This is 2014 alone. The second half of the season. Of course because these are only three more examples, I suppose I should just give in and agree with you, right?



His game hasn't changed much at all since being here.
- SuperSchennBros

You sited a cheap headshot that resulted in a penalty, something others have been suspended for?

And it doesn't refute the argument that Hartnell's hitting and physicality have declined as the years have passed. And that's not a knock against him, that's just the way it works, the body wears down.

You sited a cheap headshot that resulted in a penalty, something others have been suspended for?

And it doesn't refute the argument that Hartnell's hitting and physicality have declined as the years have passed. And that's not a knock against him, that's just the way it works, the body wears down.
- wolfhounds

It's physical play no matter what excuses you can come up with.

This is 2014 alone. The second half of the season. Of course because these are only three more examples, I suppose I should just give in and agree with you, right?


His game hasn't changed much at all since being here.
- SuperSchennBros

Yes, because I'm always 100% right, duh

It's physical play no matter what excuses you can come up with.
- SuperSchennBros

Look, I like Hartnell. I wish him no ill will. He and the Flyers have both lost a bit of their physicality, and perhaps not by coincidence. But that doesn't change the fact that he doesn't fight or hit or stir things up as much as he used to. Raffl likely had as many big hits throughout the season as Hartsy; Rino and the Schenn Bros had a lot more. That's just the way it is. Or was.

And I have no idea why I would be making excuses for a professional hockey player.

It's physical play no matter what excuses you can come up with.
- SuperSchennBros

It's 3 instances of physical play during the season.

It was 60 degrees at least 2 times this past winter season in the Philly area. Therefore, it was a mild winter.

The reality is it was one of the coldest, snowiest winters I can remember. Not that I have a problem with that. I love the cold

Snow in the city sucks though. Snow is way more fun/way less infuriating in Lancaster

Look, I like Hartnell. I wish him no ill will. He and the Flyers have both lost a bit of their physicality, and perhaps not by coincidence. But that doesn't change the fact that he doesn't fight or hit or stir things up as much as he used to. Raffl likely had as many big hits throughout the season as Hartsy; Rino and the Schenn Bros had a lot more. That's just the way it is. Or was.

And I have no idea why I would be making excuses for a professional hockey player.
- wolfhounds

Scott Hartnell had 155 hits last season. The most among forwards came from Matt Martin with 359. Zac Rinaldo was 11th in the league and first among Flyers with 231 but Harnell isn't Rinaldo. Hartnell isn't so desperate to make something happen with such limited minutes that he has to go out of his way to hit guys but it doesn't mean he's declined in physical play.

The Boychuk fight I showed you was at the end of this season!

In case anyone was wondering, Steve Ott was 6th in the league among forwards.

EDIT

Interesting side note.

Raffl didn't have as many hits as Hartnell as you suggested. He had 113, tied with...Yes, you guessed it. RJ Umburger.

Scott Hartnell had 155 hits last season. The most among forwards came from Matt Martin with 359. Zac Rinaldo was 11th in the league and first among Flyers with 231 but Harnell isn't Rinaldo. Hartnell isn't so desperate to make something happen with such limited minutes that he has to go out of his way to hit guys but it doesn't mean he's declined in physical play.

The Boychuk fight I showed you was at the end of this season!

In case anyone was wondering, Steve Ott was 6th in the league among forwards.

EDIT

Interesting side note.

Raffl didn't have as many hits as Hartnell as you suggested. He had 113, tied with...Yes, you guessed it. RJ Umburger.
- SuperSchennBros

I said "big hits". That's what this particular conversation has been about. If we're going to consider total hits, we also have to consider games played and average time on ice.

I said "big hits". That's what this particular conversation has been about. If we're going to consider total hits, we also have to consider games played and average time on ice.
- wolfhounds

No, this conversation was never about "Big Hits". It's been about whether or not Hartnell is a physical player or in your view, is his physical play declining.It isn't.

No, this conversation was never about "Big Hits". It's been about whether or not Hartnell is a physical player or in your view, is his physical play declining.It isn't.
- SuperSchennBros

I'm gonna chime in again and just say hits =/= what encompasses "physical play".

