Horachek's impact on the team

[CarltonTheBear]

Explain your reasoning, please.

One former player says "Kessel isn't working hard enough" and another says "players always work hard (except for 1 or 2)".

I know which one sounds more believable to me, and it's not the one not named O'Neill.

To put it bluntly, one's a big dumb idiot, and it's not the one not named Gomez. You don't finish top-10 in scoring 3 years in a row by never working hard.

We can have this discussion if you want, but bringing O'Neil into it really doesn't do anything.

 

[Chris]

"one's a big dumb idiot" isn't much of an explanation. The point is, which statement is more believable? Do you really believe the assertion Gomez made, that "every player works hard all the time" (except for 1 or 2)? I've watched enough hockey to know that ain't true, so anything else said by Gomez is highly questionable.

I don't really care to debate the Kessel issue any more. I've never said he was the only problem, but I know what I've seen over the past 40 or so games, and it's not pretty - regardless of whether he finished top 10 in scoring the previous 3 years.

 

[Kin]

Do you really believe the assertion Gomez made, that "every player works hard all the time" (except for 1 or 2)? I've watched enough hockey to know that ain't true, so anything else said by Gomez is highly questionable.

Typically when quotation marks are used they're done so to transcribe what someone actually said verbatim, not a fairly transparent job of paraphrasing what was said to fit a convenient narrative. Gomez didn't say all players work hard all the time, he said "I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been."

Which takes us back to one of the central areas of nonsense about the Kessel criticism. The people who are the strongest advocates of it can't even pin down what the criticism is. Some people say that he's out of shape, despite there being no evidence for that. Some say that he just doesn't have that "competitive fire", in stark contrast to how teammates have described him in the past. Some say it's that he isn't battling in the corners and backchecking like a madman, which he's never really done. Others, like cw, are intimating that Phil Kessel has a serious mental disorder.

Until there's a specific accusation of what it is that Kessel's not actually doing, and "not working hard enough" is not that, there's really nothing to refute. Certainly not from a meat head like O'Neill whose only real claim to authority on the subject is being one of the first guys whose name will come to mind when asked to name a Leafs player who didn't look like he gave a damn.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

The point is, which statement is more believable? Do you really believe the assertion Gomez made, that "every player works hard all the time" (except for 1 or 2)?

If my choices are "the player who was 3rd in points among all NHL players from October 2011 to April 2014 never works hard enough" and "all hockey players playing in the most competitive league in the world work hard" then yeah, I'm going with Gomez.

 

[cw]

For future reference, the answer to the above question will always be "Whoever is not Jeff O'Neill".

Not this time for me.

Never liked the guy - partly because he was a dick jerk and part because he showed the kind of lack of effort some of criticized Kessel of for much of his career. He's one of the "few" Gomez was talking about.

But here's the thing, he admits it:
NHLer turned broadcaster Jeff O'Neill tells it like it is when it comes to the Toronto Maple Leafs
?He never works hard enough,? said O?Neill, when the topic of Kessel is brought up. ?It?s my job to watch and talk about it and if the effort?s horrible, then the effort?s horrible. I don?t make it up. I don?t know Phil Kessel. Apparently he likes fishing and he likes playing cards. And I love that s--t. So I?d probably like playing that with him. But when I watch him on the ice, he does a lot of things that I don?t like.?

In particular, Kessel?s lack of effort when he?s not scoring or when the club is in a slump, as it is right now (a profound understatement).

But the irony is ? and NHL fans and O?Neill followers will jump all over this ? that O?Neill himself was sometimes knocked as a player for his occasional Kessel-like qualities ? a gifted goal scorer who wasn?t (or so it would seem) always in the very best of shape.

But the Etobicoke resident admits as much

It's hard to point the finger at this guy and say he's lying, when he admits what I always thought about him much of his career. At times, he was a lazy jerk.

On the other hand, he named his dog Pavel Brendl after his old Hurricanes? teammate.

Why Pavel Brendl?

Because the dog is really lazy, said O?Neill with a laugh.

Ah yes, the Antropov-Brendl thread. Made me smile. 

 

[Kin]

Not this time for me.

My goodness. It's almost like you're disposed to believe anything negative that anyone says about Phil Kessel regardless of how nakedly self-serving it is.

 

[cw]

Not this time for me.

My goodness. It's almost like you're disposed to believe anything negative that anyone says about Phil Kessel regardless of how nakedly self-serving it is.

Nope. That's just another straw man.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I know which one sounds more believable to me, and it's not the one not named O'Neill.

Probably a direct correlation in who's more believable and who most aligns with your views.

