stones at organizations for being “not classy”. Oh wait, that has about the same odds as winning the lottery
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Oh
the slime that oozes out from that organization…
Rogers Arena - the Sugarbowl!
by Big Blue Whale on Jul 8, 2011 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I think there's a pretty big difference
between whining about officiating, or making an offer sheet (which is somehow considered not gentlemanly to GMs), and straight-up lying to another team about the health of another player. The latter is essentially conning the other GM into accepting a deal he otherwise might not, which is a far cry from the relative inconsequentialness of whining or doing something that’s completely within the rules and technically fair.
Yeah, our organization may not be classy, but lying about the health of a player in a trade is downright embarrassing for the supposedly professional management team in Edmonton.
Well as long as you aren't rushing to judge
someone without all the facts.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 9, 2011 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
GMMG wasn't even whining
he was merely stating the facts about the officiating up to that point in the series.
Rogers Arena - the Sugarbowl!
by Big Blue Whale on Jul 8, 2011 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
we know
just looking at the hypocrisy that is the Oilers.
Nucks Misconduct writer, queen of inter-blogging etiquette. I also ramble on Twitter every so often.
Summer sucks, there isn't hockey on.
Agree that we don't need a fighter
We lost the series because of injuries and the fact that we couldn’t score. By the time the final started, they were the deeper team. We ran 3 lines while they had 4 – and it paid off in the end.
Our players weren’t intimidated – they were frustrated because the Bruins were getting away with things and we weren’t. Slashing, hacking, roughing, you name it. Maybe our “reputation” (blech) was a part of the reason why, but you can’t think that it doesn’t affect how they play out there.
Rogers Arena - the Sugarbowl!
The getting frustrated
Is the problem. Do you think they got slashed more than any other team? Or injured more than boston? The “poor us” attitude needs to stop. The bottom line is it cant affect your play the way the Canucks let it. It’s what happened in the Chicago series too and that had nothing to do with injuries. The book is out and the Canucks need to change.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 9, 2011 9:35 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Exactly this
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
This ain't the movies, white hats will always finish second
The key is nastiness, rather than fighting IMO. Guys like Pronger, Getzlaf, Marchand, Byfuglien, Messier (for the ’94 alumni), while talented, are all downright nasty characters.
They intimidate other teams, not by fighting, although some of them will when they have to, but by physically punishing them at every opportunity. By doing this they grind down the other team’s will to compete.
When you’re a shaking mess of burst bruises, torn ligaments and broken bones, going to the front of the net knowing you’re going to be brutalized by a guy like Zdeno Chara has got to take a tremendous measure of will, and let’s face it, most of us would come up short, even if we were getting paid oodles of money and competing for the Stanley Cup.
And therein lies the key to winning it all. Not only that drive to win at all personal costs, playing through the pain and getting into those dirty areas, but the flip side of winning at all costs, and that is by breaking the rules, physically and mentally breaking your opposition until their will to compete has evaporated.
A fighter can’t protect their entire team, especially if they’re logging < 5 minutes a night. Offense is the best defence, make the other team pay. I would say at least three of your top 9 forwards need to be bringing a world of pain to the opposition every night as well as at least half of your D-men. In the end you have to hope that your nasty guys do a better job of intimidation than the competition does.
Exactly that is why I mourn the lose of Raffi. Personally I felt he was a very large part of the deep Canucks run this spring. I still can not believe we let him go because he wanted a couple of years.
Further I severely covet Shane Weber for the same reason. There are few Canucks that can inflict major pain on the opposition. Our lack of pain makers in the final cost us the cup. I am pretty sure it will cost us again this year unless the pain infliction gap is closed in a major way. IMO Fighting is a vaguely related side show compared to this issue.
Shane Weber?
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
by Semi_Colon on Jul 9, 2011 8:53 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
My understanding
Was raffi wanted to be a more important piece on a team. That we couldn’t give him.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 9, 2011 9:30 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
No goons
I thought we left behind that notion when we shipped Hordi to Florida.
If ‘protection’ is really that big of an issue, then get someone who can do something else besides play for 5 minutes.
I still think if the power play had performed at even half the rate it had been performing before then we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.
I think whatever this team is missing, Gillis will find it and fix that hole.
"You don't have to be smart to laugh at farts but you have to be stupid not to" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's official black guy and first line center (Twitter's 1st line center also).
by Chuckles Canuckles on Jul 9, 2011 9:52 AM PDT reply actions
Well then.
Thanks for calling my article “required reading,” Cam. It’s something I’ve felt strongly about for a few years now, and I’m glad I was able to make my point well. I’ll check out the rest of the comments here a bit later.
I will point out that Brandon Prust (NYR) and Cody McCormick (BUF) also played on playoff teams, but again, out in the first round. I noticed that three of those five (Prust, Clifford, and Westgarth) played more per game in the playoffs, but I also kind of wonder if that’s a small-sample/double-OT effect, since both New York and LA played a lot of OT in the first round.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Robertson's Rants - Exceedingly occasional, lengthy ramblings on hockey topics, hosted at Puck Podcast. And no, my name's not Doug.