Hits are part of physical play, sure, but there's other stuff too- most nonquantifiable....so...I think Hartsy's physical game is on the downswing because it seems like he doesn't mix it up after the whistle as much as he used to. Or muck it up in the corners, or pester, or anything like that. He's not as much as a power forward anymore. It's natural...as I read our canine friend Wolf wrote, it's also natural for a power forwards body to feel the toll of power forwarding for years on end. Nowadays, it's almost like he thinks he's more of a finesses/sniper player (please note I didn't say "he thinks he's solely a finesse/sniper player") than pest/yeoman guy, but I believe he had his best success under the latter role.

You don't think that. That's fine. You don't think that because of his hit totals, which the numbers show are not really changing. Or at least, aren't changing drastically or showing any sort of drastic trend. That's valid, but it's a bit of shortsighted, since it doesn't seem like you're considering other physical aspects of the game.

I don't feel like arguing anymore because it's just going to be "yeah huh nuh uh yeah huh" from here on out.

I'm gonna chime in again and just say hits =/= what encompasses "physical play".

Hits are part of physical play, sure, but there's other stuff too- most nonquantifiable....so...I think Hartsy's physical game is on the downswing because it seems like he doesn't mix it up after the whistle as much as he used to. Or muck it up in the corners, or pester, or anything like that. He's not as much as a power forward anymore. It's natural...as I read our canine friend Wolf wrote, it's also natural for a power forwards body to feel the toll of power forwarding for years on end. Nowadays, it's almost like he thinks he's more of a finesses/sniper player (please note I didn't say "he thinks he's solely a finesse/sniper player") than pest/yeoman guy, but I believe he had his best success under the latter role.

You don't think that. That's fine. You don't think that because of his hit totals, which the numbers show are not really changing. Or at least, aren't changing drastically or showing any sort of drastic trend. That's valid, but it's a bit of shortsighted, since it doesn't seem like you're considering other physical aspects of the game.

I don't feel like arguing anymore because it's just going to be "yeah huh nuh uh yeah huh" from here on out.
- Giroux_Is_God

You are 100 percent wrong. I've posted recent clips. I've presented the stats. The nonsense after the whistle and chatter towards opposing players is meaningless and has nothing to do with physical play. Either way he still upsets opposing players which the clips also show. You think he's lost his edge because he doesn't say "(frank) you" to other players anymore as if it takes a serious effort in doing so? Now that's funny.

You are 100 percent wrong. I've posted recent clips. I've presented the stats. The nonsense after the whistle and chatter towards opposing players is meaningless and has nothing to do with physical play. Either way he still upsets opposing players which the clips also show. You think he's lost his edge because he doesn't say "(frank) you" to other players anymore as if it takes a serious effort in doing so? Now that's funny.
- SuperSchennBros

But...how can this be when I'm 100% right all the time?

Also, why so hostile?

Let's have some fun.

I'll also present a clip!

This is the entire OT sequence when G scored with 4 seconds left. At the 2:45 mark of the video, you can see Hartnell's only shift of the period. He didn't throw one hit- didn't even ATTEMPT to throw a hit- during his whole shift. Therefore, I can conclude his physical play for that game was minuscule.

http://youtu.be/g_iyy57vfGc?t=2m45s

See? It's a little silly, eh?

But...how can this be when I'm 100% right all the time?

Also, why so hostile?

Let's have some fun.

I'll also present a clip!

This is the entire OT sequence when G scored with 4 seconds left. At the 2:45 mark of the video, you can see Hartnell's only shift of the period. He didn't throw one hit- didn't even ATTEMPT to throw a hit- during his whole shift. Therefore, I can conclude his physical play for that game was minuscule.

http://youtu.be/g_iyy57vfGc?t=2m45s

See? It's a little silly, eh?
- Giroux_Is_God

And you expect what? Hartnell to possible cost his team in OT against a measuring stick team? Not just a measuring stick team but the defending champions at the time.

Your argument is becoming stupid. We won because he didn't do what you were expecting or hoping for. It doesn't mean he's not a physical player.

Hartnell also didn't fall once which is also rare.

And you expect what? Hartnell to possible cost his team in OT against a measuring stick team? Not just a measuring stick team but the defending champions at the time.

Your argument is becoming stupid. We won because he didn't do what you were expecting or hoping for. It doesn't mean he's not a physical player.
- SuperSchennBros

You showed us 3 clips that showed Hartnell doing physical player things to illustrate your point of him not declining in physicality.

