Confirmed with Link: Sestito signed for 1y 2-way @ $575k

[Son Goku]

I don't doubt that. The point of my post wasn't "I play hockey at a high-ish level and I don't like enforcers, so enforcers are stupid". My point was that what level of hockey you're at doesn't impact whether you like enforcers or not. I personally don't like enforcers. That's completely irrelevant from my hockey experience, it's just a personal preference. I don't think players are wrong for liking enforcers, I just don't like enforcers in hockey.

Again, I have nothing against enforcers as people. I don't doubt they're among the best locker room guys in hockey. However, I think enforcers are mostly obsolete at this point in the NHL and really serve no purpose in today's NHL.



I probably would be playing longer if I had the money to replace most of my equipment. A lot of my stuff is rusting and falling apart and I can't afford to replace it all, so I'm probably not going to play college hockey after this year. It sucks, playing D1 is so much fun. It's a ton better than amateurs, without a doubt.



RMU is a pretty big hockey school, I think they have like 4 or 5 teams. I know they have all 3 ACHA divisions filled and they have at least 1 NCAA team. They're definitely the biggest hockey school in Pittsburgh.

So you're saying there's a chance?

 

[Empoleon8771]

So I'll counter with this. You don't believe in enforcers, and I'll assume you're glad they're out of the game. Most of the guys like Cooke, Avery, Ott, etc are either out of the game too or are neutered. So, you got exactly what you wanted. IMO, a very boring game with low scoring, zero rivalries, and little intensity. All that's missing are group hugs after the games at center ice.

So, my question is, even if I exagerrated a bit on the current state of the game, it's more true than not true. Are you happy with it? Are you happy with the entertainment product currently on the ice every night? 2-1 games with 70 blocked shots?

And again, you're connecting 2 unrelated things. Players like Avery and Cooke being phased out and scoring being down are entirely unrelated things. You're acting like that goons being taken out of the game is somehow causing scoring to fall, which is downright nonsensical. I could at least listen to the deterrent for cheap shots side for enforcers, acting like they have any sort of impact on scoring is hilariously wrong.

 

[SEALBound]

I don't agree with you, but what I'll do is concede your point and instead counter with: that works pre instigator and all that, but nowadays, no "true great heavyweight enforcer" is going to be allowed to go after someone like Brandon Dubinsky.

The rules protect those guys.

I don't believe in enforcers but even if I were convinced of their importance and effect, the league has neutered them.

The only guy id want is the psychopath willing to take 30 game suspensions to go after a Dubinsky.

Agreed. Enforcers really only work when the player goes by the "code" and is willing to answer the bell. If you're Dubinsky, why should you?

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

So I'll counter with this. You don't believe in enforcers, and I'll assume you're glad they're out of the game. Most of the guys like Cooke, Avery, Ott, etc are either out of the game too or are neutered. So, you got exactly what you wanted. IMO, a very boring game with low scoring, zero rivalries, and little intensity. All that's missing are group hugs after the games at center ice.

So, my question is, even if I exagerrated a bit on the current state of the game, it's more true than not true. Are you happy with it? Are you happy with the entertainment product currently on the ice every night? 2-1 games with 70 blocked shots?

Thinking enforcers are not effective and thinking they are entertaining are not mutually exclusive.

I think enforcers "role" is the most overrated in sports, but I think a good emotional in the moment scrap (not that scripted ****) is great to watch.

 

[Hossa die Waldfee]

I apologize for coming across as a condescending ***** in my previous post. It was not my intention. A poorly thought-out post on my part.

Enforcers - I see them with a different perspective from many on HFBoards. Having met them, the vast majority came across as altruistic (not to say that most hockey players are). Entertained by what they provide on the ice to a great degree as well.

Do I think enforcers are an actual deterrent? No, and I have stated this before. I want them more so for the entertainment aspect and how teammates cherish their presence.