Depends
Is Gabe’s TOI/60 stat actually TOI/60? Because that would account for OT, and, yes, all three players happened to play more in the playoffs.
I don’t think I used Gabe’s site for TOI, I think I just used NHL.com, because I was originally not going to bother with the playoffs. A quick eyeball reveals that EV, they did actually play a little more (though in Westgarth’s case, only about a shift per game), which is kind of confusing for the two Kings, but at least Prust kind of makes sense.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Robertson's Rants - Exceedingly occasional, lengthy ramblings on hockey topics, hosted at Puck Podcast. And no, my name's not Doug.
Oops
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
by Semi_Colon on Jul 9, 2011 11:17 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Not trying to be overly difficult, but then
Where does a guy as mildly interested in hockey as Maxim Lapierre fit into the team concept?
Ok, so the number of Canucks fighting majors have declined, yet that doesn’t mean two minute penalties taken for dumb extra-cirriculars isn’t something that is happening. The Canucks take on far more PIMs than your traditional skill team like Chicago or Detroit.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 2:10 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
It's a nice narrative
But Lapierre ends up drawing ~ the same number of penalties as he takes. He was 1.1 taken for every 1 drawn in the regular season. Lapierre contributes other ways, too. He’s a pretty good hockey player.
What Cam said
Also, yes, the Canucks do take more PIM than Chicago and Detroit, but if you looked at the numbers you’d see this for minor penalties taken by the Canucks:
06-07: 490
07-08: 433
08-09: 425
09-10: 380
10-11: 348
So those as also declining. They are higher than “traditional skill teams”, but are decreasing, which is the point
So total
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
by Semi_Colon on Jul 10, 2011 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Don’t know what’s so total
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
I thought
you coined the next big hipster phrase.
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
I guess
We could make it something. Maybe like streets ahead
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Other than being so total...
Great comment Semi. Where do you get minor penalty data? Or is it just SHO from previous years?
NHL dot com, baby.
Team stats-penalties. Breaks it down by Minor/Major/Misconduct/Game Mis/Match/Bench
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Unfortunately, those numbers are misleading as they are merely following the league-wide trend. Consider the yearly comparison of the skill team (Van) and the ‘thug’ team (Bos)
07-08: V – 433, 25th; B – 362, 5th (low is 318, high 480)
08-09: V – 425, 26th; B – 353, 6th (low is 314, high 446)
09-10: V – 380, 25th; B – 300, 5th (low is 264, high 402)
10-11: V – 348, 24th; B – 292, 6th (low is 249, high 374)
So Vancouver has cut down its minors but stayed at the exact same spot relative to the league meaning they haven’t actually progressed. What is really amazing is to see the drop in the total number of minors… I mean, the 15th best this year (320 for Dallas) would have been 2nd 4 seasons ago. The 6th best four seasons ago would be the worst last season.
All I can figure is the players and coaches adjusting to the new rules post-lockout.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 10, 2011 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Also true
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
I think
It’s actually the refs letting more stuff go than they did right after the lockout. You can see the game slowly getting back to the way it was pre lockout especially in the playoffs. It sucks, but coaches are able to slow the game down again. In part because some people want the game slower to avoid the head injuries. Because if we can just eliminate those evil Rome style hits players will live forever.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Maaaaaay-beeeeeee
I don’t really wanna knooooooow
If your gaaaaaaarden grows
I just waaaaanaaaaa fly!!!!
Cam’s been hitting the good stuff
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
The best part
Is that everything he ever writes is all reason and stats, like a hockey knowledge cyborg and now this. Maybe he just needs a reboot?
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I sure hope not!
I really like his posts.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Are there people
who needed to be told that? And if so can we burn them as heretics?
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 11, 2011 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions
There is nothing "narrative" about it
actually there is nothing all that impressive about a 1 to 1 ratio on penalties taken versus drawn, it means, that on a night in, night out, basis your killing as many penalties as you are playing with the advantage.
looking at aggregate PIM is a misleading stat, because if you look around you’ll notice that virtually every team across the league is taking fewer PIMs than they did right after the lockout. If you look at rankings, however, how many PIMs a team takes relative to the rest of the league, then you start to find some trends that are useful. The Canucks have consistently been a middle of the road team in terms of avoiding penalties, usually falling in between 12th to 18th. That’s as compared to teams like the Detroit Red Wings, the Chicago Blackhawks, and the New Jersey Devils who have pretty consistently been in the leagues top five for fewest minor penalties against and fewest PIMs.
