Training Camp Thread

[AtomicMapleLeaf]

"And ultimately, which is better: 23 guys all willing to stick up for each other, or 22 guys hanging back waiting for Colton Orr to protect them?"

This.  ^^^^^^^^^

 

[bustaheims]

And ultimately, which is better: 23 guys all willing to stick up for each other, or 22 guys hanging back waiting for Colton Orr to protect them?

As former NHLer Ray Ferraro put it this morning: "I never felt safer with one tough guy and surrounded by a bunch of guys my size. I felt safer when we were team tough & everyone took care of themselves"

 

[Highlander]

The teams that employ facepunchers are dinosaurs, the game is to quick to have flatfooted sloths on the ice.  We have Carter "home alone" Ashton who is an animal, Clarkson will and has to our dismay dropped the gloves with anyone.  Komorav is a pest and Winnick wouldnt back down from to many, I'd venture. Oh and Polak is a beast, watch the highlight reels of his previous fights. I think we are in pretty good shape truculence wise.

 

[Deebo]

Phase 2 is for them to get either claimed, traded, or retired so they don't take Marlie ice-time away from Broll/Devane/anybody at all.

McLaren was a regular healthy scratch when he was sent to the Marlies last year, he only got into 6 regular season games out of 23 after he was sent down in early march.

 

[Kin]

And ultimately, which is better: 23 guys all willing to stick up for each other, or 22 guys hanging back waiting for Colton Orr to protect them?

Well, to play devil's advocate for a second it's something of a false choice. To the extent that "sticking up for each other" means anything other than giving an opposing player a shove in a scrum(which every player in the history of the NHL has been willing to do) then I don't know that I buy that Orr not being on the team makes Phil Kessel or whoever any more likely to stick up for a teammate.

I think it's fair to question the impact it has in a hockey sense but having someone like Orr doing what he does, and let's not mince words an enforcer is doing a physically demanding and dangerous job, could be sold as having inspirational value. I think that's why polls of hockey players tend to be so heavily in favour of keeping fighting in the game.

 

[Highlander]

Perhaps our united hatred of Molten and Freezer was not based on being facepunchers but rather Randy's continued insistance on having them on the team and then not playing them or the 4th line all that much.  I can see that Randy is now a puppet on a string and that the real decisions are being made for him. Lets have a 4th line that can rock and out perform any other 4th line in the game. Wouldnt that be great?

 

[Coco-puffs]

are inconsistent offensively (Kadri more-so on the inconsistent)

How would you argue that Kadri is inconsistent offensively?  And Lupul too I guess.

7 times last season he went 3+ games without points.  He was pretty poor in mid-December to mid-January (4 pts in 14 games from Dec-16 to Jan-14) and at the end of the season for example. 

If he want to get to the next level he needs to become more consistent- not just offensively but throughout his entire game.  Aside from the stats, I watched pretty much every game last season and saw that some games he just wasn't performing the level you'd want.

Lupul had 5 3+ game stretches without points.  Bozak, in comparison, had just 2 stretches like that.

But how does that compare to other similar players league-wide?  Without that context I have no idea if that is good, bad, normal or not normal for a 2nd line C of his age.

Well, I don't have the time to look up all of those stats.  Sorry I can't provide you with that context- if you want to challenge my opinion you can provide opposing information. 

Well I'm just saying that I think those would be important things to actually know before you state an opinion like you did.  You're welcome to state whatever opinion you want, but that doesn't shift the burden of proof onto me simply because you want to have whatever opinion you want.  I don't have time to look it up either - but that's why I wouldn't say something like that either based solely off my eyes.

You are insufferable.  I said I was worried about our 2nd line for the following reasons:

- Kadri and Lupul are not good defensively, and can be inconsistent offensively (Kadri more-so)
- Kozun is unproven

You questioned me on Kadri's inconsistencies offensively, so I provided stats that back up my argument.  Nik actually provided even more proof that he's inconsistent, including a comparison to another 2nd line center in the league.  Are you saying that my opinion that he's inconsistent offensively isn't true because other 2nd line centers may also be inconsistent offensively?  Just because other 2nd line centers can be inconsistent doesn't mean Kadri is magically NOT inconsistent.

But, as I said originally, his inconsistencies offensively aren't the ONLY reasons why I'm worried about the 2nd line.

Why don't you tell me why you think we have a great 2nd line Potvin?

 

[Kin]

The teams that employ facepunchers are dinosaurs, the game is to quick to have flatfooted sloths on the ice.

It's probably worth mentioning, to some extent, that the #1 and #2 teams in the regular season last year ranked #2 and #6 in fighting majors. That's not to suggest a causal link but the idea that having "facepunchers" precludes a team from being successful is clearly not true.

 

[bustaheims]

It's probably worth mentioning, to some extent, that the #1 and #2 teams in the regular season last year ranked #2 and #6 in fighting majors. That's not to suggest a causal link but the idea that having "facepunchers" precludes a team from being successful is clearly not true.

I'd argue that neither of those teams saw true facepunchers play in the majority of their games, but, rather, they had some capable hockey players that happened to be frequent fighters on their rosters. I don't think the argument is that fighting is detrimental to success, it's that having guys on the roster whose sole contribution is with their fists is.

