This is Anton Lander. He's an important part of the future because of a strong 2-way game. Oiler fans get their chance to see Lander this week at the prospect camp. The marquee names are Taylor Hall, Magnus Pääjärvi-Svensson, Jordan Eberle. The secondary group includes Lander, Tyler Pitlick, Chris Vande Velde and Teemu Hartikainen.
The entire list exposes one strength and one problem: Edmonton's future up front is very bright, but their list of defensemen lacks a top drawer talent. Among the blue, fans will be watching closely: Martin Marincin, Jeff Petry and Troy Hesketh (who was supposedly injured but is on the prospect list). Olivier Roy is the clear top goalie prospect on the list. The best sources for information today and this week will be Coming Down the Pipe and Bruce McCurdy over at C&B.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHopefully Vande Velde shows he's legit and Marincin can skate with the rest of these guys.
ReplyDeleteIt's the depth guys that could make me the happiest.
they do need a top flight d-man don't they? i believe that's what they were trying to do at this year's draft when Gormley and Fowler were still availible.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletethey really DO need to draft a star defenceman though. hopefully next draft? maybe Petry can be that star d-man. he and Plante are about the only chance we have for a star back there.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at teams that have won the cup in the last couple years, they all have 2-3 dominant Centers, and mobile defenseman. The long range forecast for the Oilers, who are these Centers ? right now they have 0. As for defence Edmonton has some work to do. I would trade any of our centers for Martin Hanzal.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the deal with Omark? I thought he was coming over this year.
ReplyDeleteThe pipeline guy Guy was saying that the prospects camp is a bit boring from a fans point of view, with lots of power skating and cross over drills.The only thing half decent was the 3v3 on Friday
ReplyDeleteno love for this Blaine kid? I wonder what Bill Dandy's record is like, has he found diamonds in the rough before?
ReplyDeleteBlogger's goofy again.
ReplyDeleteAnton Lander is an exciting prospect because of his leadership skillset and tendency to play "clutch" hockey. Hopefully he comes over next year and shows his stuff to the Barons.
ReplyDeleteunless Petry is it, the Oilers probably won't have a top flight d-man anytime soon, unless you consider Whitney to be one?
ReplyDeleteWhat's the deal with Omark? I thought he was coming over this year.
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers have judged his pro experience too extensive for the prospect camp.
I'd be combing the college free agents if I were Tambellini.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of getting a D, I guess you hope that enough of the forwards come through that you can then swap for a D that will be closer to the show. Plus they are likely to get a lottery pick again this year and at some point the BPA is going to be a Dman so it could be next year. In the meantime it would be nice if somebody from the current group overachieves, Plante, Petry, somebody, anybody.
ReplyDeleteI suppose next summer they would offer sheet Doughty for like 8 mill a season for 12 seasons or something crazy like that and then we would have our top tier defenseman.
ReplyDeleteThat sheet would be matched.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the Oil should offer Souray to the Isles for Kabanov.
ReplyDeleteEverybody wins.
That sheet would be matched.
ReplyDeleteSo there's no cost!
Before we can see an offer sheet matched you have to see what their cap situation is next season. If somehow they still end up signing kovalchuk they might be in tough for the cap. Then there is the possibility they they won't be able to match a significant offer sheet. This all best case situation for us of course and highly unlikely.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to seeing how Lander, Vande Velde and Hartikainen do. I've seen enough of the Hall, MPS, Eberle group to fill in the holes we don't have enough math for. It's those centers that are going to be the most interesting for me.
ReplyDeleteBG - Hartikainen is not a center. He's a wing.
ReplyDeleteJDD and JFJ file for arbitration.
ReplyDeleteA situation to laugh about.
The 1st could be punted solely for that, and the 2nd, I don't know how he could possibly be given reason. He just sucked so bad this year.
Looks like theyr terribly unaware of theyr situation
JDD probably figures he might as well get a contract that pays well—he keeps that wherever he ends up.
ReplyDeleteAs to the recent suggestion that Cogliano is going to be the 3rd line center........is there a stats guy that has recently concluded, and moreover convinced the Oilers that winning face-offs is completely and utterly irrelevant?
ReplyDeleteIf not why are we starting the season with 3 guys in the 40's for a face-off percentage-- Cogliano, Gagner and Colin Fraser? And it's unclear if Horcoff's shoulder will allow him to take a large number of draws.