Now, don’t confuse what I am saying with an attempt to construct a narrative, or bash the Canucks. Not at all. What I am saying is that the Canucks are a team that loads up an impressive amount of skill on their top lines, however, their checking and energy lines have been populated, since the lock out, with a number of players who have difficulty, at times, walking that fine line between playing with and edge/being difficult to play against and taking bad or poorly timed penalties. I think its fair to categorize Alex Burrows (i know he’s top line skill but still…), Kevin Bieksa, Shane O’Brien, Raffi Torres, Maxim Lapierre as these kind of players. Am I saying these players are bad? No. Am I saying they have a record for taking some marches to the box (especially when flustered), yeah, and that’s not an unfair thing to say.
To further avoid being accused of setting up a narrative, i also recognize that saying a team takes penalties, isn’t tantamount to accusing that team of being dirty. There are plenty of clean players who take penalties. Further, there are players who make themselves hard to play against by being able to push the envelope and get away with things simply by keeping an eye on where the linesman and refs are looking. I and most Blackhawks are fully aware that if you aren’t one of us you probably hate David Bolland with a passion, and hey, if he wasn’t one of us we’d probably hate him. But the guy manages to consistently get away with things by sneaking behind the ref’s vision, and makes himself hard to play against he coincidentally draws far more penalties than he takes (usually from guys that snap on him).
There is also a popular victim narrative that can come about. I’m telling you, guys don’t become persecuted for putting on a Canucks sweater, guys like Raffi Torres and Lapierre had well earned nefarious reputations before they ever played a single game for the Canucks.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions
As for the whole Rome hit on Horton thing
that didn’t have anything to do with who was wearing what sweater, its the type of hit, and how it looked. Not all together dirty, yet, that kind of violent collision has become indelibly linked in the popular imagination with “what is ailing the game today,” for better or worse. The NHL has decided to act according to fan outburst, and they’ve done it often, in multiple situations, really Rome became a victim of putting himself and Horton in an uncomfortable situation.
I distinctly remember a hit that Niklas Cronwall put on Marty Havlat in the 2009 WCF. Exact same hit, Cronwall came in high on Havlat, on open ice, and Marty, stupidly had has head down. It wasn’t a particularly dirty hit, but Havlat got hurt, so Cronwall got suspended. This most recent episode wasn’t some Canuck witch hunt or conspiracy.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Who said anything about a witch hunt?
I don’t know what you’re trying to accomplish with that last sentence but I doubt a Blackhawk fan is going to convince the people who are of the opinion that there’s an anti canuck bias that there isn’t.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything
apparently it wouldn’t work anyway.
but the tinfoil hat stuff is a bit whiny, a lot entitled, and entirely ridiculous
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions
but the tinfoil hat stuff is a bit whiny, a lot entitled, and entirely ridiculous
and I’m sure everyone appreciates you coming here of all places to voice that opinion. You know we just wait around here waiting for Hawk fans to fill us in on what we do wrong as a team, fanbase and city.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Settle down.
what have I said about your team, other than that it is less than accurate to say the Canucks “excellence” at avoiding penalties isn’t exactly a cornerstone this obviously good franchise is built around (notice I haven’t said that teams that take penalties are automatically bad teams)?
I haven’t said shit about your city, I like Chicago, you like Vancouver, ok. No need to whip it out and compare ’em over that difference of opinion.
I haven’t said anything about your fans generally, I’m responding to your personal belief about how the NHL deals with the Canucks with my personal belief about how based in reality that opinion is.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions
* isn't accurate to say the Canucks are built on avoiding penalties.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions
That's not my belief actually
At all. My belief is that the NHL deals with the Canucks the same way they do every other NHL team for the most part. You offered up your opinion on the matter unsolicited. My point is, what would lead you to think we cared what your personal opinion on a small portion of our fanbase was? That’s not to say I don’t appreciate the perspective of a Hawk fan on anything but the sweeping generalizations about Canuck fans are getting a little tired considering how many of them we’ve endured the last couple of years.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions
I haven't made any generalizations
you talked about people who think the refs screwed them, i said that belief for those people is ridiculous.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions
I never did though
You brought it up unprovoked. No one had said anything about a “witch hunt” before you brought the conversation there.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions
the people who are of the opinion that there’s an anti canuck bias
thus the use of the term tin foil hat wearers
settle down.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm settled
But you do understand that was a response to the unnecessary witch hunt comment don’t you? If you’re actually interested why some people feel that way I could explain to you how it’s partly rooted in our Canadian politics and also how are publicly funded national broadcaster treats our team. But i’m sure you’d rather just go on assuming it’s baseless and chuckle at the silly little Canuck fans.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Excuses don't make a baseless belief any less baseless
And whatever the dynamics of Canadian society, they are still just excuses. Otherwise you’ve boiled it down to a point of relativism that makes it impossible to say anything about anything.
