The Curious Case of Colton Orr

[namttebih]

Yes - because a screened shot from the point really shows that momentum exists.

How soon we forget that the Leafs had a breakaway with 3 minutes left in that game - I guess momentum stopped working during that time?

We were flat out dominated 5 on 6 that whole series. Call it "nerves" or whatever you want - the last 90 seconds of Game 7 was overdue from Games 5 and 6.

And that's the last I'll talk about "that game" for the next 20 years.

It wasn't that one goal that proves it, it was the 4 goals over 15 minutes or so that proves it. They controlled the game and yes our nerves and Boston's confidence changed the momentum of the game.

BTW breakaways usually occur when one team is getting dominated and one player breaks away. Bozak's patented short handed goals for example.

I totally agree with you, let's not talk about it anymore.






























But I'm right.

 

[Goonface2k14]

You've clearly made up your mind on this and will twist anything to suit your agenda. Not sure why I'm bothering but...

Having a player like Orr on your team is beneficial in times when guys are taking liberties against your star players or goaltenders. Cheap players like Kaleta, Ott, Downie, Rinaldo, Neil all require a counter-measure. Having a fearsome ogre like Orr in your lineup does make them think twice, lest they get fed.

I don't think you'll get any disagreement from me about the usefulness staged fights (which you apparently seem to think comprise 95% of all fights), but fighting has its place in this game to protect a team's most valuable players. It is as much a response as it is a deterrent. Instead of denouncing fights themselves, just think about a league where players don't have to answer for their cheap tactics. That's what you're pining for.

Cheap players like Kaleta should be policed by Shanahan, but that's an argument for another day.

I agree, there's a place for intimidation on the ice to deal with those who take liberties. I just think it doesn't have to come from a pure fighter with nothing else to offer. If you have no other options, sure, you put a goon in your lineup, I totally agree. I think Montreal did that with the acquisition of Parros. On the other hand, I found that the Leafs were ok in the intimidation department without Orr last season. Dion, Fraser and even Franson are big boys who will also answer the bell if need be. Not saying they need to be all out goons, that's ridiculous. But if some punk takes a run at Kessel, those guys will 100% answer the bell. This team is tight, it's not the team that had no reply for the cheap shot on Kaberle in NJ a few years back. And they won't need to do it every night all the time, so it's fine by me. Especially with Clarkson, Look what he did to get suspended lol. So since the leafs are ok in that department without Orr, IMO, they don't really need him. And the especially don't need him and McLaren. I'd rather they went with more skill, even if it's fourth line minutes. We're tough enough.

http://youtu.be/WxBx0nfRp9s

 

[The Legend]

Because they've said like 5689328962936290 different ****ing times in 628689346894673489678934689 different interviews that they do. Why do people continue to try to dispute this?

Players are good at playing hockey. They aren't necessarily good at analyzing the game. Why do people continue to try and dispute this? This is how we get horrible analysts on television, horrible coaches for our favourite teams, and - unfortunately - horrible general managers as well.

 

[Duke Silver]

Cheap players like Kaleta should be policed by Shanahan, but that's an argument for another day.

Shanahan's decisions come in the aftermath of an injury in most cases. The pro argument is that having fighters deters injuries in-game.

I agree, there's a place for intimidation on the ice to deal with those who take liberties. I just think it doesn't have to come from a pure fighter with nothing else to offer. If you have no other options, sure, you put a goon in your lineup, I totally agree. I think Montreal did that with the acquisition of Parros. On the other hand, I found that the Leafs were ok in the intimidation department without Orr last season. Dion, Fraser and even Franson are big boys who will also answer the bell if need be. Not saying they need to be all out goons, that's ridiculous. But if some punk takes a run at Kessel, those guys will 100% answer the bell. This team is tight, it's not the team that had no reply for the cheap shot on Kaberle in NJ a few years back. And they won't need to do it every night all the time, so it's fine by me. Especially with Clarkson, Look what he did to get suspended lol. So since the leafs are ok in that department without Orr, IMO, they don't really need him. And the especially don't need him and McLaren. I'd rather they went with more skill, even if it's fourth line minutes. We're tough enough.