O'Neill is the last person anyone should listen to about effort on the ice anyway.  He needs a huge mirror.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

The point is, which statement is more believable? Do you really believe the assertion Gomez made, that "every player works hard all the time" (except for 1 or 2)?

If my choices are "the player who was 3rd in points among all NHL players from October 2011 to April 2014 never works hard enough" and "all hockey players playing in the most competitive league in the world work hard" then yeah, I'm going with Gomez.

Not to mention O'Neill has (a) been ripping Kessel daily (supposedly, I don't listen) for a few months now and (b) has an interest in being as controversial as possible to get listeners.

 

[Kin]

Nope. That's just another straw man.

See that just says to me, as with the rest of the times you've used the expression, that you don't know what that means. A straw man is constructing a false argument that you attribute to your opponent, that was me directly questioning your objectivity on the matter.

 

[Chris]

The point is, which statement is more believable? Do you really believe the assertion Gomez made, that "every player works hard all the time" (except for 1 or 2)?

If my choices are "the player who was 3rd in points among all NHL players from October 2011 to April 2014 never works hard enough" and "all hockey players playing in the most competitive league in the world work hard" then yeah, I'm going with Gomez.

Not to mention O'Neill has (a) been ripping Kessel daily (supposedly, I don't listen) for a few months now and (b) has an interest in being as controversial as possible to get listeners.

(a) the criticism of Kessel over the past few months has been warranted, wouldn't you agree?
(b) maybe, but many others have been critical as well.

As for O'Neill, why would his history (lack of effort on the ice) make his view any less valid? Perhaps he sees things in Kessel that remind him of his own shortcomings, in which case his opinion on this issue might be more pertinent than that of someone like Gomez.

 

[Bullfrog]

Kessel's love of his pay cheque vastly surpasses his love of winning hockey games.  His lazy attitude reflects the fact he's scored hugely on the financial side of playing hockey.  He's got nothing to work towards now!

If the team he plays for drags him into the playoffs, then, so be it, if not, there's always fishing in Florida for an extended off season!  I think his play this season reflects this attitude nicely.

I?m a sports fan, so I?m familiar with the stigma ? guy signs a big contract and then starts taking it easy.

Let?s address that for a moment: It?s bull#$#%. This is the National Hockey League and the game has only one speed. We all work hard. That?s just the way it is. Over my last decade and a half in the NHL, I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been. If you don?t put everything you have into this game, you open yourself up for injury and, the worst possible punishment for a hockey player, losing the respect of your peers. But, that being said, I also get the fans? perspective. If I was sitting in the stands, I might have started booing me too.

I think I'd generally agree with Gomez. The frequency of the allegation is far greater than the reality.

In this particular case with Kessel, I don't agree. For one thing, he has had some history of issues like this before he was paid a lot so I'm not convinced it can be simply explained away by his contract. His contract may be a factor in some way but I don't think it's a major factor.

It's interesting that we can consider sweeping statements by Gomez who is unfamiliar with the specifics here and to my knowledge, is speaking in general terms - not specifically about Kessel. But we can dismiss specific statements by members of the team like Bernier and others or the coach alleging a lack of effort. And that's backed up by what we've seen on the ice and see in the stats.

Gomez says "I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been" And Phil's teammates probably basically say to themselves "yeah, we have a few of those guys here". And some are concluding "since it's rare in Gomez's experience, then it cannot be so with Kessel's line" ... when a bunch of the testimony and evidence suggests otherwise?

A kicker for me is how come no one in the Leafs locker room, coaches or management is doing a Gomez for Kessel and his line? I asked that before: How come Phil's team won't stand up for his line?

Maybe Gomez can answer that one.

You're just speaking generally here, I'm assuming. Because I'm not part of the "we" that is considering Gomez's sweeping statements while dismissing other's.

I was simply posting a recent quotation that provides one opinion on whether salary affects motivation and the general effort of most NHLers. I didn't even express an opinion on the quote I provided.

I am a bit perturbed, however, by how you're reading so much into the perceived lack of defense by his teammates and by how vehement your criticism is while barely addressing the context of this season.

 

[cw]

Nope. That's just another straw man.

See that just says to me, as with the rest of the times you've used the expression, that you don't know what that means. A straw man is constructing a false argument that you attribute to your opponent, that was me directly questioning your objectivity on the matter.

Nope, that was you constructing a false argument suggesting that I am "disposed to believe anything negative that anyone says about Phil Kessel regardless of how nakedly self-serving it is."

I didn't construct that false argument. You did. It's insulting and ignorant.