I showed you 1 clip of him not being a physical player, to illustrate my point of his physicality diminishing over the past few seasons.

You concluded from your clips he hasn't changed in the physicality department, since it's consistent with the clips. He's still just as physical!

I concluded his physical game is almost nonexistent, which is consistent with the clip.

My point is twofold: 1) You're using the day's weather to make conclusions regarding the climate. Your logic regarding your chapter of the argument using the clips is invalid. I'm trying to prove that point with my video up there and my (flawed) logic that goes with it. And 2) this is silly to argue about. You and I watch the same Hartnell and we differ in opinion. Arguing back and forth is just going to get us no place fast.

Why don't we agree to disagree? Or no?

EDIT: He definitely stumbled to his knees in the corner of the Hawks' zone...so...yeah

You showed us 3 clips that showed Hartnell doing physical player things to illustrate your point of him not declining in physicality.

I showed you 1 clip of him not being a physical player, to illustrate my point of his physicality diminishing over the past few seasons.

You concluded from your clips he hasn't changed in the physicality department, since it's consistent with the clips. He's still just as physical!

I concluded his physical game is almost nonexistent, which is consistent with the clip.

My point is twofold: 1) You're using the day's weather to make conclusions regarding the climate. Your logic regarding your chapter of the argument using the clips is invalid. I'm trying to prove that point with my video up there and my (flawed) logic that goes with it. And 2) this is silly to argue about. You and I watch the same Hartnell and we differ in opinion. Arguing back and forth is just going to get us no place fast.

Why don't we agree to disagree? Or no?

EDIT: He definitely stumbled to his knees in the corner of the Hawks' zone...so...yeah
- Giroux_Is_God

We can agree to disagree, the only problem is. I am 100 percent right and you are 100 percent wrong. No if's, and's or even doubt's about it.

This has nothing to do with climate.

We can agree to disagree, the only problem is. I am 100 percent right and you are 100 percent wrong. No if's, and's or even doubt's about it.

This has nothing to do with climate.
- SuperSchennBros

What about but's?

And no, that's incorrect as well, because I am, in fact, 100% right 100% of the time.

The climate things was an analogy by the way. I sincerely hope you get that.

As in, you're taking a teensy sample of a real bog population and trying to make conclusions about the population based on that teensy sample. That's flawed, and invalid. I wasn't actually talking about global warming or anything.

Good lawd. Well on that note, I'm going to try to get some sleep. I need to be up I'm 2 hours

It was real. It was fun. But it wasn't real fun.

What about but's?

And no, that's incorrect as well, because I am, in fact, 100% right 100% of the time.

The climate things was an analogy by the way. I sincerely hope you get that.

As in, you're taking a teensy sample of a real bog population and trying to make conclusions about the population based on that teensy sample. That's flawed, and invalid. I wasn't actually talking about global warming or anything.

Good lawd. Well on that note, I'm going to try to get some sleep. I need to be up I'm 2 hours

It was real. It was fun. But it wasn't real fun.
- Giroux_Is_God

Well for starters, Giroux isn't god so your making it tough right out of the gate of making the valid point that you're 100% right 100% of the time.

I've given one recent example of Hartnell's physical game in the playoffs which led to a goal. I've given you three recent clips of his physical play from three different games. I've presented the stats over the course of the entire season. The best you can do is your word, examples of climate (which doesn't matter), one clip of one shift in a fragile situation, and you've flipped flopping from being physical to being an annoying player after the whistle to prove whatever point your trying to make.

And you'll stay up. You always do.

By the way, I'm pretty sure there isn't a stat for scrums after the whistle. Do you know why? Because it doesn't matter.

It's quite possible AMac would have cost more, but my guess is that contract would have gotten him to the Flyers without trading. I see it as a pick for a tryout on how he fits with the team, which is okay if thought about like that. That to me is better than trading for Streit's rights before FA. Not having their own 2nd and 3rd round picks for 2015 is a bit of a bummer.

I'll give you a counter argument... Bryz. IMO he completely negotiated against himself because I sincerely doubt any other team would have made an offer close to that. After Snider called the goalie situation out in public, it definitely tied his hands (I really blame Snider for this). Between that and trading for his rights, Bryz's agent had Homer by the cojones and the rest is history.
- mmcclatchy

But my point is that the Flyers go into that knowing what the situation is and what they're willing to pay. And the length of the Bryzgalov deal was ll about lowering the Cap hit. Bryzgalov was in the drivers seat no matter how the Flyers approached it. As most top free agents are.

