Do the Habs go into the season "Goonless"? Part 2
- Thread starter hototogisu
- Start date
- Status
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,024
- 44,759
Having a heavyweight around has never seemed to work for us...don't think we will have one as the season starts, but who knows as the season goes on?
Dominator13
Registered User
Cause we alwaysed aimed for the best of the rest instead of trading an asset to get a younger player that A) still likes fighting and B) doesn't look stupid when he's playing hockey. Imagine having a 23 year old Jared Boll or Tom Sestito instead instead of the washed-up heavyweight for a moment?
1000 posts wondering if it's a good idea to save a spot for a Laraque/Parros type.
Watching just a single game with one of these two in the lineup should've been enough to answer that question.
Have more Prust/Tinordi type players if want, just keep the Sylvain Blouin's of this world the hell away from my team.
Watching just a single game with one of these two in the lineup should've been enough to answer that question.
Have more Prust/Tinordi type players if want, just keep the Sylvain Blouin's of this world the hell away from my team.
Habs
We should have drafted Michkov
- Feb 28, 2002
- 21,253
- 14,776
In 93 we had Todd Ewen , Lyle Odelein, Mario Roberge as heavyweights. If you got through that, you could talk to Muller, Keane, Haller and Skrudland about your issues. That team was tough as nuts, and Johnny LeClair never started to flex any muscle yet.
Nevins
Registered User
- Jul 12, 2014
- 2,348
- 1,642
We all saw how bad was Parros last year.Could a player like Nevins or Crisp do better than Parros?It is not the best for their development but do you think that they can be better than Parros?And if so,could one of them be the Habs goon?
I don't think that this will happen because none have experience fight with men....But Wilson did it 2 years ago with Washington.
I don't think that this will happen because none have experience fight with men....But Wilson did it 2 years ago with Washington.
WeThreeKings
Habs cup - its in the BAG
Capitano
Registered User
Intimidation still plays a role in the game against some players and it's simply something we have never really done. Doesn't seem to fit our style. Guys like Robinson would stand up when the time came though and we should focus on getting more players that WON'T be intimidated rather than DO the intimidating.
You just can't have too many softies in your lineup and expect to win. I think MB has done a pretty good job at creating a pretty balanced lineup so we'll likely just go with what we've got. Ryan White was a guy who was willing to drop the gloves and he was a homegrown guy and we decided not to keep him...so I doubt we get anybody else.
Oh My God... in one shift, score a goal, and beat up two players on the opposing team:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0TMdhRK2-8
Allah, Christ and Moses, this please
Hope Of Glory
Registered User
Yeah, because there are a LOT of those guys in the league right? And the teams surely wants to trade them...
Of course it'd be good if we could get one of those but there's a reason why we always end up with old washed up goons. The few teams that have one don't want to trade them.
S Bah
Registered User
The talk here is about guys that can scrap and barely understand hockey, none of them would be a boxing champion. Bare knuckled fighting isn't legal and is usually confined to those of us that can actually box and knock people out, not that hard to do if you can throw a proper punch bare fisted, a 100 lbs girl is more than capable of performing that much.
Team toughness is what the point is about, not allowing teammates to be intimidated out of their groove to playmake and create offence. That's done by a player making a statement by hanging a beating on an opponent without repercussions from teammates of the abused party. It's a fairly simple procedure used in many team sports, referees are supposedly there to insure no team uses intimidation as an asset. If the refs did there jobs properly then teams that use intimidation as their main weapon, would lose every game, this would also mean that team wouldn't last in the league, because they would always be in last place. So don't tell me the refs are doing their jobs, unless it entails allowing teams to win using intimidation by fists.
Team toughness is what the point is about, not allowing teammates to be intimidated out of their groove to playmake and create offence. That's done by a player making a statement by hanging a beating on an opponent without repercussions from teammates of the abused party. It's a fairly simple procedure used in many team sports, referees are supposedly there to insure no team uses intimidation as an asset. If the refs did there jobs properly then teams that use intimidation as their main weapon, would lose every game, this would also mean that team wouldn't last in the league, because they would always be in last place. So don't tell me the refs are doing their jobs, unless it entails allowing teams to win using intimidation by fists.
Kriss E - Boston (the cup winning Boston) was built the same way. You wanna start s***, you had to deal with 8-9 guys ready to takeyour head off.
Now granted, that's a team philosophy, and one we (Montreal) doesn't share.
But to suggest it's a useless relic from another era, is simply false.
As you said, that has nothing to do with getting 1 enforcer that can't play hockey.
I agree. The Parros/Laraque crap is over and done with. I hope Habs brass see this as well.
Sterling Archer
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2006
- 22,976
- 13,449
I think a tough team is better than having 1 tough guy and expect miracles.
i think Montreal showed last year in the Boston series that speed and tenacity is a more powerful tool than beating a team up. You can't hit what you can't keep up with as we showed them throughout the season.
That being said, I'm all for a tough guy type player IF he can play a regular 4th line shift. If he's the old school, big, lumbering hands of stone neaderthal, I'd pass.