You are talking about MY beliefs. You're hardly an expert in what I believe and you don't speak for me. Stick to speaking about your beliefs.

Over the years, I've rarely agreed with or cared for Jeff O'Neill. Agreeing with him this time means just that. Nothing more. I maintain the right to agree or disagree with anyone on any issue.

Just because I rarely agree with someone doesn't mean I have to disagree with them 100% of the time. I don't always agree with what you say. But sometimes, I do.

Again, the poster shouldn't be the issue. That what you attempted to make the issue with your comment. It's flat out wrong.

 

[Kin]

Also, for the people who can't be bothered to read a very long and embarrassingly terrible article in the Sun(which, I suppose, makes "embarrassingly terrible" a bit redundant) it's not all a mea culpa from someone who really knows the price of indolence. No, when it comes to his own half-assed efforts with the Maple Leafs:

When people suggest that the O?Dog sometimes ?dogged it? near the end of his career, including his last two NHL seasons with his hometown Leafs, he gets emotional and defensive.

For good reason.

?I played for the Toronto Maple Leafs after one of the worse things in my life happened, my brother dying. And people have no idea what I was going through because it hurt a lot and I was having a tough time dealing with life in general, let alone playing in the NHL.?

I bring this up for two reasons. One, somewhat understandably O'Neill seems to be very forgiving when it comes to his own life as to how outside influences can impact what goes on within the game and two, the writer of this article refers to Jeff O'Neil in print as "The O'Dog", which is also how O'Neill refers to himself.

Just, I mean, c'mon. This is the guy whose opinion we're being asked to take seriously?

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Kessel's love of his pay cheque vastly surpasses his love of winning hockey games.  His lazy attitude reflects the fact he's scored hugely on the financial side of playing hockey.  He's got nothing to work towards now!

If the team he plays for drags him into the playoffs, then, so be it, if not, there's always fishing in Florida for an extended off season!  I think his play this season reflects this attitude nicely.

I?m a sports fan, so I?m familiar with the stigma ? guy signs a big contract and then starts taking it easy.

Let?s address that for a moment: It?s bull#$#%. This is the National Hockey League and the game has only one speed. We all work hard. That?s just the way it is. Over my last decade and a half in the NHL, I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been. If you don?t put everything you have into this game, you open yourself up for injury and, the worst possible punishment for a hockey player, losing the respect of your peers. But, that being said, I also get the fans? perspective. If I was sitting in the stands, I might have started booing me too.

I think I'd generally agree with Gomez. The frequency of the allegation is far greater than the reality.

In this particular case with Kessel, I don't agree. For one thing, he has had some history of issues like this before he was paid a lot so I'm not convinced it can be simply explained away by his contract. His contract may be a factor in some way but I don't think it's a major factor.

It's interesting that we can consider sweeping statements by Gomez who is unfamiliar with the specifics here and to my knowledge, is speaking in general terms - not specifically about Kessel. But we can dismiss specific statements by members of the team like Bernier and others or the coach alleging a lack of effort. And that's backed up by what we've seen on the ice and see in the stats.

Gomez says "I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been" And Phil's teammates probably basically say to themselves "yeah, we have a few of those guys here". And some are concluding "since it's rare in Gomez's experience, then it cannot be so with Kessel's line" ... when a bunch of the testimony and evidence suggests otherwise?

A kicker for me is how come no one in the Leafs locker room, coaches or management is doing a Gomez for Kessel and his line? I asked that before: How come Phil's team won't stand up for his line?

Maybe Gomez can answer that one.

You're just speaking generally here, I'm assuming. Because I'm not part of the "we" that is considering Gomez's sweeping statements while dismissing other's.

I was simply posting a recent quotation that provides one opinion on whether salary affects motivation and the general effort of most NHLers. I didn't even express an opinion on the quote I provided.

I am a bit perturbed, however, by how you're reading so much into the perceived lack of defense by his teammates and by how vehement your criticism is while barely addressing the context of this season.

I don't believe for one second if any of the Leafs made any sort of statement about Kessel or his line that any of his dogged detractors would lend it any credence.

Have they even been asked about it?  Or are they supposed to call a press conference to address it?

"Phil is a great player and he's a great teammate too," said Bolland, who spent last season with Toronto before moving on to Florida when the Leafs deemed re-signing him to be too expensive.

"He hates losing. I remember coming in after a few games we lost and he'd be the one yelling and screaming. When you see that happen, you can see that he cares about the game and that he wants to win. Phil's a guy that wants to win, he wants to play, he wants that puck. You could see it every night when he's out there. He's a crucial guy, you get him that puck and he's got it on his stick, he's dangerous with it."

