Do the Habs go into the season "Goonless"? Part 2

[JusticeBeaver]

If Lucic wants to fight, the Habs should do what he did and avoid him and just not fight. If he jumps him, great! Make them pay on the PP. If he calls him out, all he needs to say is George says hi.

Only way Montreal beats Boston is with our speed and antogonizing them. When we play their game, we get beat on the ice both ways. Getting under their skin is what we do best and it works so let's stick with that!

Get out of here with your logic and reasoning you beta male. Obviously we alpha males prove our points with more mature antics, like name calling and antagonizing on the internet.


On a more serious note from Andrew Berkshires twitter, Murray nope chart

If we're talking about a player who is more than one dimensional , yeah it'd be nice. But this thread isn't about that.

That's my side of it, couldn't give a rats ass if you agree or not, but when you result to barrading people to try and prove your point, you, dbag, prove to be the beta male.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Get out of here with your logic and reasoning you beta male. Obviously we alpha males prove our points with more mature antics, like name calling and antagonizing on the internet.


On a more serious note from Andrew Berkshires twitter, Murray nope chart

If we're talking about a player who is more than one dimensional , yeah it'd be nice. But this thread isn't about that.

That's my side of it, couldn't give a rats ass if you agree or not, but when you result to barrading people to try and prove your point, you, dbag, prove to be the beta male.

I guess that makes me

I'll go BBQ now and drink a keg of beer while tuning my car in the garage with posters of nude women around me to help me man up. Maybe I'll want a face puncher afterwards.

 

[Kriss E]

Yet it's an argument that you and more here REALLY need to start grasping soon. You guys love to pick sequences on which having an enforcer didn't do much, but when we pick a different sequence, now all of a sudden it's luck, or player X doesn't get pushed around that easily or bla bla bla. None of the pro-enforcer supporters here have ever claimed that having an enforcer = 0 injuries, but just like tying your seatbelt, it helps.

I don't pick sequences. I look at the fact that fights have been on the decline for quite some time now, and that there's half the number of enforcers in the league today than a decade ago. Those are facts not opinions.

That's the thing, you guys keep saying ''it helps'' but you have 0 evidence of this. We know that injuries still happen when they are dressed, so how can you possibly come to the conclusion that ''it helps''??
Players get hurt while enforcers are dressed. That's a fact. Conclusion? Enforcers help prevent injuries...That's some weird ass logic.

Again, 20 years ago I would agree with you. Today, not so much.

This thread badly needs an overhaul IMO. It's not about having an enforcer, it's about finding the RIGHT GUY. I don't care about trading an asset to find him, instead of a 35 year old George Parros, we need a 25 year old Chris Niel or Jared Boll that can skate and jumps on anybody who even tries to injure one of our own.

Every single person here agrees with this. Even a guy like White, I don't get why we let him go. But people are discussing the Parros' of this world, not the Neil or Boll or even White. I hope we move Moen for a more aggressive scrapper.

 

[Dominator13]

On a more serious note from Andrew Berkshires twitter, Murray nope chart

Oh boy, now we're using the worse one as a reference now...

You guys watch sports like you play X-box, so yes I'll use the "beta male" reference. Hockey is WAY more than logic and systems. It's the intangibles, the same ones you only learn by playing the game, that separates the athletes from the people that analyse it.

 

[Dominator13]

I don't pick sequences. I look at the fact that fights have been on the decline for quite some time now, and that there's half the number of enforcers in the league today than a decade ago. Those are facts not opinions.

That's the thing, you guys keep saying ''it helps'' but you have 0 evidence of this. We know that injuries still happen when they are dressed, so how can you possibly come to the conclusion that ''it helps''??
Players get hurt while enforcers are dressed. That's a fact. Conclusion? Enforcers help prevent injuries...That's some weird ass logic.

Again, 20 years ago I would agree with you. Today, not so much.

Oh really? Than Parros jumping on Orr, Tinordi junping Gryba and Torres, Prust jumping Hendricks, are those myths too? Sorry man, you're 100% wrong. Seriously watch the games and not the stats, we were far more respected ladt season than any of the last 15 years.

 

[Kriss E]

Oh really? Than Parros jumping on Orr, Tinordi junping Gryba and Torres, Prust jumping Hendricks, are those myths too? Sorry man, you're 100% wrong. Seriously watch the games and not the stats, we were far more respected ladt season than any of the last 15 years.

Parros didn't jump on Orr, PK jumped on Orr, the refs split them up, and then Orr skated back towards PK and Parros stepped in. There is zero proof that Orr was going to do some hurt PK. It's a wonder, how did PK manage to survive with Parros for 60ish games? How did he do it for the 3 previous years too.
Tinordi and Prust are not enforcers. Stop mixing everything up together.