Would you make this trade?
ReplyDeleteSam Gagner for Martin Hanzal.
Would Phoenix consider it.
I'm trying to read between the lines but it looks to me that management is more than happy to start the year with all of Hall, Eberle, and MPS in the lineup.
ReplyDeleteIf so, they're isn't a lot of room left in the active roster, which means no more veteran signings. If that's the case, I think it's unfortunate. I'd like to see one more veteran who could anchor a minimally decent 3rd line.
(This is assuming both Souray and Cogs are back, which is unsure to say the least.)
Anyway, with the lineup we have, if injuries hit at all, and if the kids aren't all great instantly -which is probable- and if goal is as shaky as we think, this is a lottery pick team again.
If they stay healthy, and the kids are way better than reasonable expectations suggest, and goal is okay, we can fight for a playoff spot.
I'd rather compete for a playoff spot this year, and that would be aided greatly by one more veteran.
I think Gagner for Hanzal is selling Gagner short. i'd do Cogliano + for Hanzal but PHX probably doesn't do that. Oh and Stone signs with CGY, 1yr 500k.
ReplyDeleteI like Hanzal size and face-off ability as well as being a 2-way player. Sam G. may score more points but I would take Hanzal straight up.
ReplyDeletePhoenix doesn't need Gagner, they have the (supposedly, on draft day at least) bigger, more skilled version in Kyle Turris. I wonder if he makes the team this year.
ReplyDeleteGagner isn't a player EDM trades imo. He's tracking well and should be a big part of the future.
ReplyDeleteI'm seeing shades of GlenX again with the Stone signing. I guess he was on the fringe of the roster, but his numbers (when healthy last year) seem to say we could've done worse than to sign him for 1 yr @ $500k. We better sign Dawes now as a counter-jinx.
ReplyDeleteWilliam - There was talk that Stone hasn't recovered - and may not recover any time soon - from his knee surgery.
ReplyDeleteSounds risky. Can't blame them for letting him walk.
Stone has hands of Stone. Don't worry about losing him (imho). Jones is the player that I think could suprise people. A physical player with enough skill to pop in 20 goals.
ReplyDeleteI'm not really broken up about it. His skating was always a concern and I agree about the risk of the knee. That said, he understood his role & skillset and used them effectively. I still think he (and guys like Pouliot & Potulny) would have been a better bet @ low $ and short term than some of the other guys who got contracts (MacIntyre, JFJ, Struds). I just hope he doesn't become like all the other guys we let go over the past few years who suddenly develop Gretzky hands whenever they play us.
ReplyDeleteCalgary is pretty hard up against the cap. Without moving out salary, they can't afford much more than league minimum to finish their roster.
ReplyDeleteLT - didja delete a buncha comments from the previous post or did Blogger 'disappear' them?
ReplyDeleteI hope Tambi has the phone ready once the Habs release David Fisher.
ReplyDeleteStory here: http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=326757
Good D-man for the system. 22 years, 6'4", 206lbs. Former 1st round draft pick.
Deano: Blogger has been a problem all day. Nothing deleted, just the usual madness.
ReplyDelete...ummm - usually it 'catches up' and the counts match (I suspect the 'lost' posts were just delayed, but you would have to cross-check against the e-mails to confirm this).
ReplyDeleteToday was the first time I've seen the counts inside the comments higher than the ones outside.
This madness is actually unusual.
Evidence that they are trying something else. It seems to be worse, but it appears to be something else.
Deano - Do you know if this happens elsewhere? I've been meaning to look into it myself to try to save LT some headache but haven't got around to it yet. It seems like a problem that should be fixable.
ReplyDeleteThen again, I still get "Too many Tweets!" pages sometimes. Which is ridiculous.
i've been watching a lot of probert video lately. the part that amazes me, is that when he's in the middle of a huge fight, you always see Yzerman on the ice or some other star. what i wouldn't give for penner to get inspired by a few of those clips.
ReplyDeleteRibs - I am assuming that you mean 'elsewhere' on Blogger.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a blog, but there are lots of other bloggers complaining of similar symptoms in the help forums. (There does not seem to be a way to contact tech-support directly)
Looks like a capacity problem and may not even be related to how busy Lowetide is, but how busy all of Blogger is.
No thanks on David Fischer...his development stalled after his draft year and he really struggled last season. Didn't even play top minutes as a senior on his team.