As is, I think that we have some good team toughness with guys ike Moen, Prust, Bourque, Emelin, Tinnordi, Weise who can all fight and guys like Eller, PK, Malhotra etc who can hit and play a physical game.
Unless we can get a guy who's as fast on his skates as he is with his hands, I don't see the point. The hockey goon is an endangered species.
i think Montreal showed last year in the Boston series that speed and tenacity is a more powerful tool than beating a team up. You can't hit what you can't keep up with as we showed them throughout the season.
That being said, I'm all for a tough guy type player IF he can play a regular 4th line shift. If he's the old school, big, lumbering hands of stone neaderthal, I'd pass.
As is, I think that we have some good team toughness with guys ike Moen, Prust, Bourque, Emelin, Tinnordi, Weise who can all fight and guys like Eller, PK, Malhotra etc who can hit and play a physical game.
Unless we can get a guy who's as fast on his skates as he is with his hands, I don't see the point. The hockey goon is an endangered species.
Dominator13
Registered User
So what? I don't remember when the rules changed from then to now. Lucic's famous "I'm gonna kill you next season" is blatant proof that intimidation still exists..
Guy Germaine
Registered User
JusticeBeaver
noice
- Oct 22, 2012
- 1,687
- 0
No, habs were able to get under his skin and throw him off his game.
He tried to intimidate the habs at the time it mattered most, and it didn't work.
Blatant proof it doesn't work.
The rules changed in 92 actually, where they added the 2min instigator rule for starting fights. In 2005, they added an ejection fine and suspension for any player who instigates a fight in in the final five minutes of the third period or overtime and a fine for his coach.
They also added the 10min misconduct.
In 2013, they added an extra penalty to guys that remove their helmets for a fight.
So if you didn't know the rules changed, you just don't know them.
As for Lucic, intimidation?? The guy lost.
You think this was his first attempt to intimidate us? That he played nice all series and waited for the handshake ceremony after he lost to ''intimidate'' us?
What about that bicep flex and Weise going right back at him flexing in his face??
Ya. I think the Habs proved to you just how little the ''intimidation'' game worked when you have a good team. It's very easy to point at intimidation when your team is mediocre and you disregard the obvious lack of talent.
Also, Marchand, one of the biggest pest in the NHL, said the player he absolutely hated the most out of all the NHL and its big tough guys, was Tomas freaking Plekanec.
You know, Pleky? The guy everybody calls soft and isn't intimidating one bit? Well apparently he must be doing stuff you clearly aren't aware of if he's able to get under the skin of the NHL's pest.
You live in the past buddy.
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,024
- 44,759
I wouldn't go that far.
Intimidation is always going to be a factor in this game. I think it's good to have those kinds of players in your lineup and I think the physical aspect of the game can make a positive difference for you.
The reason I'd want a Lucic though is that he's also a pretty good hockey player. A 'goon only' type guy is a waste of time. You get a 25 goal scoring hulk winger though... that's awesome. Multi dimensional players are always good to have in your lineup.
Intimidation, hits, the rough stuff... really difficult to quantify. Did the Bruins win the cup because they were strong defensively and had a good goalie? For sure that's the real reason. But I can't help but think that their size and smashmouth tactics didn't also play a role.
I'm not advocating that we try to be the Bruins and I definitely don't think we should get a goon. But I still think there's a place for smashmouth players in the game.
Posted this on the previous thread so I will post it here.
All you did was post a wish. Meanwhile, we do not have those players in Montreal.....yet. Still about 2-3 years away.
Wishing for and hoping for will not change the fact that the team as it is now will be targeted physically as a strategy to defeat the Habs on the scoreboard.
The Habs need an enforcer until your wishes and hopes come true.
Bourne Endeavor
Registered User
No, no. Weise is never a good mainstay on the third line. Trust me, I spent two years watching AV try it in Vancouver. It worked for maybe a handful of games before crashing and burning. Weise just does not have the consistency to play in a top nine for long. If we have to, I'd move Prust up but were prefer to just sign Penner and/or let Sekac roll with it.
Pacioretty - Desharnais - Gallagher
Galchenyuk - Plekanec - PAP
Bourque - Eller - Penner/Sekac
Prust - Malhotra - Weise
Moen, Bournival
I think that is better than Sestito.
Bringing up the Boston series in the playoffs and using it as some justification to diminish Lucic (and the other Boston tough guys) is short-sighted and foolish.
The playoffs are a best-of-seven series.....win 4 games and send the other team packing. Teams cannot lose discipline in a short series that will not last for more than 7 games. Coaches know this. So do the players.
Now look at an 82 game season where one loss has significantly less impact on a team. It is easy for Lucic and company to send a message without regards to winning or losing the game.
Lucic will get his revenge against Weise and Emelin. If not from Lucic, it will be from one of his teammates.
Once Prust is taken from the game on a misconduct.......who's left?
The pacifists will surely complain loudly on the Main Board about the dirty Bruins when we play them and they take advantage of our team physically.
Enjoy it!!
- Status
