|
Post by David Aebischer on Jul 19, 2007 9:16:59 GMT -3
What you have to realize is that thankfully the era of loading up with non-skilled enforcers is over. Look around the division none of the other teams really have a REAL Heavy like a Cormier that is going to intimidate other teams. You know what, I thought that those days were gone as well. Then I saw what Anaheim did with 2 or 3 enforcers on their team, and every GM's knee jerk reaction to start drafting big, and signing enforcers all over again. I don't know, but it seems like things are slowly turning back to the way they were before. Of course just because it's happening in the NHL doesn't mean it will happen in the Q, but things that happen in the NHL tend to mirror themselves in the lower leagues. I really hope it doesn't but goonery may be making a come back. That's good news for fans...the best hockey ever in the NHL was the 80's where enforcers policed and skill players did their thing with protection. Recently it's been more loading up on big guys with some skill that can protect themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Hockeyfan99 on Jul 19, 2007 11:12:01 GMT -3
Was the Hockey in the 80's really better because of Enforcers.
Personally what I associated with what made hockey in the late 80's exciting was:
1. Big difference in skill from the stars to the rest of th league (eg. Gretzky & Lemieux)
2. Goalies in small gear and not as good as today (lots of shots going in from long range)
3. More flow to the game (less obstruction, more speed and fewer penalties)
4. Dynasties (Edmonton and NY Islanders)
To me enforcers have nothing to do with that. And the game has changed dramatically since then. Now there is much less distinction in skill from 3rd line players to the top stars in the league. Goalies have improved immensely, players move and teams change dramatically from year to year and a lot of the flow to the game has been lost. So while I agree with you that the late 80's provided some great hockey I personally don’t credit the enforcers for that.
IMO this whole enforcer mentality is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. If everyone else has an enforcer you need one but if no one else does then you don’t.
And I would much rather see a league filled with skilled players who play tough hockey and occasionally drop the gloves than one filled with each team having a couple designated enforcers.
Also did Anaheim really load up with enforcers? They certainly have some tough, bang and crash guys like Moen, O’Donnell and May but those guys play a regular shift. IMO Parros was the only real Enforcer guy and for the record he only dressed in 30 games during the season and 5 games with very limited mins in the playoffs. So does a team really need a Laraque when they play Anahiem.
No IMO they simply need players who won’t be intimidated by physical hockey. And the new breed of stars coming into this league like Oveckin, Crosby, Getzlaf, Staal, etc won’t be intimidated by that.
Of course this is a long running hockey debate which could easily turn this thread into a 10 page argument which I have no interest in. Simply put I personally don’t see the need to add another Natawary/Lafierre type player especially when other teams don’t have real enforcers either.
|
|
crocop
Rookie
Beware the left high kick
Posts: 181
|
Post by crocop on Jul 19, 2007 12:35:26 GMT -3
Also did Anaheim really load up with enforcers? They certainly have some tough, bang and crash guys like Moen, O’Donnell and May but those guys play a regular shift. IMO Parros was the only real Enforcer guy and for the record he only dressed in 30 games during the season and 5 games with very limited mins in the playoffs. So does a team really need a Laraque when they play Anahiem. The Ducks main enforcers were Parros, Shane O'Brien, and Shawn Thornton. All were in the top 15 in fighting majors during the regular season. Plus Moen, and May like to do their thing too. You have to have some toughness when playing a team like that. For the Rocket, I don't think it is a big concern for us to go out and get a heavy. Paynter and Main will step up when needed.
|
|
|
Post by peibruin8 on Jul 19, 2007 13:02:11 GMT -3
I think this Manson kid will be looked upon in camp as a possible enforcer. His two brothers before him have been succesful in the role and pitched in the odd point as well. At 6-2, 190 pounds, he is big for a 15 year old and still young enough to learn how to improve his skills. I think this is why Jimmy Bonneau was successful at the end of his tenure with the Rocket. They developed him from a young rookie as an enforcer who could chip in regularly. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by Hockeyfan99 on Jul 19, 2007 13:15:03 GMT -3
I think this Manson kid will be looked upon in camp as a possible enforcer. His two brothers before him have been succesful in the role and pitched in the odd point as well. At 6-2, 190 pounds, he is big for a 15 year old and still young enough to learn how to improve his skills. I think this is why Jimmy Bonneau was successful at the end of his tenure with the Rocket. They developed him from a young rookie as an enforcer who could chip in regularly. Just a thought. Good point and I was happy to see the Rocket draft Manson just for that reason. IF Manson develops into a Bonneau type player he could be a valuable addition to this team. Contributing some added toughness but also contributing a regular shift. Although based on the scouting reports I read it sounds like he may need at least another year before he is ready. And I want to be clear that I have no problem with players who are willing to fight. I just don't think teams need to carry one-dimensional fighters who aren't skilled enough to contribute any other way.