ReplyDeleteWilliam, Stone is no where near Glencross in teams of talent of potential, but there's a slight chance your words will ring true.
ReplyDeleteCalgary Flames sign Stone. Sutter sure likes rehashes and signing ex-Oilers =).
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=326787
I'll also add that I would vastly have preferred signing Stone over MacIntyre for the 4th line.
ReplyDeleteMacIntyre is better on the 4th than Stone simply because his presence gives players on the bench more confidence that they won't be mauled out there. Stone had some flash, but too much time spent on the IR. Quinn really blew it when he didn't use Big Mac properly and told Tambi to send him down. He's not there to score pretty goals; he's there so that the other players feel confident enough to make those goals happen. Who knows if someone like O'Sullivan would have been more involved in the play had there been a Big Mac deterrent. Sports psychology is a tricky business, and the Oilers last year tossed it out the window, and it showed on the ice.
ReplyDeleteNo thanks on David Fischer...his development stalled after his draft year and he really struggled last season. Didn't even play top minutes as a senior on his team.
ReplyDeleteI'd still give him a shot on the Barons. We need more D-man prospects. Maybe it's not a declining skills issue and more of a prospect lost in the system issue. We need to take a chance or two on guys like this to build up the farm.
magisterrex I fail to see how a goon who can't do anything but get into fights prevents injuries of any kind.
ReplyDeleteIf that was the case Cooke, Ruutu et al would never be able to hurt anyone because a knuckle dragger would be able to intimidate them into compliance right? Just like Lucic being able to fight really well stopped Savard getting hurt.
Having tough players that can play physical and contribute to the game is one thing, having a guy that simply fights for a living but nothing else is useless on a hockey team. Especially since the opposing players never even have to drop the gloves.
magisterrex I fail to see how a goon who can't do anything but get into fights prevents injuries of any kind.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't really matter whether or not YOU fail to see Big Mac's value. It only matters if the smaller players on the team see it. They'll play "bigger", as will the middle-weights. It also frees up Stortini to be an agitator, which he does quite well, rather than an enforcer, which he's not so good at.
We'll see the proof in the pudding this year.
Ask any teammate of Boogaards if they'd rather play with him or against him and you'll have your answer to whether goons are useless or not.
ReplyDeleteAsk any teammate of Boogaards if they'd rather play with him or against him and you'll have your answer to whether goons are useless or not.
ReplyDeleteBeing unpleasant to play against is not the same thing as helping win hockey games, or Mathew Barnaby would be in the Hall of Fame.
We'll see the proof in the pudding this year.
ReplyDeleteI think that's a dubious comment, since a healthy Hemsky, jettisoning of dead weight and tweeners, the improvement in the calibre of players brought in, and the movement towards more balance on the team is as close to a guarantee as you can ever get to an improvement.
The team will do better in the upcoming season, and it will have nothing to do with SMac.
I don't think smaller players go out onto the ice with less trepidation if an enforcer is on the 4th line getting 5 minutes of ice time where he's completely outplayed by the opposition. Especially since the guy running them has no obligation to fight said heavyweight.
MacIntyre isn't the same as a Domi, Probert, Simon etc. All of those guys were incredibly physical, combative, and were able to take a regular shift. SMac cannot take a regular shift.
If you were right every team in the NHL would have a SMac type.
I understand the point you're making and you're entitled to your opinion. I don't agree with it, and I see no logic or proof that supports it, but that's once again just my own opinion.
Here's hoping we all see a much better effort from the Oilers in October onwards. I miss the lovable 'losers' that were always coming up just short from the early 2000's but were never short on try =).
We have seen on countless occaisions that the Oilers have been easily pushed around and remember the liberties that were taken against Hemsky.If our tough guys presence allows our skilled players to play then that is what I want to see.
ReplyDeleteI would be very happy if in the early divisional games we saw Big Mac go mental against the first guy to cheap shot an Oiler and every game for the first 10 games or so.
If our tough guys presence allows our skilled players to play then that is what I want to see.
ReplyDeleteThat's a fair statement; I just haven't seen any evidence that dressing goons has that effect, especially since the heavyweights (guys like MacIntyre whose sole purpose is fighting) tend to only fight other heavyweights, who aren't usually the ones taking liberties with Hemsky.