Teams that are respected are the ones that are good. You think the NYI were respected last year? Yet they had Martin-Carkner-Boulton. Or the Oilers? With Gazdic-Fraser-Hendricks?

More respected? Yea, that's because we're better than we've ever been since mid-90s.

 

[Brainiac]

The Lucic crying thing is so stupid I won't even comment.

But please, don't compare regular season with playoffs, it's not the same game. The playoff pace is so fast there's no time for retaliation or dirty tricks. Other than the odd fight here and there (i.e Prust vs Dorsett) there's not much going on.

But here's the issue, YOU GOTTA THERE 1ST. Protection isn't a question, it's a must, the problem is who..

I think it's pretty safe to assume we're a playoffs team now. When was the last time one of our players got injured because a team played too tough against us?

 

[sandysan]

I think it's pretty safe to assume we're a playoffs team now. When was the last time one of our players got injured because a team played too tough against us?

rene bourque , who despite being so poorly suited to this type of thing, had to because our captain who was getting mandandled by colton orr is even less capable of self protection ?

if you like seeing our non fighters getting tuned, you probably wont have to wait long. after prust, the list gets pretty thin.

 

[Price is Wright]

Oh boy, now we're using the worse one as a reference now...

You guys watch sports like you play X-box, so yes I'll use the "beta male" reference. Hockey is WAY more than logic and systems. It's the intangibles, the same ones you only learn by playing the game, that separates the athletes from the people that analyse it.

You are correct. Hockey is more than logic and systems and it includes intangibles.

But intangibles is also a really big excuse people use to justify the unimportant elements of hockey they love. It's what justifies moves like Russ Courtnall for John Kordic.

I love it when a player gives his all for the game and when something like a hit can change the emotion of a team that was once down on itself to have motivation and energy in once tired legs. You can't gauge that on a chart. But you also can't make hockey decisions that rely on players to do that. Because sometimes that big hit just becomes a big hit, and your team just lost because you banked on a momentum shift instead of a goal scorer.

Intangibles is why Dale Weise is better to have than Raphael Diaz, but logic and systems is why you play Nathan Beaulieu over Doug Murray.

 

[Hoople]

Yet it's an argument that you and more here REALLY need to start grasping soon. You guys love to pick sequences on which having an enforcer didn't do much, but when we pick a different sequence, now all of a sudden it's luck, or player X doesn't get pushed around that easily or bla bla bla. None of the pro-enforcer supporters here have ever claimed that having an enforcer = 0 injuries, but just like tying your seatbelt, it helps.

This thread badly needs an overhaul IMO. It's not about having an enforcer, it's about finding the RIGHT GUY. I don't care about trading an asset to find him, instead of a 35 year old George Parros, we need a 25 year old Chris Niel or Jared Boll that can skate and jumps on anybody who even tries to injure one of our own.

Amen.

Best post on this thread(s)

 

[Hoople]

When the "bully" is almost crying in his post-game interview, I'd say there's not much to worry about. Lucic himself was pretty much beta last playoffs against us.

Look, I'm all for team toughness and yes, the Habs could use a little more physicality. But if it means playing 4 on 5 each time the 4th line is on, I'm out.

Anybody remembers how our 4th line was effective last playoffs? Right? Because there was no goon on that line.

Do you seriously believe the **** that you type?

Lucic "almost crying" means that he will not exact his "revenge" on Emelin or Weise?

Hell, Thornton was damn near in tears or even may have cried (who gives a **** what a player says or does when the cameras are rolling) after the Orpik incident and he still will kick player's ***** and still play on the edge of legal.

 

[Brainiac]

Do you seriously believe the **** that you type?

Lucic "almost crying" means that he will not exact his "revenge" on Emelin or Weise?

Hell, Thornton was damn near in tears or even may have cried (who gives a **** what a player says or does when the cameras are rolling) after the Orpik incident and he still will kick player's ***** and still play on the edge of legal.

Thornton isn't with the Bruins anymore...

 

[Brainiac]

rene bourque , who despite being so poorly suited to this type of thing, had to because our captain who was getting mandandled by colton orr is even less capable of self protection ?

if you like seeing our non fighters getting tuned, you probably wont have to wait long. after prust, the list gets pretty thin.

The only example you can come up with is Rene Bourque? Protecting a player who's not even on the team anymore.

Are we good now?

 

[sandysan]

The only example you can come up with is Rene Bourque? Protecting a player who's not even on the team anymore.

Are we good now?

