Great Fight Debate - II

[KrejciMVP]

And I just showed you that Marchand leads the league in PIMS because he has 20 minutes in misconduct penalties. His flag waving in the box, and his ridiculous mocking during the Nashville game. So it's of his own doing... Not because he's trying to fight.

was he off the ice for those 72 PIM min or not? That hurts the offense

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

It seems as though the last few seasons the Bruins have lost an insane amount of players due to injury. Does anyone think it MAY have something to do with how soft the team is built now?

No, because the team being "soft or tough" isn't stopping injuries from happening.

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

was he off the ice for those 72 PIM min or not? That hurts the offense

AND f***ING 20 OF THEM WERE FROM HIS OWN f***ING DOING. JESUS. f***ING. CHRIST.

What does any of this have to do with team toughness? Honestly... 10 minutes of the 72 were from fights.

 

[Sheppy]

He. Was. On. The. Ice. When. It. Happened.

Why does this fact falls on deaf ears?

This is really a no win situation. Marchand steps up? Complaints are made that the wrong guy stepped up for Grzelcyk. Marchand (hypothetically) doesn't step up? This place goes bonkers that no one steps up for Grzelcyk.

Marchand stepped up because he knew no one else would. I get wanting to go at the guy right away, but had the Bruins had anyone tougher, they would have went at Smith next shift and likely wouldn't get rag dolled. You could tell in Marchands body language that he didn't want to have to fight Smith.

Hell, Boro got away with a greasy elbow to a Bruins rookie who hasn't played since. Great team response to that one, too.

 

[Sheppy]

No, because the team being "soft or tough" isn't stopping injuries from happening.

I disagree to an extent. Do i think there would still be hard hits? Yeah, i do. Do i think they wouldn't be so frequent if the Bruins had a tougher team. Yeah, i do.

Do I think having a guy in the bottom 6 who's capable of playing nasty would take pressure off non-fighters like Krug, Marchand and Nordstrom? Yes, I do.

 

[LSCII]

Marchand stepped up because he knew no one else would. I get wanting to go at the guy right away, but had the Bruins had anyone tougher, they would have went at Smith next shift and likely wouldn't get rag dolled. You could tell in Marchands body language that he didn't want to have to fight Smith.

Hell, Boro got away with a greasy elbow to a Bruins rookie who hasn't played since. Great team response to that one, too.

It's better than waiting the 4 weeks for Kevan Miller to get healthy for a response, no?

 

[smithformeragent]

I'm all for revenge, to a point.

It still doesn't change the fact that revenge doesn't nullify the original act. Nor does it prevent it.

Does the threat of retribution act as a deterrent?

 

[Sheppy]

It's better than waiting the 4 weeks for Kevan Miller to get healthy for a response, no?

Honestly, I'm not so sure it is. Marchand got rag dolled and Smith was smiling in the penalty box.

Like I said, if i walked into Boston, laid out Bergeron and I had to scrap Marchand, I'd be licking my lips.

1. I get to fight a known shit head.
2. He can't fight
3. I take one of the best wingers in hockey off the ice for 5 minutes
4. Lets do it again!

 

[Therick67]

When you know the other team isn't going to respond, or doesn't have the ability to match your physicality, are you more likely to hit them - or less likely?

Seems easy enough to figure out to me..

It's better to be the hammer.

 

[Therick67]

It's better than waiting the 4 weeks for Kevan Miller to get healthy for a response, no?

He's going to be busy when he finally gets back in the lineup.

 

[Over the volcano]

Team needs a Chara and/or Kevan Miller type player.

He's going to be busy when he finally gets back in the lineup.

He won’t find a lot of takers

 

[Therick67]

Team needs a Chara and/or Kevan Miller type player.



He won’t find a lot of takers

Great. Team looks much better with someone who's physical and has the ability to drop the gloves if needed.

 

[Sheppy]

Team needs a Chara and/or Kevan Miller type player.



He won’t find a lot of takers

Miller is a good physical d-man, and a pretty decent fighter. I love the style he plays, especially the game he had against the Habs a few games back.

 

[LSCII]

Miller is a good physical d-man, and a pretty decent fighter. I love the style he plays, especially the game he had against the Habs a few games back.

What does it matter if he can't stay on the ice? Dude has never played more than 71 games in a season, and really his average for games played isn't even close to 70.

 

[Sheppy]

What does it matter if he can't stay on the ice? Dude has never played more than 71 games in a season, and really his average for games played isn't even close to 70.

That’s also another issue. I don’t disagree. He brings a physical element to this team which is severely lacking.

The Bruins are lacking physicality, especially with him out of the lineup.

Again, this team can’t stay healthy during the regular season, what the hell are they going to do in April? This team will get speedbagged physically and probably murked within one playoff round.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

It seems as though the last few seasons the Bruins have lost an insane amount of players due to injury. Does anyone think it MAY have something to do with how soft the team is built now?

Nope

 

[Sheppy]

Nope

I disagree.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

I disagree.

They are two completely different issues.

 

[Dr Quincy]

I mean tough like the 2011 BRUINS

Was that why they won? Or was it because they had 3 lines that could score, a game-altering #1 D and a goalie who played as well for 2 months as anyone in history ever has.

Yes they were a tough team in 2011. But there have been tough teams that have won and tough teams that have lost. Tough teams that finished 1st and tough teams that have finished last. Tough teams that have choked in the playoffs and ones that won it all.

