My point is that a player can make an argument for just about anything being considered as "standing up for a teammate." And I'm sure there have been times when a player is "standing up for a teammate" and it can lead to his team's loss. So, "standing up for a teammate" can be stupid, depending on the circumstance.
- mcefalu

Sometimes the team is more important then the game. If a game needs to be lost to protect a star player or a teammate, so be it.

Spock.
- youarewrong

I was sooo hoping you'd say Buckwheat.

5 or 10 years ago, I would have been the first guy screaming for Rosehill to be dressed against the Leafs.

Ten years ago, a guy like Kaleta would have been shunned by teammates for running around like a jackass and refusing to answer the bell for it. Enforcers fought to protect their skilled teammates, not to protect jackasses who delivered a cheap poop
- Jsaquella

And if you take out the instigator rule, then Shelly doesnt need his permission to fight Kaleta, and then Kaleta stops, at least for 5 minutes, in which Shelly goes back out and doesnt ask again.

That's kind of the point. What good is it for Jay Rosehill to stick up for Claude Giroux when he's sitting in the quiet room after getting his bell rung? Oh, Giroux's out for ten games, but man, Jay Rosehill beat the poop out of John Scott over it...even if Scott's not the one that gave Giroux the concussion.

The logic is priceless.

The first time your argument makes sense will be the last time you have to state it.
- Jsaquella

You can state my argument doesn't make sense until you're blue in the face. You're still hung up on an enforcer preventing something from happening. That's what makes zero sense. That has never been the case. And if you think that is the argument being made, then you aren't getting the argument being made.

They should have gave you guys Pittsburgh and Columbus then moved the future Quebec Nordiques and Toronto Legacy in with us until they relocate. We can take the Jackets and Pens back after that happens.
- mayorofangrytown

thats a dumb name.. It'll obvously be some canadian name like the Beavers or the Snow

Well I gathered that you think I'm mistaken

But I'm going to agree to disagree here. I similarly don't think you've demonstrated any real need nor benefit for enforcers.
- BulliesPhan87

The history of the game demonstrates the need for an enforcer. And I think I've made a solid argument for why I don't have an issue with Rosehill in the lineup. And it's why some NHL GM's still want one. As I've said many times. I don't think there's a right or wrong here. I think it's just different philosophies. I have no problem with Rosehill in the lineup tonight becaue Orr is.

The history of the game demonstrates the need for an enforcer. And I think I've made a solid argument for why I don't have an issue with Rosehill in the lineup. And it's why some NHL GM's still want one. As I've said many times. I don't think there's a right or wrong here. I think it's just different philosophies. I have no problem with Rosehill in the lineup tonight becaue Orr is.
- MJL

History Will Be Made

You can state my argument doesn't make sense until you're blue in the face. You're still hung up on an enforcer preventing something from happening. That's what makes zero sense. That has never been the case. And if you think that is the argument being made, then you aren't getting the argument being made.
- MJL

"(insert goon name) keeps the other teams honest"

"(insert goon name) prevents other guys from taking liberties with our skill players"

I've never heard those phrases used before.

thats a dumb name.. It'll obvously be some canadian name like the Beavers or the Snow
- Arctic_AARDVARK

When I first heard it I was all WTF!!!!! Now it's so silly I can help repeating it.

For the record, I much prefer drunken crowd fights over two goons slugging it out on the ice. But only if all the people involved in the fight are legally drunk, I don't wanna see some drunken slob crack some sober dude. There's a code.

"Goons" waste my time and a roster spot. I'd rather see a kid with some skill who worked his way up get the roster spot over some guy who made it because he can't score or back check but is willing to punch and get punched.

Anyone who fights in a game gets ejected plus a game. It won't eliminate fighting because it's going to happen but you better be pretty pissed to get in a fight.

Exactly.

And honestly, if a guy like Kaleta or Sean Avery was confronted with a fight, as often as not, they'd turtle and end up drawing a power play for their team...but somehow the guy that "fought" them was smart for standing up for his teammates.
- Jsaquella

Really then who is worse, players like Kaleta and Avery that can really hurt someone and draw a lot of gray lines around the rules, and use rules like instigator to hide behind, or Goons that fight by a code, and stick up for your team?

Giroux on DNL right now.

edit: Rosehill is standing right behind him.