Perhaps you might invest in some remedial reading classes at the local community college.

The question posed was when was the last time......., the answer is still Rene bourque. Sorry that it actually did happen so that your narrative of "it never happens" is exposed as false.

And we are sooooooo much better off with lions like PAP so that when the wolves come a Knockin, we can send out deharnais/gallagher/pap and plekanec to say "we have your back ".

 

[Hoople]

Thornton isn't with the Bruins anymore...

I like how the pacifists change the subject. I was talking about Thornton the player, not Thornton the Bruin who was traded to the Panthers.

Feel free to spin some more.

 

[Kriss E]

Perhaps you might invest in some remedial reading classes at the local community college.

The question posed was when was the last time......., the answer is still Rene bourque. Sorry that it actually did happen so that your narrative of "it never happens" is exposed as false.

And we are sooooooo much better off with lions like PAP so that when the wolves come a Knockin, we can send out deharnais/gallagher/pap and plekanec to say "we have your back ".

You realize the point of the game is to outscore your opponent right?
Are you suggesting you'd rather have Parros than PAP?

 

[Kriss E]

I like how the pacifists change the subject. I was talking about Thornton the player, not Thornton the Bruin who was traded to the Panthers.

Feel free to spin some more.

Not wanting a Parros type player =/= being a pacifist. You need to finally understand this.

Also, Thornton wasn't traded, he was let go and signed as a free agent.

 

[sandysan]

You realize the point of the game is to outscore your opponent right?
Are you suggesting you'd rather have Parros than PAP?

When you are done misrepresenting my position let me know.

We have what might be, again, the softest top 9 in the league. One that can be exploited physically. So if you want more aphysical forward's, we know where that road ends. I've been there, don't want to go back.

If we were nor tissue soft upfront me might not need a guy other than Prust to fight. But we are and if things go south, as they are inclined to do, we are going to see more Pyatt/Campbells and the chicken Littles will say, not so bad we ended up on the PP.

Mabey this year we can send in 2 non pugilists to get KTFO like tough guy Rene bourque. If we are lucky mabey one will be career derailing like komisawrecked. Hooray!

 

[Dominator13]

Parros didn't jump on Orr, PK jumped on Orr, the refs split them up, and then Orr skated back towards PK and Parros stepped in. There is zero proof that Orr was going to do some hurt PK. It's a wonder, how did PK manage to survive with Parros for 60ish games? How did he do it for the 3 previous years too.
Tinordi and Prust are not enforcers. Stop mixing everything up together.

Teams that are respected are the ones that are good. You think the NYI were respected last year? Yet they had Martin-Carkner-Boulton. Or the Oilers? With Gazdic-Fraser-Hendricks?

More respected? Yea, that's because we're better than we've ever been since mid-90s.

******* dude, you've turned from a class poster to the mother freackin king of excuses. There's no proof that Orr was going to hurt PK BECAUSE PARROS STEPPED IN!!!!

That's the exact same dude that knocked out Bourque and Gionta in 1 shift 2 years ago.

Who gives a rat's ass if Tinordi and Prust aren't enforcers??? The point is protection, which is what a typical enforcer does on a larger scale, the point was to show clear moments that 1) intimidation still exists and 2) even if we're not the 90's, the role still exists.

Let's get something straight, if Tinordi can drop them against the big boys, the point of this thread is moot, but until that happens, this team has a need, no matter how crappy the player is..

 

[habsfanatics*]

Same here.

Hence why (imo or imho) we need a ''POLICEMAN''.
Gotta protect Subban, Price, Gallagher,etc,etc....

A policeman will let our players play the game.

Lucic, Chara, Colton Orr, and other criminals on ice are still there...we need a policeman/goon/''tough guy'', whatever you're going to call him.




Bergevin better get one.

Lucic/Chara/Colton Orr will still be around whether we get a tough guy or not, well maybe not Colton Orr, but yeah. Having one guy in't going to stop Chara/Lucic from being Chara/Lucic, this idea is absurd.

 

[Kriss E]

******* dude, you've turned from a class poster to the mother freackin king of excuses. There's no proof that Orr was going to hurt PK BECAUSE PARROS STEPPED IN!!!!

Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean he's going to shoot you.
You think it's the only game that Orr played vs PK?? He's played some without Parros or any other enforcer around. Why didn't he sucker punch him the many other times they played against one another?

That's the exact same dude that knocked out Bourque and Gionta in 1 shift 2 years ago.

Who gives a rat's ass if Tinordi and Prust aren't enforcers??? The point is protection, which is what a typical enforcer does on a larger scale, the point was to show clear moments that 1) intimidation still exists and 2) even if we're not the 90's, the role still exists.