 

[Kin]

Nope, that was you constructing a false argument suggesting that I am "disposed to believe anything negative that anyone says about Phil Kessel regardless of how nakedly self-serving it is."

"Constructing a false argument"is not a Straw Man unless I then also attribute that argument to you. Directly questioning your objectivity on the matter is not attributing a position to you, it's impugning how you arrived at your position. Words mean things and I absolutely, 100% stand by the statement that I don't think you're viewing this matter objectively.

 

[cw]

Kessel's love of his pay cheque vastly surpasses his love of winning hockey games.  His lazy attitude reflects the fact he's scored hugely on the financial side of playing hockey.  He's got nothing to work towards now!

If the team he plays for drags him into the playoffs, then, so be it, if not, there's always fishing in Florida for an extended off season!  I think his play this season reflects this attitude nicely.

I?m a sports fan, so I?m familiar with the stigma ? guy signs a big contract and then starts taking it easy.

Let?s address that for a moment: It?s bull#$#%. This is the National Hockey League and the game has only one speed. We all work hard. That?s just the way it is. Over my last decade and a half in the NHL, I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been. If you don?t put everything you have into this game, you open yourself up for injury and, the worst possible punishment for a hockey player, losing the respect of your peers. But, that being said, I also get the fans? perspective. If I was sitting in the stands, I might have started booing me too.

I think I'd generally agree with Gomez. The frequency of the allegation is far greater than the reality.

In this particular case with Kessel, I don't agree. For one thing, he has had some history of issues like this before he was paid a lot so I'm not convinced it can be simply explained away by his contract. His contract may be a factor in some way but I don't think it's a major factor.

It's interesting that we can consider sweeping statements by Gomez who is unfamiliar with the specifics here and to my knowledge, is speaking in general terms - not specifically about Kessel. But we can dismiss specific statements by members of the team like Bernier and others or the coach alleging a lack of effort. And that's backed up by what we've seen on the ice and see in the stats.

Gomez says "I only saw one or two guys who I think weren?t as committed to the sport as much as they should have been" And Phil's teammates probably basically say to themselves "yeah, we have a few of those guys here". And some are concluding "since it's rare in Gomez's experience, then it cannot be so with Kessel's line" ... when a bunch of the testimony and evidence suggests otherwise?

A kicker for me is how come no one in the Leafs locker room, coaches or management is doing a Gomez for Kessel and his line? I asked that before: How come Phil's team won't stand up for his line?

Maybe Gomez can answer that one.

You're just speaking generally here, I'm assuming. Because I'm not part of the "we" that is considering Gomez's sweeping statements while dismissing other's.

I was simply posting a recent quotation that provides one opinion on whether salary affects motivation and the general effort of most NHLers. I didn't even express an opinion on the quote I provided.

But you did post it within the context of a discussion surrounding this issue. In doing so, I don't think it was unfair to comment on it.

I am a bit perturbed, however, by how you're reading so much into the perceived lack of defense by his teammates and by how vehement your criticism is while barely addressing the context of this season.

Maybe I'm old school and going to sound like Don Cherry.

These guys are supposed to be a team. If someone went after one of my teammates on or off the ice, the code is or was: you stand up for that teammate. We always did that without thinking. Automatically. Instantly. It's just the way it was and how we were raised in team sports. You did it, period ... as long as it was ethical - you weren't compromising other core beliefs/values.

Here we have a situation where a bunch of folks are taking some pretty serious shots at our perennial scoring leader and his linemates. Over the years, we've seen that and when it's happened, it's pretty rare for the teammates, coach and/or management to sit on their hands and not respond.

This is the sort of allegation that attacks the character of a few of the guys in that room. If it isn't true, it should have been addressed by several teammates, the coach and management in mass some time ago - to nuke it and protect the character of the players being criticized.

I don't think any of that is news to the members of this team. The silence with respect to Kessel and his line of late is kind of deafening.

 

[brothert]

i felt that tucker was much more into the game prior to signing his big contract with toronto.  got his money and ran.....

 

[Al14]

i felt that tucker was much more into the game prior to signing his big contract with toronto.  got his money and ran.....

Surprise, surprise... look at Kessel this year!

 

[Tigger]

I don't know if it really matters in the context of this saga but Phil certainly came to his Captains defense recently, at least with the media chum.

Also, I said this on December 23. I think his play, and ghastly lack of finish, has been blown out of proportion over the past two months. If he had a proper cast to work with, he'd be fine.