Giroux on DNL right now.

edit: Rosehill is standing right behind him.
- MBFlyerfan

Really then who is worse, players like Kaleta and Avery that can really hurt someone and draw a lot of gray lines around the rules, and use rules like instigator to hide behind, or Goons that fight by a code, and stick up for your team?
- youarewrong

Forget Orr is playing tonight (I know it's reality), would you rather pay to watch Ty McGinn or Scott Laughton play hockey tonight or would you rather watch Jay Rosehill? Because when it comes right down to it don't we want to see the best hockey players play the game? We are sitting down to watch hockey right?

Giroux on DNL right now.

edit: Rosehill is standing right behind him.
- MBFlyerfan

Tell me they both have pants on...

The history of the game demonstrates the need for an enforcer. And I think I've made a solid argument for why I don't have an issue with Rosehill in the lineup. And it's why some NHL GM's still want one. As I've said many times. I don't think there's a right or wrong here. I think it's just different philosophies. I have no problem with Rosehill in the lineup tonight becaue Orr is.
- MJL

I think there are trends in hockey. You will see in influx of dirty small players like Kaleta, Cooke, Barnaby.... then after a while teams will respond to those guys by getting bigger goonish guys. Eventually, then teams trend away from the bigger guys for more skilled players that agitate. Then those agitators, become dangerous like Cooke and Kaleta, and the Goon comes back around.... Such is the cycle of hockey life.

Our cycles aren't sync'd yet..... girlfriend.

Really then who is worse, players like Kaleta and Avery that can really hurt someone and draw a lot of gray lines around the rules, and use rules like instigator to hide behind, or Goons that fight by a code, and stick up for your team?
- youarewrong

Goons are an ineffective deterrent for stopping rats like Kaleta and Avery from "running around" is the point. Even without the instigator, or a code, a goon would just get piled on by the other team the second they went after a non-goon, as we saw from the Kessel/Scott situation, if the linesmen didn't end the fight right away already.

There really isn't any situation where Rosehill would be able to take Kaleta aside and beat the living pulp out of him uncontested for sticking an elbow or knee out at Giroux.

So if the deterrent isn't deterring, what's the point? That's pretty much why most of the heavies have been flushed out of the league.

Forget Orr is playing tonight (I know it's reality), would you rather pay to watch Ty McGinn or Scott Laughton play hockey tonight or would you rather watch Jay Rosehill? Because when it comes right down to it don't we want to see the best hockey players play the game? We are sitting down to watch hockey right?
- mayorofangrytown

No. I want to see the best TEAM play the game. The best TEAM isn't always the best players.

No. I want to see the best TEAM play the game. The best TEAM isn't always the best players.
- youarewrong

K Herb Brooks

(I agree with this assessment though for what it's worth...)

Tell me they both have pants on...
- mayorofangrytown

"(insert goon name) keeps the other teams honest"

"(insert goon name) prevents other guys from taking liberties with our skill players"

I've never heard those phrases used before.
- Tomahawk

Just because phrases are used, doesn't mean it is correct. And I'm discussing my position on how I feel about having an enforcer on the roster or in the lineup. And those phrases have zilch to do with my position on the subject.

No. I want to see the best TEAM play the game. The best TEAM isn't always the best players.
- youarewrong

So you're the GM who's going to find a roster spot on the Olympic team for John Scott because he's the best at what he does?

Goons are an ineffective deterrent for stopping rats like Kaleta and Avery from "running around" is the point. Even without the instigator, or a code, a goon would just get piled on by the other team the second they went after a non-goon, as we saw from the Kessel/Scott situation, if the linesmen didn't end the fight right away already.

There really isn't any situation where Rosehill would be able to take Kaleta aside and beat the living pulp out of him uncontested for sticking an elbow or knee out at Giroux.

So if the deterrent isn't deterring, what's the point? That's pretty much why most of the heavies have been flushed out of the league.
- Tomahawk

Really it's all relative. I think without an instigator penality you would see rosehill pummel kaleta for injuring Giroux. Both get 5. You dont want to get pummeled, dont do stupid poop. And that goes for the stars of the league too. If crosby wants to hack both of giroux's wrists, be ready to answer for it.

Forget Orr is playing tonight (I know it's reality), would you rather pay to watch Ty McGinn or Scott Laughton play hockey tonight or would you rather watch Jay Rosehill? Because when it comes right down to it don't we want to see the best hockey players play the game? We are sitting down to watch hockey right?
- mayorofangrytown

Of course the answer is obvious. I'd like to see enforcers totally removed from the game. But as long as there is a Colton Orr in the opposition lineup. I want the Flyers to have an enforcer to counter with.

K Herb Brooks

(I agree with this assessment though for what it's worth...)
- Giroux_Is_God

AGAIN!

AGAIN!

AGAIN!

AGAIN!