This tells me that "toughness" doesn't have a ton of effect ultimately on winning. I mean, if you look at other things- scoring for instance, it has a much stronger correlation to winning. You won't find teams at the bottom of the standings that are near the top in scoring. Same with goaltender save %.

Does it hurt to have toughness? Of course not. Can it help? Sure maybe a bit. Is it why that team won? No. Is it why this team isn't doing well at the moment? No.

But we don't get 100 pages on adding secondary scoring.

 

[Dr Quincy]

I'm all for revenge, to a point.

It still doesn't change the fact that revenge doesn't nullify the original act. Nor does it prevent it.

Because it makes some people "feel better" if they see an offender get pounded. Hell, I wanted Randy Jones pounded too. But other than having that feeling satiated, it wouldn't bring the injured player back, or stop the next one from getting hurt.

 

[Dr Quincy]

I disagree.

Do you have numbers to show that they have lost more man games than the average team? Have you looked at those injuries to see which have happened in practice or in accidents or what not?

I mean, it's fine to "feel" things, but isn't it better to actually look at it and see?

 

[Sheppy]

Was that why they won? Or was it because they had 3 lines that could score, a game-altering #1 D and a goalie who played as well for 2 months as anyone in history ever has.

Yes they were a tough team in 2011. But there have been tough teams that have won and tough teams that have lost. Tough teams that finished 1st and tough teams that have finished last. Tough teams that have choked in the playoffs and ones that won it all.

This tells me that "toughness" doesn't have a ton of effect ultimately on winning. I mean, if you look at other things- scoring for instance, it has a much stronger correlation to winning. You won't find teams at the bottom of the standings that are near the top in scoring. Same with goaltender save %.

Does it hurt to have toughness? Of course not. Can it help? Sure maybe a bit. Is it why that team won? No. Is it why this team isn't doing well at the moment? No.

But we don't get 100 pages on adding secondary scoring.

Because maybe, just maybe the pro-toughness has some ground to stand on. I mean, the Bruins are CONTINUALLY getting pushed around. I don't get how that's debatable, honestly. Teams are walking all over this Bruins team. You had a team like Detroit trying to goad Marchand into fights, you had their tough guy take a run at Krejci, and the response was Nordstrom dropping his gloves for like the 3rd/4th time in his career. That believe it or not... can be considered an issue with the makeup of this current team. Is it the be all end all? Probably not, but it's an issue no matter how much you try to downplay it.

Do I think secondary scoring is the biggest issue? Absolutely. I've said this the entire time. The team has very little depth from the second line down, that's for sure. I hope it gets addressed soon because I'm not sure guys like Bjork/Heinen are going to produce this year at a high level. If you can get a capable 25-30 goal winger to slot into the other side of Krejci and move Heinen down to the third line or whatever, I hope they do it. I also hope they add someone in the bottom 6 with some size and some muscle that isn't a twerp who can play a physical game, drop the gloves if needed and produce 10-15 goals.

 

[Sheppy]

Do you have numbers to show that they have lost more man games than the average team? Have you looked at those injuries to see which have happened in practice or in accidents or what not?

I mean, it's fine to "feel" things, but isn't it better to actually look at it and see?

Urho Vaakanainen was injured with a greasy elbow from Borowiecki, he hasn't played since October 23rd, it's now December 3rd. The hit went without a response from anyone on the Bruins.

Patrice Bergeron was injured with a bit of a questionable play from Radek Faska, he's out for 4 more weeks. People have questioned the hit, but something tells me that if Patrice Bergeron spends the rest of the game going at Faska, he must have felt the hit was a bit greasy.

David Backes missed games this year with a concussion from a high hit, and had a bad one in the playoffs last year that you can make the argument it really set him back.

Charlie McAvoy was getting hit hard earlier this year, suffered a pretty bad concussion. Hasn't played in months.

Zboril got hit high in the pre-season by Hathaway that went without a response. I believe he suffered a concussion too.

That's just off the top of my head.

 

[Sheppy]

I believe the Bruins have 96 man games lost right now, and that number will increase until Miller, Bergeron and Chara are back. Of those 96 man games lost, they've been to our most important players, so it's not like Joe Blow on the 4th line is missing significant time. It's legitimately our top players.

As of right now they're 5th in the league in terms of man games lost, and expect them to be probably top 2-3 by the time January rolls around.

Last year the Bruins came in 8th with a total of 307 man games lost.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

Urho Vaakanainen was injured with a greasy elbow from Borowiecki, he hasn't played since October 23rd, it's now December 3rd. The hit went without a response from anyone on the Bruins.

Patrice Bergeron was injured with a bit of a questionable play from Radek Faska, he's out for 4 more weeks. People have questioned the hit, but something tells me that if Patrice Bergeron spends the rest of the game going at Faska, he must have felt the hit was a bit greasy.

David Backes missed games this year with a concussion from a high hit, and had a bad one in the playoffs last year that you can make the argument it really set him back.

Charlie McAvoy was getting hit hard earlier this year, suffered a pretty bad concussion. Hasn't played in months.

Zboril got hit high in the pre-season by Hathaway that went without a response. I believe he suffered a concussion too.

That's just off the top of my head.

To @Dr Quincy 's point, Savard was hit (also with no response, unless you count Thornton waiting until the next Pens game) while the team was loaded with what you would call "tough guys" (including Thornton who was an enforcer). How did this prevent Savard from getting injured? Did Thornton fighting Cooke that next game bring Savard back any sooner? But since this is an issue only for this year's soft team, how did this stuff continually happen even when the team was tougher and harder to play against?