Do you somehow think that the belief in an east coast bias to western teams is a foreign concept to Americans? Please, there are plenty of people who think that everything is tilted in favor of the New York Yankees or the Boston Red Sox, and its an equally dubious line of reasoning. The most profitable teams will get the most attention. Thus the Yankees and the Montreal Canadians are going to always get the most attention.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions
All fan bases think the refs are out to get them
Hawks fans included. All I’m pointing out is why ours might be a little more insecure with it than others.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 1:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Actually most Hawks fans are jilted against the inclination to blame the refs
On the basis of a long time rivalry with the Red Wings and a prevalent belief amongst that fan base that the Wings are not actually capable of losing a “fairly” officiated game.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 2:14 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
You must have hated
That Stan went and talked to the refs after Game 2 then
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Yeah but Semi
there is no proof he was complaining. He probably just wanted to find out if they knew a good restaurant he could try.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 11, 2011 6:48 AM PDT up reply actions
right or wrong most Hawks fan put the distinction at
talking to the refs behind closed doors, versus speaking to the press about it as well. Its interesting what lines fans have for their own teams.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
by justforkicks on Jul 11, 2011 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Bitching and moaning
is bitching and moaning. In the media or behind closed doors. It’s all the same.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 11, 2011 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't disagree that whining is whining no matter where its done
I just think its considered worse by a lot of people (to a degree myself as well to be honest), which I think is related to the perception of the Canucks as a whole. Its not really fair, but we all have our biases.
"I don't go looking for trouble. Trouble usually finds me." - Harry Potter
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
by justforkicks on Jul 12, 2011 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions
You lost me at Raffi
Torres can hardly be considered in the same category as Burrows and Bolland. Are his hits old school? Yes. But I think maybe you’re letting your feelings about his hit on Seabrook paint a different picture than the reality. I don’t know if anyone outside of Chicago fans think of Torres the same way they think of Cooke or Bolland.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I promise you I am not.
I just said, taking penalties isn’t tantamount to being a dirty player. The guy had a reputation long before he became a canuck. My rose colored glasses are in their case.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:46 PM PDT up reply actions
being a guy that walks that fine line between being edgy and undiscplined
not accusing him of being dirty, but saying the guy isn’t above taking a poorly timed minor.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I disagree
I think Raffi just suddenly finds himself out dated. Catching a guy with his head down was celebrated just a few years ago and personally I think it’s BS that the NHL suddenly finds it in poor taste and everyone in every fanbase is screaming for suspensions any time a guy gets rocked. I guess that makes me outdated too but no matter what rules you enforce athletes are still going to get hurt so i’d rather they didn’t slow down the game for no reason other than politics.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:03 AM PDT up reply actions
You miss my point
If you wan’t to call Torres’ style “outdated” then fine, whatever. Ill-definitions are the enemy of precision, but moving on. My point is that Torres’ style was “outdated” before he ever became a Canuck – thus he was a guy liable to get burned for walking the line between edgy and undisciplined before he ever put on your sweater.
If you want to focus on the fault of the refs, or league trends in what they call, then whatever dude. Equal blame can be put on a player for not being able to adjust with the game as it evolves. I’m not here to debate morality or what should or should not be called. Dealing in normatives completely disinterests me. I’m interested in talking about how well a player plays within the confines of WHAT gets called.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions
What does get called?
Because last I checked it was unclear to everyone.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions
pretty sure just about everyone knows that if you go in high on a guy with his head down
you can expect a call from NHL soon.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:22 AM PDT up reply actions
So
Then I take it you knew Raffi wouldn’t get suspended when he hit Seabrook.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions
please,
its one weighed against so many more
a player still knows that if he wants to avoid the whole production he’ll avoid that situation. Do you think these guys are dumb?
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions
No
But I do think several players and even refs have gone on record saying they don’t know what’s a penalty and what’s not.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions
for some calls, mostly discretionary ones
I think high sticking, interference, tripping, slashing, hooking are all pretty cut and dry
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes
But I don’t think those are the calls were talking about when Raffi Torres enters the discussion or when you say
pretty sure just about everyone knows that if you go in high on a guy with his head down
you can expect a call from NHL soon.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 1:23 AM PDT up reply actions
you actually. brought yup the Seabrook hit
I was more so alluding to the fact Torres has spent much of his career drawing penalties ona near nightly basis. So all of those kinds of penalties apply
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 2:22 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
and wow,
Bolland and Cooke?
looking, I know Bolly gets away with liberties, but its chippy little shit. Bolland doesn’t run around looking to end guys careers, and Bolly takes about half the PIMs that Torres does.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Bolland is a rat
He’s very good at his job but there’s a fine line between trying to purposely hurt players so they cant perform at their best like Bolland does and accidentally ending someone’s career.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 11:51 PM PDT up reply actions
A fine line that Bolland walks pretty well no?