 

[Frank E]

The teams that employ facepunchers are dinosaurs, the game is to quick to have flatfooted sloths on the ice.

It's probably worth mentioning, to some extent, that the #1 and #2 teams in the regular season last year ranked #2 and #6 in fighting majors. That's not to suggest a causal link but the idea that having "facepunchers" precludes a team from being successful is clearly not true.

I think your middleweight fighting still exists to a great extent, and that the Clarksons and Phaneufs of the NHL can handle that stuff.

The idea of having a Colton Orr on your roster was so that Clarksons and Phaneufs don't have to do the fighting and intimidating.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I'd argue that neither of those teams saw true facepunchers play in the majority of their games, but, rather, they had some capable hockey players that happened to be frequent fighters on their rosters.

Patrick Maroon, Anaheim's facepuncher, had 29 points in 62 games last season. Orr's played in 476 NHL games and only has 24 career points to his name.

 

[bustaheims]

Patrick Maroon, Anaheim's facepuncher, had 29 points in 62 games last season. Orr's played in 476 NHL games and only has 24 career points to his name.

Exactly. I wouldn't use the label "facepuncher" for a guy like Maroon. He's a legit hockey player who enjoys fighting. To me (and, I imagine, to most), a facepuncher is a player who is really only on the roster for his willingness to punch people in the face and receive punches to his face.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I'd argue that neither of those teams saw true facepunchers play in the majority of their games, but, rather, they had some capable hockey players that happened to be frequent fighters on their rosters.

Patrick Maroon, Anaheim's facepuncher, had 29 points in 62 games last season. Orr's played in 476 NHL games and only has 24 career points to his name.

And he played 12:00 a night and 1:43 of PP time per game.

I think it's clear that when people are upset about 'facepunchers' it's about players, like Orr, who can do nothing else at the NHL level but that.  And if they could, they'd be used in more situations and given more minutes.

 

[Kin]

I'd argue that neither of those teams saw true facepunchers play in the majority of their games, but, rather, they had some capable hockey players that happened to be frequent fighters on their rosters. I don't think the argument is that fighting is detrimental to success, it's that having guys on the roster whose sole contribution is with their fists is.

Well, I definitely disagree about Boston. Shawn Thornton is absolutely a traditional enforcer to the extent that the term means anything other than the guys like Boogard and Orr who can barely skate. As for Anaheim, I'd agree they didn't have someone like that in their line-up for a majority of their games but to that extent I think it's noteworthy that despite all of their success, they found it necessary to go out and trade for Tim Jackman who, again, I think absolutely would qualify.

But as to the general point I agree with you. If someone wanted to say that Thornton and Jackman were detrimental to their teams' success, I might even agree with that even if I think we're broaching near the area of group dynamics that I don't put a ton of stock in but don't dismiss outright either.

However what I responding to was the idea that a team that employed a guy like that was a dinosaur or that employing those guys were solely the province of what's established themselves as a pretty mediocre group like the Carlyle-Nonis gang. I think there are still some fairly smart, forward thinking teams out there that put stock in guys like Thornton and Jackman and I think we saw it last year.

 

[Highlander]

If you really think back, John Ferguson was one tough SOB and everyone feared him, yet he was a very good hockey player. Tie Domi was a great fighter but I think was underestimated as a player.  He put together a very good string of hockey at one point.
We need tough SOB's that can play, its that simple.  2 or three on every team.  Well we have Polak, Clarkson and perhaps Home Alone Carter.

 

[Kin]

If you really think back, John Ferguson was one tough SOB and everyone feared him, yet he was a very good hockey player. Tie Domi was a great fighter but I think was underestimated as a player.  He put together a very good string of hockey at one point.
We need tough SOB's that can play, its that simple.  2 or three on every team.  Well we have Polak, Clarkson and perhaps Home Alone Carter.

Pretending like Ferguson or Probert or guys like that were ever the norm for tough players though, is entirely untrue. The 92-93 Leafs had Clark, sure, but they also had Ken Baumgartner(who scored all of one goal and no assists in 63 games). Marty McSorley was a legitimate hockey player at one point but that Kings team also dressed Warren Rychel pretty much just to throw fists.

Obviously players who can play and fight are preferable but nobody is arguing the opposite. The problem is that those guys are at such a premium that even when available in the modern cap environment they're almost certainly going to be overvalued(say, Clarkson) and in their absence, teams have to decide between abandoning fighting all together and going with guys like McGrattan or Jackman or others who wouldn't be on a NHL roster absent their ability/willingness to drop the gloves.

I'm fine with saying that a smart team should lean towards the former but there are smart teams who don't.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

The fighting discussion alone hurts my head.

 

[Highlander]

I tell you Nick should have his PHD in NHL

 

[Bender]

I tell you Nick should have his PHD in NHL

To go with the several he already has in both wit and sarcasm. 

 

[2badknees]

I don't think there's any lack of desire for a GM to have a big tough guy/fighter on any team in the NHL. The only caveat is that he needs to be a useful player. It's not like intimidation ever left the game.

The leafs don't have one of those, hence, they can't afford to carry Orr/Mclaren. Its great to say "team toughness" and all these platitudes in justification, but if the leafs had a Maroon type, he'd be in the bottom 6, guaranteed.