(Though I admit that I'd enjoy a MacIntyre-Cooke tilt.)
Deano - Heh, so it's kinda like the tweets thing then. You'd think giant companies like these would have this stuff figured out.
ReplyDeleteah, the magic forcefield protection that enforcers somehow emanate. Of course, somehow Gaborik's anti-magic shell somehow negated Boogard's forcefield protection when Gaborik kept on getting injured...
ReplyDeleteAsk any teammate of Boogaards if they'd rather play with him or against him and you'll have your answer to whether goons are useless or not.
ReplyDeleteJust don't ask the guys that he's keeping out of the show or his lucky linemates.
LeBrun reporting (via Twitter) the Oil was one of three teams in on Rob Niedermayer. He chose Buffalo (1-yr, 1-mil) over Pittsburgh and Edmonton.
ReplyDeleteGlad Tambellini was doing his best, but it's a shame we got "snubbed" by yet another "big ticket" free agent. Maybe the braintrust and Cousin Strudwick should have brought a DVD to the Niedermayer Ranch...
From all indications thus far, the Oilers don't intend to dress SMac every night. After signing MacIntyre, Mr. Dithers, er, ST said something to the effect the Oilers want a lineup flexible enough to match whatever the opposition ices. Clearly, if the opposition has a big fighter like SMac, he'll be in the lineup. Other nights (probably most nights), MacIntyre will be in the PB. From that perspective, I have no problem with signing MacIntyre. Don't forget that dressing MacIntyre occasionally opens up double-shifting Hemsky (or whoever is hot).
ReplyDeleteClearly, if the opposition has a big fighter like SMac, he'll be in the lineup.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't that just give the other team's big fighter something to do?
Missing on Neidermayer is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteHis RelCor was one of the worst in the league.
He was down around enforcers and thecaptainethanmoreau, and JFJ.
He played 2nd toughs with the dregs and got killed.
He was a good player, but I don't think he helps anymore in a tougher minute capacity.
That spot is still open though, hope it gets filled.
I think Poo would have been perfect as that part of his game was coming around.
Don't know if he wanted to do it, or be an Oiler anymore though.
Steve,
ReplyDeleteI think enforcers are useless since they only fight other enforcers.
Goons on the other hand can be very handy.
If Smac goons the first guy who works over one of the kids, I'll be happy.
Word gets around.
While I don't think much of enforcers' role in the NHL anymore, I do think there is value in a goon who can protect the kids and send a message to anyone messing with them. If the Oilers are willing to accept the instigating penalty etc., which I certainly would if someone was messing with the kids.
ReplyDeleteIf the Oilers are willing to accept the instigating penalty etc., which I certainly would if someone was messing with the kids.
ReplyDelete"Don't mess with our kids or we'll give you a power play!"
I'm willing to be swayed on this with statistical evidence, but these arguments seem intuitively ludicrous to me.
"Ask any teammate of Boogaards if they'd rather play with him or against him and you'll have your answer to whether goons are useless or not."
ReplyDeleteI'd much rather play against Boogaard. I bet I could score in an NHL game if he were the only guy in my way. The guy can't skate. One of these days a smaller guy is going to get smart and pop him in the mouth with either an elbow or a helmet. It's a dirty trick, but he deserves it. He's not a hockey player.
This is a little bit off the current topic but I thought I'd put it out there for opinion.... As far as acquiring an additional veteran centre, what about Eric Belanger? I haven't seen any chatter here regarding signing him. Any information on whether Tambellini has looked at him?
ReplyDeleteWG:
ReplyDeleteGood to know. I figured it was a character/leadership signing anyway.
What's the math say about Madden or Belanger? I figure they're likely the next targets on Tambi's list.
Goons are useless as long as the instigator rule exists.
ReplyDeleteTheir only skill is punching people in the face, and if they can only punch people in the face with signed forms in triplicate, they're useless as a deterrent. The whole point of the goon protecting the star is that the other guy maybe doesn't necessarily agree to getting punched in the face. You know, just a thought.
Doesn't that just give the other
ReplyDeleteteam's big fighter something to do?
If you assume every fight is a draw, and that there's no emotion in the sport, then sure. Last I checked though...
Nice job ignoring the part about double-shifting a skilled forward.
Don't forget that dressing MacIntyre occasionally opens up double-shifting Hemsky (or whoever is hot).