I’ll maybe listen to you when you provide me with a rap sheet for all the careers that Bolland’s antics have apparently ruined
(and psychiatrist bills don’t count)
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 10, 2011 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions
One is enough
Guys don’t usually cause more than one career ending injury. All i’m saying is it’s the players, like Bolland, who are looking for ways to hurt players that usually end up going too far every once in a while and doing it. Bolland is no better than Cooke he just hasn’t played long enough yet.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 10, 2011 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions
For that matter,
I’m a little confused how a little bit of stickwork to the shin pads has ever ended anyones career but ok.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:01 AM PDT up reply actions
to the shin pads?
He wouldn’t be very good at hurting someone if all he did as stick them in the shin pad. That doesn’t hurt at all
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions
My point exactly
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions
its annoying it doesn't end Marc Savard's career
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Do you really think
Sedin snapped at Bolland because he hit kept slashing him on the shin pad?
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions
I am not sure who great of evidence that is
because as most of us recall, Bolland can get both Sedins to snap over far less.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Right
Because the Sedins are known for their hot tempers. Maybe consider that what Bolland was doing was dirty and probably dangerous. Especially given the fact that he got one of the Sedins to lose his shit, a player that never does.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I'll listen to an argument about how Bolland is dirty
not really disputing that much. but calling Bolland dangerous is something that is taking it one toke over the line.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Dirty and dangerous
are ugly little brothers.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions
So then, does that make Alex Burrows a dangerous player?
Is Chris Drury a dangerous player?
or Bobby Ryan?
or Tuomo Ruutu?
or Temmu Selanne?
Is Evgeni Malkin dangerous?
You slip between complete relativism and utter absolutism with surprising ease.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions
You can only use
a word like relativism in one context before it starts to lose all meaning. You’ve used it at least three times in this thread, all slightly differently. I wasn’t being absolute about anything, just trying to point out that it’s a vague distinction between dirty and dangerous.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions
And before this spirals
I didn’t mean that last comment to sound as snotty as it does. It was funny in my head but after reading it it sounds prickish. Thanks for the conversation, I enjoyed it.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 11, 2011 1:27 AM PDT up reply actions
I am using relativism the same in every case
meaning that you are proposing that a particular outcome (be it the tendency of fan to blame refs or how “dangerous” a player is or is not) is entirely circumstantial. So, because of the conditions in Western Canada, a Canuck fan saying that got jobbed by the ref is different than a Blackhawks fan who believes that his team has been jobbed by the refs. I am proposing that neither case is circumstantial – they are both cases of a whiny and entitled fan.
What I am further suggesting is that there is a definable continuum for how dirty or dangerous a player is or is not. Now there are borderline dirty players that are not dangerous, and dirty players that are dangerous, and players that are just plain dangerous.
If you are suggesting that Dave Bolland is a dangerous player, then I was submitting to you, that by the logic you use, Alex Burrows is equally dangerous.
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 2:36 AM PDT up reply actions
*how
Am I paranoid? I don't know. I went to a therapist once, but I left before he gave me the diagnosis, cause he had it out for me.
by Detroit Must Die on Jul 11, 2011 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions
I found this convo interesting and a little curious. Honest question,
so you’d put Bolland in the same category as Cooke, but not Torres, who I saw a bunch of times in the playoffs (including against Boston) aiming high with his hits and/or leading with his elbow – where even the announcers mentioned it? And sure old school it was ok, but in the new NHL it is not, so continuing to do it is dirty and dangerous. To a degree I think you are right – personally, I’ve noticed and nitpicked it more after this season because it happened to our guys. I mean Hamhuis’ hit on Bolland, which put his head into the glass, game after he came back from a concussion – certainly put him on my shit list as well. But then I know the teams Bolland has agitated also hate him – the Sharks and you guys certainly, and maybe I would as well if he wasn’t a Hawk. Perception is key right – because I’ve never thought he was dangers, but I’ve definitely thought some of your guys were.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
by justforkicks on Jul 11, 2011 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions
huh. just reread my comment and not sure if it makes any sense. sorry if that's the case.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
by justforkicks on Jul 11, 2011 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions
For the most part
You’re just advocating for your player. Just as we do for ours. It’s unfortunate that it seems to reach a fever pitch between our two fan bases during the season. Maybe if the league wasn’t constantly shifting the goalposts?
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
Why can't we just agree
Burrows is dirty and Bolland is dirty. We think our guy is less dirty. They think there’s is less. I just don’t get the bias in these situations. Anyone saying Bolland isn’t one of the cheapest dirtiest players in the league either isn’t watching or is completely biased. Burrows is the same and not admitting it on our part would be equally baffling.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 5:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Torres actually bothered me more than Burrows did. He seemed to be the more dangerous and disrespectful of the two.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 6:27 AM PDT up reply actions
Why?
Cause he hits guys hard? That’s worse than biting and hair pulling?
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions
To me, he intends to injure. As in severely.
In the finals he had a nice flying elbow that thankfully missed. Made a nearly identical hit on Seabrook that concussed him.