Wouldn't you rather an expendable player like Orr made someone answer the bell, rather than have an average fighter like Dion or a total non-fighter like Franson out there risking injury or in the penalty box for 5-7 minutes? These guys are valuable pieces.

It's the same reason many teams don't like their star players out there on the penalty kill. The injury risk is great in those situations. These bottom line players are foot soldiers. They do the dirty work so the stars can get those high quality minutes.

You'll say we're tough enough until we play a team with a goon taking liberties on our players and nobody to neutralize him. At the moment, we're a shadow of the tough team we were last year. And teams can sense that.

 

[Goonface2k14]

Not that interesting. Players can get an adrenaline rush for a variety of reasons. A fight doesn't always pump up the team, but neither does scoring a goal (as you previously mentioned). If that were such a sure way of providing adrenaline then I wouldn't have witnessed so many games where goals were exchanged in just a few minutes apart from one another. If you try to look at this as a science and disregard the power of perception, then your argument will be flawed no matter how hard you try to argue. If you try to look at this as 2 evidence against fighting holds more weight than 2 evidence for fighting, your argument will be flawed no matter how hard you try to argue.

People try to dismiss the idea of momentum, benefits of fightings, etc. The world exists beyond numbers and formulas. If people don't think such things are real, then they should do some hard research on the placebo effect. Sometimes results are influenced/aided by intangible belief. It doesn't matter if any of us believe such things make a difference, if one, many or all players 'believe' that it can, then chances are it will. Not to get too philosophical but it's our perceptions that shape our realities. It's okay to say that fighting doesn't work for everyone, but to say that it doesn't work at all...anecdotal evidence would suggest that that simply isn't true.

You're missing my point.

I remember this like it was yesterday:

http://youtu.be/J8rCFe6VdPs

 

[BayStBullies]

It takes having someone to fight. Who the heck is gong-ho to fight Colton Orr?

 

[Muston Atthews]

Players are good at playing hockey. They aren't necessarily good at analyzing the game. Why do people continue to try and dispute this? This is how we get horrible analysts on television, horrible coaches for our favourite teams, and - unfortunately - horrible general managers as well.

When we are all assuming how a fight makes players feel, yes, I'd assume that they are VERY good at analyzing that part of the game.

 

[Larcos_Unal]

Its like teams have taken a page out of Detroit's book (preseason game). Dont give a fight to Leafs and they'll come out flat.

correct.

we need clarkson back in the lineup, he'll get the chirping started, which in turn will get Naz chirping, then it will hit the fan.

 

[Kyle Doobas*]

Players are good at playing hockey. They aren't necessarily good at analyzing the game. Why do people continue to try and dispute this?

Well obviously you're right that not all hockey players will provide great analysis, but we're talking about whether or not a player feels a 'spark' when one of their teammates fight, not their ability to objectively analyze a game.

 

[Goonface2k14]

Shanahan's decisions come in the aftermath of an injury in most cases. The pro argument is that having fighters deters injuries in-game.



Wouldn't you rather an expendable player like Orr made someone answer the bell, rather than have an average fighter like Dion or a total non-fighter like Franson out there risking injury or in the penalty box for 5-7 minutes? These guys are valuable pieces.

It's the same reason many teams don't like their star players out there on the penalty kill. The injury risk is great in those situations. These bottom line players are foot soldiers. They do the dirty work so the stars can get those high quality minutes.

You'll say we're tough enough until we play a team with a goon taking liberties on our players and nobody to neutralize him. At the moment, we're a shadow of the tough team we were last year. And teams can sense that.

You're acting as though opposing teams are constantly sending dirty goons over the boards against our top six and taking runs at them non stop. That's not hockey, that bush league. The John Scott incident was a once in a blue moon scenario. Same incidents with guys like Cooke and Kaleta. Everyone knows what they do. And believe me, Phaneuf, as much as people hate on him in the league, is as intimidating as it gets for most opposing players. He'll mess you up with a huge check and won't back down from anyone. Fraser can drop the mitts, so will Clarkson. Perhaps until those guys are back, you put Orr out there. Still, check the oppositions lineup, and if there's no Kaleta or Cooke or another known guy, perhaps you give the 5 mins of ice to Brodie or Leivo, who offer more skill.