Who gives a rat's ass? Anybody that understands the modern day game. I need the guys that are going to ''protect'' the others to be good enough to handle over 10min of ice time.

Let's get something straight, if Tinordi can drop them against the big boys, the point of this thread is moot, but until that happens, this team has a need, no matter how crappy the player is..

There is a need for a big player that can swing'em and play 10-15min of ice time. There is no need for a player like Parros.

 

[Kriss E]

When you are done misrepresenting my position let me know.

I didn't misrepresent anything. Here's what you said:

And we are sooooooo much better off with lions like PAP so that when the wolves come a Knockin, we can send out deharnais/gallagher/pap and plekanec to say "we have your back ".

Adding an enforcer will change absolutely nothing to our top 9.

We have what might be, again, the softest top 9 in the league. One that can be exploited physically. So if you want more aphysical forward's, we know where that road ends. I've been there, don't want to go back.

If you're issue is with the top 9, then talk about improving the top 9. Bringing in a guy like Parros will do nothing to change any of this.

If we were nor tissue soft upfront me might not need a guy other than Prust to fight. But we are and if things go south, as they are inclined to do, we are going to see more Pyatt/Campbells and the chicken Littles will say, not so bad we ended up on the PP.

Did you ever notice that the Pyatt/Campbell and Ott-Mtl whooping happened after WE initiated it??

Mabey this year we can send in 2 non pugilists to get KTFO like tough guy Rene bourque. If we are lucky mabey one will be career derailing like komisawrecked. Hooray!

Or, you know, maybe nothing happens.

 

[Dominator13]

Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean he's going to shoot you.
You think it's the only game that Orr played vs PK?? He's played some without Parros or any other enforcer around. Why didn't he sucker punch him the many other times they played against one another?


Who gives a rat's ass? Anybody that understands the modern day game. I need the guys that are going to ''protect'' the others to be good enough to handle over 10min of ice time.


There is a need for a big player that can swing'em and play 10-15min of ice time. There is no need for a player like Parros.

I think sometimes we're pretty much arguing for the same things, except for me it a Jared Boll or Chris Niel type >> a George Parros or Colton Orr type >>> nothing.

 

[Kriss E]

I think sometimes we're pretty much arguing for the same things, except for me it a Jared Boll or Chris Niel type >> a George Parros or Colton Orr type >>> nothing.

Herein lies the problem.
You view it as Orr >>> nothing. I view it as Orr <<< one of Maholtra/Prust/Weise/Bournival.
Not only do we remove an effective player in order to put a terrible one in, but we also make him play for 5min so for 55 mean we're playing with 11 forwards. Not what I consider an advantage or smart strategy.

 

[Corncob]

Yet it's an argument that you and more here REALLY need to start grasping soon. You guys love to pick sequences on which having an enforcer didn't do much, but when we pick a different sequence, now all of a sudden it's luck, or player X doesn't get pushed around that easily or bla bla bla. None of the pro-enforcer supporters here have ever claimed that having an enforcer = 0 injuries, but just like tying your seatbelt, it helps.

This is your problem, in a nutshell. No-one is arguing that enforcers should prevent all injuries to be worthwhile. No-one is arguing that anyone has said they do. And like I said before if indeed "it helps" then I'm interested in the idea. But how much does it help? How many less injuries, on average, will the team suffer? Which enforcers are better than others at preventing injuries? Those are the questions I would want to find answers to. I can't, and you won't even try to answer them, because you can't either. But, if it was true, I should be able to see that effect in the stats, just like I can with the wearing of a seatbelt. The figures can't show that a specific accident would have been different if a person had been wearing a seatbelt when they weren't or hadn't been wearing a seatbelt when they were. But they show clearly that, in the long run, people wearing seatbelts suffer fewer and less serious injuries in an accident that people who don't. So I don't expect proof of what would have happened if Parros hasn't been playing when Orr decided to lip at Subban or if we would have had a goon sitting on the pench when Bourque decided to go for Orr. But there should be figures that show that, in the long run, teams with a goon playing suffer less injuries than teams without. And, just like any other part of the game, some goons should be better at preventing injuries than others, and that should show up too.

This thread badly needs an overhaul IMO. It's not about having an enforcer, it's about finding the RIGHT GUY. I don't care about trading an asset to find him, instead of a 35 year old George Parros, we need a 25 year old Chris Niel or Jared Boll that can skate and jumps on anybody who even tries to injure one of our own.

Problem is, in about a months time, you'll be the guy wanting to claim every single goon that gets put on waivers.