I’d rather a pest that bites and pulls hair than a thug who goes headhunting.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Well I guess that's where we disagree
I think if you skate around with your head down oblivious to what’s going on around you then you deserve to get hit hard. I don’t think he targets heads. I think he hits them sometimes cause he goes for open ice hits and guys aren’t always aware he is coming. That’s their own fault.
If this is the hit you are talking about on Seabrook and you think that’s a flying elbow I have no words to describe how wrong you are.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeZDE9H3_vU
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Agree to disagree on the matter. Don’t feel like searching for the video of the Torres play I was referencing (its a part of one long video).
To me, he goes out there trying to injure guys a la Cooke or Ott. That is something I find far worse than pests like Burrows, Kaleta, Avery and Marchand.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions
Everyone tries to injure guys
It’s a violent game and every hit is thrown with bad intentions. I’m sick of everyone making that distinction between players and plays. The reason we hate cooke is because he threw the hit on a guy in a vulnerable position and from an angle he had no chance of seeing it coming. This sudden need to protect the players is so trendy and it makes me crazy. You know who else used to go into hits with his elbows high? Gordie Howe and he was celebrated for it. Mark Messier too, now suddenly the league is going to tell me Raffi Torres is a villain for throwing hits the way you grown up your whole life learning to? Everyone is going to chime in with “we have to protect the poor players”. I count a few NHL payers as friends and I would never say this to them but they are being very handsomely compensated to put their bodies on the line, they don’t need us looking out for them. Sure eliminate the Cooke hit but this outcry every time there’s a big hit is BS.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions
I disagree.
Yes, most players lay hits and the intent is to shakeup and hurt the opponent. But there is a difference between that and trying to injure a guy.
And the whole ‘it used to be fine so why the outrage now’ argument is utter BULLSHIT. Slavery used to be acceptable. Women not voting was acceptable. Blacks not voting was acceptable. Segregation was acceptable. Obviously they should not have been. Just because past stars were glorified for certain acts doesn’t mean those same acts would or should be acceptable in today’s culture.
The world changes and the league and game needs to change accordingly. If you don’t see the difference between laying an honest hit shoulder-to-shoulder and aiming an elbow at another guys head then I don’t know what to tell you.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Those are some pretty ridiculous comparables. I’m talking about the way a game is played here not the mistreatment of any group of people based on sex, skin tone or nationality. I did make a distinction between the hits I think are acceptable and the ones that aren’t when I mentioned the Cooke hit from behind. The thing that gets me are all the holier than thou types (since you are comparing NHL hits to racism I think it’s safe to assume you’re one of them) getting up and crying for someone’s head every time a hit is thrown with any ferocity. This keeps up and you’ll eliminate hitting all together and we’ll have soccer on ice and for what? Honestly, why do we need to eliminate the hits you’re talking about if that comes with the risk of making the players too cautious?
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions
The situations may not be comparable but the thought-process is.
The whole concept that something should be acceptable now because it once was the norm is completely illogical and utterly flawed.
And no, I am not a holier than thou type… I just don’t like dirty injurious play. I am not advocating the removal of hitting or fighting, merely the removal of intentionally dangerous hits. There is a difference.
Consider the Weight hit a couple years ago on Sutter… that was Sutter’s fault and a perfectly clean hit that belongs in the game. The Cooke elbow to McDonagh has no place in the game as there is no hockey justification for that hit.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
I think you mean the Cooke hit on Savard
You make it sound like in a game that’s played at 30 KPH it’s easy to make the distinction between going shoulder to shoulder or elbow to head. The only distinction you can make is hit or don’t hit. That’s why elbowing is only a 2 min penalty. I agree take out that Cooke hit, throw the book at him. But the Torres hit on Eberle was a good hockey play. The Torres hit on Seabrook was a great hockey play and the Rome hit on Horton was a fraction of a second too late to be a good hockey play but certainly didn’t deserve the punishment. I’m really asking you too, why are you so concerned with eliminating the Rome hit?
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I mean exactly what I type.
I am obviously aware of the Savard hit but I was pointing out the serial nature of his offenses and his general carelessness.
And if its so hard to make that distinction why is it that the majority of players deliver clean hits the vast majority of the time while the minority of dirty players repeatedly deliver questionable hits?
Consider, an honest player like Shawn Thornton was credited with 141 hits last season with zero complaints (to my knowledge). Another honest player, Dennis Seidenberg, had 161 with no complaints. A third honest player, Craig Adams, delivered 171 with no complaints.
A dishonest player like Matt Cooke had 192 and got suspended twice (and likely had more questionable ones). A second dishonest player Raffi Torres had 134 hits and got suspended once (with at least one more suspect hit).
No why do the first guys have no problem playing physical without getting suspended but the last two do?