 

[Ari91]

You're missing my point.

I remember this like it was yesterday:

http://youtu.be/J8rCFe6VdPs

If I missed your point then you might need to go back and make sure you had a point to begin with.

Posting another video is irrelevant. My point was that there is no formula for momentum/adrenaline. One guy not caring about fights unless it's in retaliation for something big doesn't necessarily apply to every single player across the league. You are arrogantly speaking on behalf of an entire league of professional players - a group that I will safely assume you aren't even a part of. It's reasonable for you to have an opinion and provide examples of players or others who agree with you. It's unreasonable for you to take it upon yourself to make generalized comments that actually fly in the face of anecdotal evidence provided by players of past and present.

If they found a way to police the game that allowed fighting to be eliminated, I wouldn't care. I'm not defending fighting in the game. I'm not even defending goons in the game. I'm defending the idea that a player who has experienced the league and supports fightings and having players like Orr around in the game shouldn't have his opinion dismissed just because some guy on the internet who has never experienced the NHL decides that fighting only works for him in a certain capacity.

 

[Goonface2k14]

If I missed your point then you might need to go back and make sure you had a point to begin with.

Posting another video is irrelevant. My point was that there is no formula for momentum/adrenaline. One guy not caring about fights unless it's in retaliation for something big doesn't necessarily apply to every single player across the league. You are arrogantly speaking on behalf of an entire league of professional players - a group that I will safely assume you aren't even a part of. It's reasonable for you to have an opinion and provide examples of players or others who agree with you. It's unreasonable for you to take it upon yourself to make generalized comments that actually fly in the face of anecdotal evidence provided by players of past and present.

If they found a way to police the game that allowed fighting to be eliminated, I wouldn't care. I'm not defending fighting in the game. I'm not even defending goons in the game. I'm defending the idea that a player who has experienced the league and supports fightings and having players like Orr around in the game shouldn't have his opinion dismissed just because some guy on the internet who has never experienced the NHL decides that fighting only works for him in a certain capacity.

The video has everything to do with my point. See who fought McSorley? The captain, the top sniper and heart and soul of the team, Wendel Clark. We now have Clarkson. Not as skilled as Wendel, but a million times more skilled than Orr. Won't back down from anyone. We don't need Orr to be some hired goon anymore. The skilled roster can handle themselves, and they're better off that way.

For sure most players support it - I don't disagree one bit. But they'll take a skilled tiger over a blind bear anyday.

 

[hockeygeek]

The video has everything to do with my point. See who fought McSorley? The captain, the top sniper and heart and soul of the team, Wendel Clark. We now have Clarkson. Not as skilled as Wendel, but a million times more skilled than Orr. Won't back down from anyone. We don't need Orr to be some hired goon anymore. The skilled roster can handle themselves, and they're better off that way.

For sure most players support it - I don't disagree one bit. But they'll take a skilled tiger over a blind bear anyday.

Why would you want your top guys risking injury in fights? Clarkson doesn't fight much. Certainly wont be dropping them with heavyweights. He's more like Darcy Tucker than Wendell Clark

 

[The Legend]

Why would you want your top guys risking injury in fights? Clarkson doesn't fight much. Certainly wont be dropping them with heavyweights. He's more like Darcy Tucker than Wendell Clark

No reason to have an enforcer at all then.

And it's wendel. Hate to be that guy - but he's one of our best ever.

 

[hockeygeek]

No reason to have an enforcer at all then.

And it's wendel. Hate to be that guy - but he's one of our best ever.

I already hate the unwillingness of our top guys to get dirty. I think they need protection

 

[Duke Silver]

You're acting as though opposing teams are constantly sending dirty goons over the boards against our top six and taking runs at them non stop. That's not hockey, that bush league. The John Scott incident was a once in a blue moon scenario. Same incidents with guys like Cooke and Kaleta. Everyone knows what they do. And believe me, Phaneuf, as much as people hate on him in the league, is as intimidating as it gets for most opposing players. He'll mess you up with a huge check and won't back down from anyone. Fraser can drop the mitts, so will Clarkson. Perhaps until those guys are back, you put Orr out there. Still, check the oppositions lineup, and if there's no Kaleta or Cooke or another known guy, perhaps you give the 5 mins of ice to Brodie or Leivo, who offer more skill.