That's a good point. I'm not a fan of enforcers or believe they "spark" star players to produce more but I wouldn't mind one on our fourth line. But we could extremely limit his time because we have Sid and Geno who should take double shifts with the 4th line. Not every game obviously.
And even if it is 100% selfishness I would feel better if Dubinsky or Rinaldo would have to pay for their cheap shots. Feels like refs hardly call a instigator nowadays anyway.

And nice gesture to apologize. This board is a little hostile and overdramatic from time to time, but being civil on the internet is always nice

 

[billybudd]

Sestito won't be up so it doesn't matter, but it seems strange to me that he signed a contract with the Pittsburgh Penguins instead of another one with the WBS Penguins.

 

[Empoleon8771]

So you're saying there's a chance?

I have a friend on RMU's D3 team that played mostly A minor/A major his entire life. I think like 10 or 11 of my teammates from my last season in amateurs play for various college teams (played A major/AA). If you play at least A major, I'd be surprised if you wouldn't be able to make Pitt's D2 team or RMU's D2 or D3 teams.

 

[WayneSid9987]

A nothing contract for 1 yr.
Like someone said earlier, he's been doing well in WB.
Plus he deserves the money after this:



Hope he passes through waivers.

 

[Son Goku]

I have a friend on RMU's D3 team that played mostly A minor/A major his entire life. I think like 10 or 11 of my teammates from my last season in amateurs play for various college teams (played A major/AA). If you play at least A major, I'd be surprised if you wouldn't be able to make Pitt's D2 team or RMU's D2 or D3 teams.

That's a start. My main goal is to play division 1 but we have to start somewhere. I mean I'd love to play PAST division 1 but talent these days is ridiculous.

 

[StutzlesTapeJob]

It's really Cool to see some of the community backstories. Tommy Sest getting an ahl contract aside lol.

The pens do have a size and physical play deficiency buts it's not an enforcer thing imo. Tom sestito wouldn't stop the whole of the current caps team from putting us through the boards and finishing some borderline hits each time we've played recently. I don't think that can be "deterred".

It would be nice to have a few nhl quality players who play that kind of ass kicking game so it was less effective against us. Hartnell (from that rumor/conjecture a week or so back) would have been a start. But having a few guys on our roster who can cleanly and effectively knock people off their skates when playing the body would be a welcome change.

Fighting for better or worse is fading from the game. But dealing some good clean physical punishment will always be part of hockey.

When I played, opposing teams with a mix of skill and physicality were always the biggest challenge. You could get scrappy with pure skills teams, you could "not get sucked in" against the rugged ones. The teams that could light you up on the scoreboard and the ice required a really well played game to beat.

 

[IcedCapp]

I'm actually okay with fighting when it's spontaneous and emotional and not scripted and not a shift or five later.

I also would love a team that legally beat the **** out of opposing teams with clean hits shift after shift. I want a physical team. I want a tough, gritty team. I would love Despres and Bortuzzo/Engelland (in 6/7 roles). I loved Downie.

The problem is, this debate is being made between enforcer and no enforcer and which is the wrong argument, IMO. The team needs more toughness and physicality from top to bottom. I don't find enforcers to be the correct brand of tough.

 

[Penguinator]

Funk said it, no enforcers (unless against Philly?). We need a tough top 6 LW.

Meanwhile...
Where's Plotnikov? sigh... (potential 3rd wheel)

...and yeah, i get he can't play AHL and Sully loves Sheary/Porter but... [censored].

 

[Shady Machine]

So I'll counter with this. You don't believe in enforcers, and I'll assume you're glad they're out of the game. Most of the guys like Cooke, Avery, Ott, etc are either out of the game too or are neutered. So, you got exactly what you wanted. IMO, a very boring game with low scoring, zero rivalries, and little intensity. All that's missing are group hugs after the games at center ice.

So, my question is, even if I exagerrated a bit on the current state of the game, it's more true than not true. Are you happy with it? Are you happy with the entertainment product currently on the ice every night? 2-1 games with 70 blocked shots?

You didn't ask me but I will answer with my view. I currently am entertained, but would obviously prefer a higher scoring game. I don't think enforcers have anything to do with the game being lower scoring as compared to post lockout years. I don't want to go back to the high scoring 80's. I'll take post lockout.