ReplyDeleteRod, the double shifting comment makes no sense. Dressing someone who can actually play NHL level hockey and contribute to the game instead of SMac allows you to use that person. It does not stop you from double shifting Hemsky or anyone else if you so choose.
Basically dressing someone like SMac limits your options by forcing you to double shift other players, even if you don't want to (hurt, tired etc.).
The Oilers don't need SMac to play hockey at a high level or even play every game. If they ever make the playoffs again with him around he likely won't even dress.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there is a reason that these type of players are called enforcers. When games are not quite as critical (such as regular season games that get rough or out of hand on the scoreboard), the tough guys earn their money.
A significant instance of Georges Laraque's nuclear deterrent status was in the 2006 playoff round with San Jose in Game #5. When trailing in the third period, the Sharks started running the Oilers all over the ice and racking up penalties.
MacT sent Georges out to play on back to back power plays to close out the game and the Sharks turned fins up and peed themselves. The headhunting of the Sharks ended abruptly and they lost interest in any physical encounters. Laraque even bumped the Shark goalie and nobody laid a glove on him.
It is true that having an enforcer like SMac on the bench won't factor into Regher's decision to rub Hemsky into the boards, but to say that having a gorilla line up beside you for a face off in the final minutes of a nasty game with a division rival doesn't have some merit shows that you may have led a sheltered life.
With all of the intelligent mathamatical analysis done on this site and others, we often undervalue the importance of emotion in the game. Fear is a crippling emotion, and freedom from fear can lead to the confidence to perform better.
ReplyDeleteMost people remember the famous Dave Brown clip where he taunts Tim Hunter from the bench in a BOA game; "Hey Timmy, you got those f*%* cemented on or what?" What may be overlooked from that is that Tim Hunter was hassling Craig Simpson first. Then Brown stepped in front of Simpson and changed the tone of the conversation. Hunter was as willing a tough guy as there was back then, but it was a lot easier to bully Simpson than Brown, not to mention safer.
Ideally you would want a guy like Probert who could contribute and knock guys out, but those guys are few and far between. The Oilers had that to an extent in Souray, and it cost them dearly when his fights turned into games lost from injury. If SMac goes down with a busted knuckly or jaw, it's not a gaping hole in your line-up.
The thing people forget about the best tough guys is that the best ones can hit, will put a glove in your face after the whistle, and generally try and intimidate.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise, this staged fighting BS from the faceoff is useless.
This is what makes Boogaard a problem for the Oilers. He would run guys all over the place. If you had a problem with it, too bad. He would just kick your butt in a fight.
With SMac, the Oilers have a guy who can fight with the heavies but I don't think this will really stop them from running people.
What Smac needs to do is to be the guy running the other teams guys. I still remember his first NHL fight, vs. Calgary. He completely crushed a Flame on a clean check, then cleaned someone's clock:
http://oilers.nhl.com/club/recap.htm?id=2008020074
If he can do this, there is a place for him. But if he is just going to be a policeman, I don't think he will help much.
---
ReplyDeleteuni said...
Rod, the double shifting comment makes no sense. Dressing someone who can actually play NHL level hockey and contribute to the game instead of SMac allows you to use that person. It does not stop you from double shifting Hemsky or anyone else if you so choose.
Basically dressing someone like SMac limits your options by forcing you to double shift other players, even if you don't want to (hurt, tired etc.).
---
Huh? I think you completely missed the point...
Dressing MacIntyre is based on the opposition. In my opinion it's better to have the flexibility to dress MacIntyre than to have no answer for the heavyweights. He's the 14F, most nights in the press box.
On the occasion MacIntyre is in the lineup, another forward will likely have some of MacIntyre's shifts, thereby minimizing the "contributor deficit". Since it's not happening every game, fatigue shouldn't be a problem for whoever receives a few/couple extra shifts.
To be clear, I *not* suggesting that MacIntyre should have a regular spot in the lineup. Just that at his contract level, I can see how he has a roster spot.
Boogaard money on the other hand. Now that's something that makes no sense.
I'm willing to be swayed on this with statistical evidence, but these arguments seem intuitively ludicrous to me.
ReplyDeleteIt is very tough to quantify.
We would need to measure how many "cheapshots" a team took before and after acquiring an "enforcer" or "goon"
The data would be next to impossible to gather.
So absent of hard data, you need to use anecdotal evidence, and the anecdotal evidence is there.
