JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,145
- 9,403
Guys.... can you keep a secret?
*looks left*
*looks right*
I think trading Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson might have been really, really dumb.
This is a baseless counter-factual.
1) Fighting has never been banned so we have no idea what will happen if it's gone.
2) Fighting doesn't exist in most leagues other than the NHL, and is heavily penalized with misconducts and suspensions when it does happen in those leagues. There is no endemic of cheap-shots in other leagues.
3) The idea that players need police themselves is an indictment of the referees. If refs called the rule-book, the cheap-shots would go away.
4) Gudas is getting suspended. If you think that's not enough of a deterrent, then suspend him longer.
Fighting is not this deeply important element of hockey. Even Ken Dryden, who #PlayedDaGame pointed out in his book that fighting in the 70s was very rare, and provides the numbers to back it up. It wasn't til th 80s, when teams started wasting roster spots on goons did it become common. The NHL made fighting a part of the game in very recent history by a) failing to call the rules effectively and consistently and b) by bringing in players that bring nothing but fighting to the table. Fighting became a way for low-skill plugs to keep their jobs, and they did everything in their power to fight as much as possible to make their jobs seem valuable.
Thankfully, the NHL is doing the right thing and doing it smartly. They're never going to outright ban fighting, there'd be too much blowback from meatballs in the media and fans.
So they're just eliminating fighting gradually with rule changes in the feeder leagues, making equipment like visors (and eventually full face shields, book it) mandatory, etc. In not too many years, the league will be full of kids who have never fought, aren't comfortable fighting, have no interest in fighting... and the game will be far better for it.
I understand why Gretzky believes fighting is important. Because he played in a time when it was common.
Just because something was does not mean it need continue be. We can evolve. We can improve. We can correct that which sullies the game.
Why do you continually mock this the way you do? There are instances where having played the game absolutely makes a difference, and as far as I know, you did play some, so why continually mock it? You just come off like an ass.
I'm not disagreeing with anything in this post, honestly. I'm just curious as to why you think that someone having played will not view things differently, or in more detail, or have better insight into the game, or even just a specific situation, than someone who hasn't, to the point you actually mock those who have played? I mean, **** like that is unnecessary, and is why people get so frustrated with you. You come off so arrogant all the time, and it takes away so much from anything you ever post.
Mostly because 'those who have played the game know/would know' is brought up so much in arguments, and not as a means to bring insight, but as a means to silence. To say, 'your opinion is invalid because you never played the game'.
Which is stupid. That's why I mock it incessantly. It's not necessarily aimed at anybody in particular, just the general sentiment. Hell half the time it's self-mocking, as in I throw it out when I bring up a player's position on something. Because it coming from a player doesn't make it anymore right or true for my position either, I probably just happen to think it's either intelligent or well-spoken. Like in this case with Dryden.
It would be fine if people cited their own anecdotes of events that happened, how they felt and responded when they were playing hockey. Those are interesting, even if they are purely anecdotal. Those would bring some insight or perspective.
But most people generally don't. They don't add insight from their having played with specific anecdotes or anything, they just use playing experience at various levels as a sweeping authority for their positions and an attempt to undermine opposing views.
And not just here. Everywhere. I use that hashtag all the time, on various forums (Reddit, Twitter, etc). Again, it's just me poking fun at a general sentiment that runs rampant in hockey communities.
I don't care about Buffalo being where they are but it is dissapointing seeing EDM and ARZ are where they are. They were supposed to improve on their respective seasons last year and they haven't.
ARZ just isn't good enough yet and EDM has too much fat on their roster. The Hall for Larsson trade was very good IMHO but signing Lucic was a very obvious mistake from the beginning. They have no bottom 6 and am underwhelming defense.
I don't care about Buffalo being where they are but it is dissapointing seeing EDM and ARZ are where they are. They were supposed to improve on their respective seasons last year and they haven't.
ARZ just isn't good enough yet and EDM has too much fat on their roster. The Hall for Larsson trade was very good IMHO but signing Lucic was a very obvious mistake from the beginning. They have no bottom 6 and am underwhelming defense.
They shouldn't have traded Hall.
<joking>They shouldn't have traded Hall.
<joking>
Word is Adam Oates was all for getting Hall on the Devils #WhoaOhHereSheComes
</joking>
<insert groans here>
Big trade this morning