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Jul 19, 2007 23:03:43 GMT -3
Whether people like it or not enforcers are still a part of the game, not every team has one, but they still serve a purpose. Their main job is to drop the gloves, offer protection for their teammates, and keep the other team honest when things start to get out of hand on the ice (ie cheap shots, taking runs at star players, game gets chippy etc).
Sometimes a player doesn't have to be on the ice to be a help to their teammates. Just the presence of an enforcer on the bench can be a help if teammates know that if crap starts on the ice that someone is there to take care of it. I have seen interviews with star players who have said that they like having an enforcer on the team for that very reason. I didn't think that Lafferriere was a good fighter but I think his presence was a help in giving other players confidence that they won't get pushed around, which IMO can be a big help. No offence to players like Paynter, Praught, etc, but those guys simply do not provide that kind of presence.
Why do you think that Savard went out and got Lafferiere? The Rocket were getting pushed around and they needed someone whose job is to step up when needed. Before acquiring Lafferriere mid-season, Laliberte and Walker were dropping the gloves and they shouldn't have had to do that. I think I would rather have a guy on the bench who only plays a shift or two a game taking care of the dirty stuff instead of taking the chance of having your star players breaking their hands in a fight. Plus it's not like Jean has ever rolled out all four lines consistently in a game, in the playoffs he was barely rolling out 3 lines.
|
|
Score
Draft Pick
Go Rocket!
Posts: 2,079
|
Post by Score on Jul 20, 2007 7:54:42 GMT -3
I agree that teams need a heavyweight fighter........... when there are other heavys around.
but who are the "heavys" in our division for this upcoming season?
|
|
|
Post by Hockeyfan99 on Jul 20, 2007 8:20:06 GMT -3
The thing is there aren't any real enforcers around the Division this season. Looking at current rosters you have
Bat - Legros (6'01 - 207) assuming he makes it Mon - Lamoureux (6'02 - 204) supposed to be an enforcer
After that on the other teams I see some big guys who are willing to go but aren't really enforcers.
SJN - Boland (6'04 - 204) CB - Lamontage (6'04 - 218) Hal - Pender (6'04 - 207) Lew - Paquette (5'11 - 201) SNB - Gallant (6'0 - 180)
Are you telling me that the combination of Gervais and Main/Paynter plus whoever else on our team can't matchup with that group?
I would have a different opinion if this Division was still full of the Cormier's, Doyle's and Spencer's but it isn't.
To me I would much rather use that roster spot for providing an opportunity and developing younger more skilled prospects than an 18 or 19 yr old enforcer.
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Jul 20, 2007 21:08:50 GMT -3
Going into last season it was the same debate on here about whether the Rocket needed an enforcer because not many other teams in the division had them. We saw what happened as the season progressed with Savard going out and acquiring Lafferriere, time will tell if history repeats itself this season.
Just because some teams in a division/conference don't have enforcers, it doesn't necessarily mean that a team doesn't need one on their bench. Why did the Pittsburgh Penguins acquire George Laracque last season? Was it because some teams in their division had enforcers or was it because they wanted to ensure that Crosby, Malkin, etc don't get pushed around?
|
|
|
Post by habs24 on Jul 21, 2007 11:37:07 GMT -3
I'm not saying that the Rocket's strong second half was entirely the result of acquiring Laff, but it helped. No longer did you have Brett Gallant and that Chaisson guy from Hfx pounding on Laliberte. The entire team played with more confidence knowing that they wouldn't have to drop the gloves with the other teams heavy's. Laff was more than willing to step up and I thought it was a great move getting him at the deadline. I think we need one again this year. You know the foggies will have a tough squad again. They always do. Brett Gallant is still in SJ. I think Moncton will have one this year since they got pushed around so much last year. Hfx will more than likely take someone in. Not sure on the Capers but Brad Gallant may still be in the mix there. Didn't mean to start this debate again just expressing my opinion. I don't want to go the first half the year without having one and then at the deadline they decide that they need one.
|
|
mikeb
Draft Pick
Posts: 117
|
Post by mikeb on Aug 3, 2007 11:20:30 GMT -3
The thing is there aren't any real enforcers around the Division this season. Looking at current rosters you have Bat - Legros (6'01 - 207) assuming he makes it Mon - Lamoureux (6'02 - 204) supposed to be an enforcer After that on the other teams I see some big guys who are willing to go but aren't really enforcers. SJN - Boland (6'04 - 204) CB - Lamontage (6'04 - 218) Hal - Pender (6'04 - 207) Lew - Paquette (5'11 - 201) SNB - Gallant (6'0 - 180) Are you telling me that the combination of Gervais and Main/Paynter plus whoever else on our team can't matchup with that group? I would have a different opinion if this Division was still full of the Cormier's, Doyle's and Spencer's but it isn't. To me I would much rather use that roster spot for providing an opportunity and developing younger more skilled prospects than an 18 or 19 yr old enforcer. Mailloux for Bathurst is a big boy who isn't shy about dropping his gloves. Legros might not even make the team.
|
|