Also ironic you bring up the Rome hit seeing as I never once mentioned it, but since you asked I want that hit eliminated since it was VERY late. Horton took two full strides before Rome initiated contact. Had Horton still had the puck that his is clean as can be… but he didn’t and hadn’t for more than enough time for Rome to know. Had Rome been stationary and Horton hit him it would be one thing but Rome chose to explode through the check KNOWING that the puck wasn’t present. That hit is unacceptable, regardless of whether or not it would have been a great play in the days of old.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions
It's funny how much perspective you have
Considering the new rules only started getting implemented half way through the season. Maybe you’ll only start to see what i’m talking about when some of those clean Seidenberg hit are suddenly considered dirty. The reason that Raffi hit on Eberle was “suspect” was because it happened after the crackdown.
Just to be clear a player doesn’t need to be in possession of the puck for a defender or forechecker to initiate contact. That’s called finishing your check and if they take that out of the game i’ll stop watching. Also a player is always trying to explode through a check, if what you mean is we should eliminate open ice hitting because it’s too jarring all I can say is I disagree.
The days of old you keep referring to are really just the beginning of last season since the NHL and most fans didn’t take this ridiculous stance until halfway through it. It’s not as if I’m suggesting we bring back the bench clearing brawl. I just don’t want everyone to be so sensitive to players health that everytime a check is thrown with any force people scream for suspensions and that’s what started happening.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Finishing your check comes immediately after the puck is passed/shot…. hitting someone a full two strides after the puck is gone is well past finishing one’s check.
Again, exploding through a check is fine IF it is on the puck-handler. If it is one some random skater nowhere near the puck it is utterly unacceptable and shows a wonton disregard for the health and safety of your opponent.
As for what most fans views were, I could care less. I only am concerned about MY view and speak to MY opinion and that hasn’t wavered.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Half second = two strides.
Note, this is not saying a half second after the puck was passed… its a half second after the half-second window passed and a full second after the pass.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Half second = two strides?
Is this scientifically proven? What if the player stopped striding like Rome did? Is the half second window in the official NHL rule book?I get that YOU only care about YOUR opinion but I’m more concerned about how many people are in the same head space as you than I am about your personal opinion. Suddenly everyone wants the players to slow down and think before they throw a check which will in turn slow the game back down as a whole. Besides the obvious my problem with that is that there’s no reason for it. Players are still going to get hurt and some of them are still going to be career enders. That’s the nature of violent sports and like I said before you take the violence out of hockey and what are you left with? Soccer on ice and not something I would want to watch.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions
So because people are going to die in car crashes no matter what we do the government should okay drunk driving and not require seatbelts?
So because planes are gonna crash no matter what we do they should just do away with airport screening?
Just because something is unavoidable it doesn’t mean lengths shouldn’t be taken to minimize the risk and dangers involved.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Now you're getting the hang of it
Much better hyperbole. I’m all for minimizing risk but not at the sacrifice of the game itself. It’s like telling everyone to stop driving or flying because of the risk involved.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions
By the way, in case you didn’t know those comparisons are hyperbole… its a form of rhetorical device
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Really?
You don’t say? Well that changes everything.
That was something called sarcasm. I’m not great at it though. Did I do it right?
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions
I thought it was obvious but seeing as it was seemingly taken literally I thought clarification was in order.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions
I think you’re confused about when an appropriate time to use hyperbole is.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions
canuckel
dont bother, not worth it, talked to bastard about the same thing before the finals, lose lose situation
He probably
is still mad about the Seabrook hit. Seabs does have beautiful lips after all.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Pretty sure
He is a Boston fan, Section
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
BOB belongs
to the sub-section of fans who view every hard hit as an affront to modern society, and view those of us who embrace the " keep your head up" mentality as throwbacks to a more vulgar era.
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
i know the hit hes talking about
the raffi “flying elbow” i got into it a bit over at chowder, i watched the video and couldnt believe what i say… raffi throws a hit, bruin sidesteps at the last second and raffi is following thru off balance, his elbow comes up instinctively as though your falling and as a reaction you put your arms out.. if he was to have made contact his arms were low until he realized it didnt hit anything, reactions took over. the bastard enjoys arguing, and has a hard time seeing the other side of things
Always love when people put words into my mouth… even more amusing when they directly contradict what I have actually said.
Truly impressive mind-reading!
Rather ironic to hear a Canucks fan advocating all manner of physical punishment regardless of inherent danger or risk of injury after hearing so many of his compatriots complaining about those thuggish Bruins turning the FInals into a streetfight…
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
maybe if he connected with an elbow?
could you plz link that play again? maybe ill see something different this time that i didnt before, but the way i remember the play going, had he connected, it would have been a perfect shoulder to chest hit.
i am not my compatriots, and they are not me.
like you said above
“As for what most fans views were, I could care less. I only am concerned about MY view and speak to MY opinion and that hasn’t wavered.”
You’re welcome to find it yourself but I’m not looking for it again
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 12, 2011 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Cause it doesn't exist
what a waste of time.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Seeing as how your fellow Canucks fan has already seen it and stated as much, clearly it does…
But apparently I’m just a stupid Chicago fan… who has Bobby Orr in his name… (cause that makes sense!)