And you continue to ignore the deterrence aspect of having designated fighters.

Contrary to your beliefs, giving Leivo 6 minutes a night is not optimal for his development. He's a top-6 forward in the making, he's not being put in a situation to succeed with fourth line minutes. That's a great way to ruin a player and waste valuable years of his development.

Also, it's Bodie. Keep up.

Phaneuf's not much of a fighter. He's a great open-ice hitter (although more hesitant in recent years to show that side of himself), but he wins as many as he loses and won't often be found fighting heavyweights. Having watched a lot of Clarkson's fights he does a lot of hugging. Plus, who knows how good Fraser will be at dropping the gloves after his injury. From my recollection, his fight in the Montreal game was nothing special.

Again, I still don't understand why you would want our top overall defenceman, a top-6 forward and our best penalty killing defenceman out fighting battles when Orr can do it better and allow them to stay in the game and away from injury risk.

Orr fills a role with this team whether you like it or not. You also give him less credit than he deserves. He finishes every hit and has improved his skating tremendously while cutting down on stupid minor penalties. While it's not necessary to dress both Orr and McLaren on a nightly basis, I bet you that every single player in the Leafs dressing room, to a man, feels more at ease when one of these guys are dressed for a game. And that's what matters most.

 

[Durrr]

I'll address your example. Wouldn't both sides in this war have that same feeling (if it exists)?

For sure, I never said it only helped 1 team. I'm just saying the feeling/experience exists. However, the experience CAN be momentum changing when a team mate wins the fight, while deflating the other team.

 

[Ari91]

The video has everything to do with my point. See who fought McSorley? The captain, the top sniper and heart and soul of the team, Wendel Clark. We now have Clarkson. Not as skilled as Wendel, but a million times more skilled than Orr. Won't back down from anyone. We don't need Orr to be some hired goon anymore. The skilled roster can handle themselves, and they're better off that way.

For sure most players support it - I don't disagree one bit. But they'll take a skilled tiger over a blind bear anyday.

I never once debated your preference of having skilled players who can fight. I argued the possibility of players gaining adrenaline/momentum from all sorts of situations - yes, and that includes physical confrontations on the ice, even if they are staged. Players often talk about how a fight or huge hit can get players into the game, even if the altercation isn't born purely from an emotionally heated moment.

You've already contradicted yourself here though. You had said:

They know what's really going on. All very routine, and not very inspiring, really.

Then you followed up with that player quote to support the bolded part of your statement. You made a blanket statement about how players feel about staged fighting. That is what my entire rebuttal was based on. Your personal feelings and a story from a former player doesn't give you the platform to make such a sweeping comment. Now you say:

For sure players support it.

Well that was the point I was trying to drive home to you. Players have expressed their support and appreciation for the Orrs and Browns in the league.Just because you don't like the roles they play doesn't mean you can make a reference to their roles being uninspiring to their teammates. According to players around the league, that simply isn't true.

I brought up the belief in adrenaline and momentum to rebuttal the blanket statement you made (and then tried to support with the anecdotal example). I'm not arguing what players would prefer if giving the choice, I'm arguing the possibility that they appreciate and do feed off of physical confrontations on the ice, even if they are staged. You need to be careful with what you're saying because you're contradicting yourself. First you said that players know what's going on and it isn't inspiring

 

[The Legend]

I never once debated your preference of having skilled players who can fight. I argued the possibility of players gaining adrenaline/momentum from all sorts of situations - yes, and that includes physical confrontations on the ice, even if they are staged. Players often talk about how a fight or huge hit can get players into the game, even if the altercation isn't born purely from an emotionally heated moment.