Whether its Gretzky talking about the value of a Semenko or a coach/GM talking about protecting the skill players, there exists this perception.
While we can use math to dispel a lot of "seen em good" evaluations of players, you cannot dismiss the impact a "protector" can have on a team because it's almost impossible to measure, and ignore all the anecdotal evidence provided by players, coaches etc.
Will Smac have an impact? Don't know, it depends on how he and Renney use his role.
The whole point of the goon protecting the star is that the other guy maybe doesn't necessarily agree to getting punched in the face. You know, just a thought.
That's why "tough guys" are useless since they only fight other "tough guys"
What the Oilers need Smac to do, is to start punching guys in the face who don't want any part of him, but have been cheap shotting the kids.
If Renney is ok with giving up some powerplays in order to protect the younger players, then the resident goon can be effective.
magisterrex I fail to see how a goon who can't do anything but get into fights prevents injuries of any kind.
ReplyDeleteIf that was the case Cooke, Ruutu et al would never be able to hurt anyone because a knuckle dragger would be able to intimidate them into compliance right? Just like Lucic being able to fight really well stopped Savard getting hurt.
Uni,
Picking spots where players got hurt despite the presence of goon is an example of Confirmation bias.
How about picking all the games where no one got hurt?
The problem with the "tough guy" role is the lack of goonery.
If Cooke cheap shots Savard then Thornton (or whoever on the Bruins) should be looking to but end Cooke in the teeth or something similar.
Unfortunately what happens too often is that tough guy will go fight tough guy, so Thornton goes and fights Rupp and Cooke sees no retribution.
Hey WG,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post. But I disagree with pretty much every sentence.
the anecdotal evidence is there... While we can use math to dispel a lot of "seen em good" evaluations of players, you cannot dismiss the impact a "protector" can have on a team because it's almost impossible to measure, and ignore all the anecdotal evidence provided by players, coaches etc.
By analogy, there's a lot of anecdotal evidence that horoscopes are useful. A closer look shows otherwise. That is, even in the absence of good evidence or even when it's impossible to obtain good evidence, bad evidence is still worthless.
I think the problem with the evidence you point to is twofold. A large plurality of hockey players, maybe a majority, and coaches have and still do believe a lot of unsubstantiated myths about hockey. For example, Quinn thinks rolling lines is good for the player's attitude, makes them play better, and will work out better than line matching. Tambellini thinks the fact that a goalie has won a cup and is therefore clutch implies he's more likely to win when "big games." Second, there's a strong sense of tradition and culture in hockey. This means players are pressured to believe things that the older guys or coaches believe too. Otherwise they're rejecting the old-school traditions and culture. This is all well and good, but it creates prime conditions for the spreading of unsubstantiated myths. As they grow up playing the game, they then find experiences that confirm the myths they've been told. (Pretty common for people to do this.)
W hether its Gretzky talking about the value of a Semenko or a coach/GM talking about protecting the skill players, there exists this perception.
A while ago I remember both Lowe and MacT saying that fighting didn't deter anyone from doing jack. I also remember Quinn saying that fighting isn't a deterrent (though he did seem to be okay with the sort of "goon-style" brutal attack you're recommending, which I'll mention below.)
So another problem with the anecdotal evidence you point to is anecdotal evidence for the opposite conclusion, e.g. a minority of players who don't care about tough guys.
That's why "tough guys" are useless since they only fight other "tough guys"
What the Oilers need Smac to do, is to start punching guys in the face who don't want any part of him, but have been cheap shotting the kids."
It's possible that getting a Boulerice style cheap shot artist will deter guys from cheap shotting Gagner and Hall.
But it's also possible the exact opposite will occur. A guy like Boulerice cheap shots a player from team X, perhaps in retaliation for a prior attack on, say Hemsky. Team X's goon retaliates for that. And so on and so on.
I suspect this is true. Gooning it up puts your own team in danger. Look at the Bertuzzi attack. That was a retaliation.
I think it's fairly clear from the hostory of the use of violence as a deterrent is that it only really deters when it's the violence is overwhelmingly destructive, immediate and certain. (Think nuclear.) If it's not, the person(s) I just don't think hockey players are that afraid of dedicated goons like SMac or even cheap shot artists like Boulerice.