I'm cool with tough, talented hockey players dropping the gloves here and there, but hate the obligatory fights when a guy clocks a player with a hard legal check (that does seem to be decreasing, but I don't have numbers to back it up).

I want the rules enforced and the league to look into smaller goalie equipment, possibly slightly larger nets. I don't know how you solve the shot blocking problem. Almost everyone coaches that way now. I suppose banning the protective shells on skates could be a start, but would only increase injuries in the short term, which never seems like a good thing.

 

[Penguinator]

I want the rules enforced and the league to look into smaller goalie equipment, possibly slightly larger nets. I don't know how you solve the shot blocking problem. Almost everyone coaches that way now. I suppose banning the protective shells on skates could be a start, but would only increase injuries in the short term, which never seems like a good thing.

Smaller goalie equipment? Yes
Bigger nets? No (i'd like that but it would never happen if only because it would screw up scoring & saving records)

As for shells, i can only see the trend going on, lighter/harder equipment.

They should really add some external soft padding on shoulder & arms to reduce injuries though. These things have become ****ing weapons.

 

[Shady Machine]

Smaller goalie equipment? Yes
Bigger nets? No (i'd like that but it would never happen if only because it would screw up scoring & saving records)

As for shells, i can only see the trend going on, lighter/harder equipment.

They should really add some external soft padding on shoulder & arms to reduce injuries though. These things have become ****ing weapons.

scoring & saving records are already completely out of reach due to many other factors. I don't even know that I want increased net sizes, but messing with the record books shouldn't really even register in the top 3 concerns IMO.

Agreed on the other points.

 

[Penguinator]

scoring & saving records are already completely out of reach due to many other factors. I don't even know that I want increased net sizes, but messing with the record books shouldn't really even register in the top 3 concerns IMO.

Agreed on the other points.

I get that but bigger nets is clearly cheating on records but then again... goalies got bigger, better.

Maybe goal posts that are slanted inwards? Hitting the goal posts would result in more goals. This i am 100% for.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I get that but bigger nets is clearly cheating on records but then again... goalies got bigger, better.

Maybe goal posts that are slanted inwards? Hitting the goal posts would result in more goals. This i am 100% for.

The goalposts being slanted in is definitely an interesting idea, but that would be a massive inconvenience on goalies and may even cause ankle injuries for them. Those would impair a goalie's ability to move side to side.

 

[Penguinator]

The goalposts being slanted in is definitely an interesting idea, but that would be a massive inconvenience on goalies and may even cause ankle injuries for them. Those would impair a goalie's ability to move side to side.

Massive? Not sure i'm following you here.

I guess you could shape the post getting slanty above a foot tall? (same at the base but gradually getting slantier)

 

[Empoleon8771]

Massive? Not sure i'm following you here.

I guess you could shape the post getting slanty above a foot tall? (same at the base but gradually getting slantier)

Not massive, but it would be inconvenient. Moving off the post would become difficult if the posts were slanted at an angle, you wouldn't have any flexibility with your pushing leg.

Like for example, if I wanted to go post to post, I'd have my push skate be more perpendicular to the goal line. If I wanted to go out to the top of the crease, my push skate would be at an angle. With a slanted goal post, you wouldn't be able to do that, you'd only have 1 angle your skates could be at.

A normal post at the bottom that changes into a slanted post would probably work though.

 

[xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

I still don't believe a goon/enforcer does a damn thing with regard to deterring guys like Rinaldo/Downie/Cooke/etc. from taking cheapshots at players. I will concede that having a goon/enforcer around might make guys feel more safe, but I still don't think that's worth the roster spot/cap space.

 

[Terrapin]

And again, you're connecting 2 unrelated things. Players like Avery and Cooke being phased out and scoring being down are entirely unrelated things. You're acting like that goons being taken out of the game is somehow causing scoring to fall, which is downright nonsensical. I could at least listen to the deterrent for cheap shots side for enforcers, acting like they have any sort of impact on scoring is hilariously wrong.