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 13, 2011 4:30 AM PDT up reply actions
People were stating that more as a criticism of our players lack of ability to play through the hacks, whacks and other cheap shit. Hence the phrase “street fight”. It has absolutely nothing to do with what were talking about here. Did you even watch the series? I’m pretty sure Vancouver even out hit Boston.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 13, 2011 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions
No, I’m a bigtime Bruins fan but I decided to watch the Lifetime network instead of the games…
If you believe that hits are a valid stat then i really feel sorry for you…
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 13, 2011 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Ok?
What stat besides hits would you use to measure hits?
by Canuckelhead on Jul 13, 2011 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I wouldn’t use a horridly subjective ‘statistic’ like hits.
Go check out home-road splits for team hits on NHL.com and tell me its a viable stat.
Or do you think Vancouver averaging 38 hits per home playoff game but only 29 per road is normal?
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 13, 2011 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions
No no no
it would be WAY more normal if they had the exact same amount of hits in every game no matter where it was played.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 13, 2011 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
Besides what the hell would you use? Your gut feeling? The force? Also, is 38 to 29 so vastly different when you consider how much more aggressive a home team plays? I would say that sounds about exactly right.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 13, 2011 5:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Welcome to the law of large numbers…
Things should average out over a big enough sample. Thus a team having a 500-hit differential between home and road hit totals is not statistically insignificant.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 13, 2011 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions
You could make all he same arguments with shots and a bunch of other stats, saves and even assists. So I guess I can conclude you don’t bother with any stats when watch hockey.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 13, 2011 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Assists are cut-and-dried and are objectively defined.
Same goes for stats and most other stats… only the RTSS ones are overly subjective.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 13, 2011 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions
What about shots
You can’t argue that hits are subjective but shots aren’t. What defines a shot or a save is exactly as subjective as what defines a hit. So if you’re going to throw hits out the window you have to throw saves out too and therefore all goalie stats. Assists aren’t as cut and dry as you’re making them either. Fo example if Hank shoots, the goalie saves but doesn’t control and the puck goes to dank who then scores Hank will get an assist, right? But is a second assist awarded to whoever passed the puck to Hank? the answer is sometimes. Not really cut and dry at all is it and their are countless other examples.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 13, 2011 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions
That's why
You just use the road hits for all teams to weed out the bias
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
No dice. It works both ways due to no clear definition of a hit.
Last season (09-10) Atlanta was credited with 200 more hits on the road than at home.
Calgary had 350 more away than home.
Vancouver had 200 more away than home.
by BobbyOrrsBastard on Jul 13, 2011 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions
There's no definition
Of a hit, shot or save. So do you just throw all goalie stats out the window?
by Canuckelhead on Jul 13, 2011 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Section
Don’t you think Burrows has cleaned up his act over the last season?
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
He did
In the regular season.
In the playoffs he reverted back to his old ways
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
Disagree
I'll do it tomorrow, that seems like a pretty good idea to me
What's wrong with tomorrow, I'm watching him but who's watching me?
The biting thing
While not as horrible as it was made out pretty clearly defines burrows as the type of player were discussing.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions
I think he talked less
and focused more on hockey than before. But that doesn’t change what kind of player he is. Not yet anyway. 5-6 years of being dirty doesn’t go away cause of one season of being less dirty. I love Burrows and couldn’t be happier that he is on my team. I’d feel the same about Bolland if he was on my team. Just cause I love one guy and dislike another doesn’t mean I can’t be objective about them.
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"Are you out of your fucking mind? You think I'm just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you're into that shit?" - Louis CK
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, and Chief Hunk.
by Section 312 on Jul 12, 2011 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't disagree
I never once in this conversation claimed Burrows was any different than Bolland cause I agree with you. Torres on the other hand is a whole different thing.
by Canuckelhead on Jul 12, 2011 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions
We had a convo about this a while ago on SCH, and I think most
would agree with Bolland being dirty (and ours being less dirty of course =)), but we love him because he’s ours, just like you love yours. What I disagree with is the idea that he is dangerous and on par with Cooke. Maybe most here would disagree with that as well, and really that’s a maybe just a small piece of the larger discussion that’s happening here, but its an idea I really wanted to (and did) question. But again, each fanbase will be biased towards their player.
"I don't go looking for trouble. Trouble usually finds me." - Harry Potter
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
by justforkicks on Jul 12, 2011 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Hopefully things will be more cut and dry with Campbell out
certainly a lot of the issues between fanbases comes from the inconsistencies of what is acceptable and what is not. And obviously players have the same problems since one day a hit they lay out is clean and the next day its dirty and suspension worthy.
"I don't go looking for trouble. Trouble usually finds me." - Harry Potter
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. - Douglas Adams
by justforkicks on Jul 12, 2011 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Nucks Misconduct
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Nucks Misconduct Store
Your clothing sucks. Go fix it.