I am in favor of hiring a 250 pound, steroid crazed, ex con mental patient who will play carrying a stick made out of lead with a razor sharp edge. We'll tell everyone in the league we'll play him the moment anyone touches Hemsky at all, even to shake his hand.
That would work.
Now, cue the people who are bored by this debate.
:)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKris,
ReplyDeleteGood post.
A while ago I remember both Lowe and MacT saying that fighting didn't deter anyone from doing jack.
Perhaps because they had to fight their own battles? Gretzky has a different take.
I understand shying away from a goon because you don't want them to start anything, and I agree.
I want my goon to have a heart of gold. No goonery unless provoked.
I hope this isn't too poor in taste, but to some extent this debate is a lot like the Captial Punishment debate.
There is overwhelming evidence that it does not act as a deterrent to others, but you cannot ignore the fact that the person getting executed never kills again.
At least we don't have to worry about innocents getting punished as in hockey the evidence of wrong doing is usually pretty clear to all.
Oops, forgot the part about the anecdotal evidence.
ReplyDeleteYou make good points, but entirely discounting the evidence given that a wide variety of player/coach/management types who support the position is wrong imo.
We can't just point to OTC and Cherry types, smart players think this way too (Gretzky, I heard Yzerman talking similarly about Probert)
Lots of room to agree to disagree about this issue.
I think we all know that a goon doesn't prevent guys like Cooke and Ruutu from running around.
ReplyDeleteI think it does however prevent guys like Boogaard and Cam Janssen from running around.
I never noticed Boogaard running around against the Oilers when Laraque was in town. I think its largely because they'd engage each other, fight, then be satisfied their job was done. Without another heavyweight around, Boogaard has to do something to justify giving him his 3 minutes of ice time. So he intimidates.
Also, I noticed Cam Janssen running around a tonne when the Oilers played the Blues post Laraque. After they picked up MacIntyre, I barely noticed Janssen in the games they played afterwards. I think that is mostly due to the fact that Cam is expected to fight anyone, but he didn't want any part of MacIntyre so he toned his game down.
Anecdotal evidence for this of course, but I think there is something tangible about the effect of an enforcer in the lineup.
It is very tough to quantify.
ReplyDeleteNot impossible, though. What matters is winning games, and that part's easy to quantify. We could then correlate a team's record with the number of fighting majors they take; that would provide one (crude) measurement. We could form an agreement on what constitutes a goon (a player with >x PIMs per game, with <y icetime per game, for example) and then compare those goons' teams records with and without them in the lineup. We're not going to resolve it conclusively, obviously, but we could function in less of a vacuum than we are now.
As for this distinction between anecdotal and statistical evidence, I think it's being misconstrued: statistical evidence is just the sum of anecdotal evidence. Both sides have anecdotal evidence, as we've already seen; statistics allows us to answer the question of who has more anecdotal evidence.
Alrighty, I'll hope I'm wrong on SMac. My main problem with him is his seeming inability to play hockey.
ReplyDeleteIf he's going to be slotted in on a game by game basis, and uses his 5 minutes to destroy any player that gets near him ala Boogard then fine.
WG: This got lost in the shuffle but for as much as I liked 78 -- and for as much as I would have brought him back and as much as I thought he was improving -- it seemed like he was a bit of a headcase and was more worried about the Praise comparisons than A: I thought he would be and B: I think he should be.
ReplyDeleteStill i think it would be nice to say have a 4th line or forwards 10-13 with 78-Frasier-Stone-Stortini.
Being able to fight or appearing as if you are deters 99% of idiots from even thinking about starting on you. This is the reality of the street, and it certainly applies to hockey.
ReplyDeleteNot impossible, though. What matters is winning games,
ReplyDeleteI'm not talking about winning games though.
I'm taking about doing the most you can to minimize the probability of getting the rookies through the first year or two without sustaining severe injuries.
I understand where you are going, but it still leaves out too much information.
If you look at games with and without Goon A in the line up, you may be putting pressure on the data. If you don't dress your Goon vs the weak sisters of the league then the winning rate will be skewed.
Similarly if you only look at games with fights, you are not seeing games where Goon A gives the opposing bench the hairy eyeball and everyone stays in line.
A significant amount of what Goon A should do is intimidation. It is impossible to count how many fights or dirty plays didn't happen because Goon A is there to play policeman.
Do you add up all the roughing, elbowing, etc penalties when they play and when they don't play? Maybe, but even then the data won't be reliable.