I find it hard to believe you don't see the correlation between enforcers and scoring (no offense).

Let me put it this way, which one of these units do you think gives up more goals, scoring chances, odd man breaks, etc?

Porter-Adams-Sheary
Lovejoy-Scuderi

or

Scott-Sill-Sestito
Mcquaid-Engelland

Now the answer is quite obvious, and naturally no team is going to have a 5 man unit like the 2nd one i listed. But, I'd wager the amount of goals the two units score are pretty similar. What I mean is, one unit provides absolutely nothing except trying not to give up a goal by any means necessary (shot blocking, clutching, grabbing, etc). The other group would provide even less, because they can't even do the defense effectively, but their presence is much more entertaining (for better or worse). When many teams had 4th lines with goons and agitators, the game was much more excitiing. They gave up more scoring chances, had big hits, etc. Nowadays the game is very bland. Instead of plugs that can only fight, we now have plugs that can only block shots and interfere. I just don't see how that's better.

The issue that I, and a few other posters here have is, there is zero middle ground with this team. We've seen the bland 4th line for years now, and guess what, we haven't won ****.

 

[Shady Machine]

Not massive, but it would be inconvenient. Moving off the post would become difficult if the posts were slanted at an angle, you wouldn't have any flexibility with your pushing leg.

Like for example, if I wanted to go post to post, I'd have my push skate be more perpendicular to the goal line. If I wanted to go out to the top of the crease, my push skate would be at an angle. With a slanted goal post, you wouldn't be able to do that, you'd only have 1 angle your skates could be at.

A normal post at the bottom that changes into a slanted post would probably work though.

Keep them the same for bottom 6 inches then slant them inwards? I don't know, just spit balling.

When I said increasing net size, which won't happen, I'm talking like an 2-3 inches wider and 1-2 taller so nothing extreme. I don't see how that messes with record books much more than larger equipment or other changes to the game.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I get that but bigger nets is clearly cheating on records but then again... goalies got bigger, better.

Maybe goal posts that are slanted inwards? Hitting the goal posts would result in more goals. This i am 100% for.

How is increasing the size of nets "cheating on records", yet all these other changes aren't? It's adjusting to the current game.

Look at the goalie wins record. Is including OT and shootout totals in a goalie's wins "cheating on records" because today's goalies benefit from something goalies of the past didn't have to pad their stats?

There's also the improvement of the sticks. Is it "cheating" that almost every player now can shoot the puck 100 mph because of the sticks, when in the past pretty much every player had to make due with weaker shots?

 

[Penguinator]

How is increasing the size of nets "cheating on records", yet all these other changes aren't? It's adjusting to the current game.

Look at the goalie wins record. Is including OT and shootout totals in a goalie's wins "cheating on records" because today's goalies benefit from something goalies of the past didn't have to pad their stats?

There's also the improvement of the sticks. Is it "cheating" that almost every player now can shoot the puck 100 mph because of the sticks, when in the past pretty much every player had to make due with weaker shots?

For the average Joe it would be though (clearly), of course the rest doesn't help (rules not being enforced, D systems etc.)

Just being realistic here about what conservative NHL would do.

p.s. Not sure goalies & by extension the NHLPA would agree to that either.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

For the average Joe it would be though (clearly), of course the rest doesn't help (rules not being enforced, D systems etc.)

Just being realistic here about what conservative NHL would do.

p.s. Not sure goalies & by extension the NHLPA would agree to that either.

What do you mean by the bolded? Who is "the average Joe"? Most of my non-hockey friends refuse to watch hockey BECAUSE of the lack of scoring. So I don't think they'd be the type who'd care if bigger nets were introduced if the end result is more offense.

Personally, I'm just tired of people having a big fit whenever the topic of increasing net sizes is raised, yet they're perfectly fine with goalies having equipment ten times the size of previous generations. It just makes logical sense that as the equipment grows and takes up more of the net even with the goalie standing still, then the net should be increased at the same rate so that there's still as much net to shoot at as in the past.