You've already contradicted yourself here though. You had said:



Then you followed up with that player quote to support the bolded part of your statement. You made a blanket statement about how players feel about staged fighting. That is what my entire rebuttal was based on. Your personal feelings and a story from a former player doesn't give you the platform to make such a sweeping comment. Now you say:



Well that was the point I was trying to drive home to you. Players have expressed their support and appreciation for the Orrs and Browns in the league.Just because you don't like the roles they play doesn't mean you can make a reference to their roles being uninspiring to their teammates. According to players around the league, that simply isn't true.

I brought up the belief in adrenaline and momentum to rebuttal the blanket statement you made (and then tried to support with the anecdotal example). I'm not arguing what players would prefer if giving the choice, I'm arguing the possibility that they appreciate and do feed off of physical confrontations on the ice, even if they are staged. You need to be careful with what you're saying because you're contradicting yourself. First you said that players know what's going on and it isn't inspiring

This thread is about Colton Orr's lack of fighting. Even for someone who thinks that fighting has some intangible effect on the instant performance of the team, surely you must acknowledge that if Orr isn't fighting his value is very low?

 

[My Sweet Shadow]

So a thread that started off as basically pondering whether Orr's playing through an injury has turned into a 5-page debate about whether watching a fight has a positive effect on the psychology of a player?

Screw Corsi/QoC, let's develop some advanced statistics using some sort of fighting-metrics. Figure out the exact timing and frequency of fights, as well as combination of fighters, that has the greatest positive impact on team output.

 

[Ari91]

This thread is about Colton Orr's lack of fighting. Even for someone who thinks that fighting has some intangible effect on the instant performance of the team, surely you must acknowledge that if Orr isn't fighting his value is very low?

Even for someone with over 2800 posts on this forum, surely can't be that ignorant to the ebb and flow of online discussion, right?

I know what this thread is about, I chose to respond to something specific. If you want to so badly stick to the original post and talk about Orr's value when he isn't fighting, then talk to someone who has said that Orr is a good player even when he isn't fighting...rather than waste your time trying to coax an answer out of me.

 

[Brewsky]

Just start swinging, stick to our guns, did you not see how Leafs manhandled the Canadians last year, that game epitomized bullying the opponents. The Bruins bullied their way to a Stanley Cup. It seems that in the past couple of games players have been able to run Bernier and get in his grill a little too much, can't wait for Fraser to come back to add some toughness.

 

[Quares27]

Sure why not? Or if you feel that puts Dion in jeopardy, perhaps Clarkson or Fraser could take him on?

The last thing I'd want is the team with less skill dictating the other team's lineup.... i.e. if Buffalo puts Scott out there, the Leafs should by no means feel obliged to counter with Orr. Let the Sabres have John "no skill" Scott skate around like a neanderthal looking for fights, while guys like Leivo skate circles around him and create scoring opportunities.

Did you not watch the preseason? ****ing hell

You're making some really bad points

 

[Goonface2k14]

Why would you want your top guys risking injury in fights? Clarkson doesn't fight much. Certainly wont be dropping them with heavyweights. He's more like Darcy Tucker than Wendell Clark

Having a heavyweight in your lineup to fight other heavyweights is what leads to 95% of the fights being staged. Two goon lines matched up against each other once or maybe twice a period, and regardless of circumstance, its just a matter of time before the two Neanderthals with no hockey skills drop the gloves. That’s the kind of fighting that needs to be eliminated from the game. It’s the two goons entertaining the crowd and keeping their job as an NHLer.

The fighting that still belongs in the game is the retaliations for cheap shots. Cheap shots are likely delivered by guys like Cooke and Kaleta, who I imagine Clarkson/Dion/Fraser would have no problem with. Again, John Scott’s attempted exhibition attack on Kessel was a rare occurrence, everyone knows he broke the code by going after Phil. If Scott wanted to exact revenge, he should’ve gone after Devane.

Having a pure goon in your lineup is a waste, because chances are he’s going to fight the other team’s heavyweight just for the sake of a fight. Woop-dee-doo. I say have a skilled player take those minutes instead. And it gives coaches more flexibility if any players on lines 1 to 3 are struggling that particular night. You can’t bump up Orr, but you can certainly bump up a guy like Leivo.

 

[Derrty]

Quitting the thread was the best thing I did yesterday