You almost need two different transcriptions from every game (one from each opponent view point) to see the effect of a Goon.
"This is the reality of the street"
ReplyDeleteThanks for that bit of street wisdom Tupac
@ kris: Not everyone spends their life living inside a bubble.
ReplyDeleteI think Hunter has unintentionally confirmed my point.
ReplyDeleteNabokov to Ska St. Pertersberg for $24MM/6 years.
ReplyDeleteMore money and term than Khabibulin/Halak.
@ kris;
ReplyDeleteBy your logic there's no need for anyone else but the refs, since after all, they enforce the rules, right?
it seemed like he was a bit of a headcase and was more worried about the Praise comparisons than A: I thought he would be and B: I think he should be.
ReplyDeleteStill i think it would be nice to say have a 4th line or forwards 10-13 with 78-Frasier-Stone-Stortini.
I think Poo is a classic case of needing a second opinion on his game. Sounds like he soured on the org and them on him.
He really was on their best in the last 1/2 of the year.
Out of the 15 forwards who played 30 games or more, Poo's RelCor stats were:
QC 4/15
QT 14/15
RelCor 9/15 (-2.3)
So he played 2nd toughs with the dregs and got beat, but not killed.
Contrast that with R.Neidermayer who was (on a much better team):
QC 6/14
QT 12/14
RelCor 14/14 (-21.2 putrid)
I just wanted the mythical one more year for him to "get it", because it looks like he was on his way there.
Tough guys will only fight tough guys or get super penalty time because he will get the cheap shooter anyway.
ReplyDeleteSo a five a ten and deuce on your team just to get back at it.
Fantastic.
How about having a team that gives a damn for his teamates and doesn't need a goon to defend each other?
That should come naturally, not some guy to get paid for it.
Oilers sign Brad Moran per Rishaug twitter.
ReplyDeletehttp://twitter.com/TSNRyanRishaug
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=28625
Solid pickup for OKC
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBigos forgot to renew his passport? Too much.
ReplyDeleteFPB:
ReplyDeleteHow about having a team that gives a damn for his teamates and doesn't need a goon to defend each other?
That should come naturally, not some guy to get paid for it.
Teamates standing up for each other is very important. However, not all situations are perfect for that kind of thing.
What about serious mismatches? When a Boogard type runs Hemsky and you have nothing but smurfy skill forwards and soft defensemen out there, who gets the priviledge of having their face broken?
As tough as some "real" hockey players can be, they shouldn't be tangling with the real heavyweights out there. If your team has a goon you will happily trade matching majors with opposition regulars any time you can get it.
Of course, another very real danger is when a regular player is hurt during a fight.
HoiL: When would that happen? Sending your goon vs the Opposing team's 1st line?
ReplyDeleteBoogard plays 4 minutes a game, even if he checks Hemsky one time, was does that change?
Score a damn goal. These guys usually don't know how to play hockey.
Boogard plays 4 minutes a game, even if he checks Hemsky one time, was does that change?
ReplyDeleteBoogaard checked Hemsky right out of the lineup a couple of seasons ago.
Bank Shot: I guess punching him in the face would have brought Hemsky back.
ReplyDeleteFace it, Boogard will check Hemsky, no matter who's in your lineup.
FPB:
ReplyDelete1)First you claim the old "team toughness" is sufficient - but when ordinary players toughbness is demonstratably insufficient, you claim it doesn't matter what you do anyway. Sorry, but I think it isn't that simple.
Do you waive the white towel when threatened by a bully? That reinforces that type of activity and guarantees that it will happen again.
While I don't necessarily subscribe to the old Conn Smythe's adage "If you can't beat them in the alley, you can't beat them on the ice", there is a grain of truth to it.
In the Hemsky vs Boogard instance, your heavyweight could be sent out on the ice as soon as Boogard appears in an unfavourable matchup and insert himself in Boogard's face before he thinks about going near Hemsky.
Alternatively, you send your meat on skates after their skill guys and make the point very clear. You may have to eat some penalties or even suspensions, but the message would sent.
Not every successful team has to employ these tactics, but many do. I haven't rechecked the stats on the Anaheim Duck's Cup winning season, but iirc, they were among the league leaders in fighting majors. I don't think you have to go to that extreme, but turning the other cheek for 82 games is a losing strategy.