I'm gonna chime in again and just say hits =/= what encompasses "physical play".

Hits are part of physical play, sure, but there's other stuff too- most nonquantifiable....so...I think Hartsy's physical game is on the downswing because it seems like he doesn't mix it up after the whistle as much as he used to. Or muck it up in the corners, or pester, or anything like that. He's not as much as a power forward anymore. It's natural...as I read our canine friend Wolf wrote, it's also natural for a power forwards body to feel the toll of power forwarding for years on end. Nowadays, it's almost like he thinks he's more of a finesses/sniper player (please note I didn't say "he thinks he's solely a finesse/sniper player") than pest/yeoman guy, but I believe he had his best success under the latter role.

You don't think that. That's fine. You don't think that because of his hit totals, which the numbers show are not really changing. Or at least, aren't changing drastically or showing any sort of drastic trend. That's valid, but it's a bit of shortsighted, since it doesn't seem like you're considering other physical aspects of the game.

I don't feel like arguing anymore because it's just going to be "yeah huh nuh uh yeah huh" from here on out.
- Giroux_Is_God

Really the point is that Superschennbros has at least provided some evidence both in terms of video, and in hit stats to the table to back up his opinion. And his opinion is called shortsighted. Well I haven't seen anything from the other side of the debate to back up the opinion that Hartnell is becoming less physical, other then the new catch word of "eye test". So who is shortsighted here? I don't think Hartnell's game has changed much in that regard at all.

But...how can this be when I'm 100% right all the time?

Also, why so hostile?

Let's have some fun.

I'll also present a clip!

This is the entire OT sequence when G scored with 4 seconds left. At the 2:45 mark of the video, you can see Hartnell's only shift of the period. He didn't throw one hit- didn't even ATTEMPT to throw a hit- during his whole shift. Therefore, I can conclude his physical play for that game was minuscule.

http://youtu.be/g_iyy57vfGc?t=2m45s

See? It's a little silly, eh?
- Giroux_Is_God

This video was a poor example to offer, for a few simple reasons. For one, for the majority of time that Hartnell was on the ice, the Flyers had the puck. In fact he had possession of the puck for a larger portion of the shift. And he was battling with the puck along the wall, and tired to take the puck to the net. And really the only opportunity he had in the shift to make a hit, was when Hjamalsson had the puck, but he wisely backed off of that, because Hjamalsson's back was to Hartnell. So offering this video as evidence for Hartnell not being physical is silly.

Well for starters, Giroux isn't god so your making it tough right out of the gate of making the valid point that you're 100% right 100% of the time.

I've given one recent example of Hartnell's physical game in the playoffs which led to a goal. I've given you three recent clips of his physical play from three different games. I've presented the stats over the course of the entire season. The best you can do is your word, examples of climate (which doesn't matter), one clip of one shift in a fragile situation, and you've flipped flopping from being physical to being an annoying player after the whistle to prove whatever point your trying to make.

And you'll stay up. You always do.

By the way, I'm pretty sure there isn't a stat for scrums after the whistle. Do you know why? Because it doesn't matter.
- SuperSchennBros

Exactly right. The videos offered wasn't the entire argument you offered. It was just part of it. And whether right or wrong, you at least backed your argument up, rather then offering an irrelevant analogy on climate.

Look, I like Hartnell. I wish him no ill will. He and the Flyers have both lost a bit of their physicality, and perhaps not by coincidence. But that doesn't change the fact that he doesn't fight or hit or stir things up as much as he used to. Raffl likely had as many big hits throughout the season as Hartsy; Rino and the Schenn Bros had a lot more. That's just the way it is. Or was.

And I have no idea why I would be making excuses for a professional hockey player.
- wolfhounds

What the ??? Okay, here's (after a quick search) one for Hartnell. Please show me at least one "big hit" from Raffl:

What the ??? Okay, here's (after a quick search) one for Hartnell. Please show me at least one "big hit" from Raffl:


- jmatchett383

And you'll stay up. You always do.
- SuperSchennBros

Again, are we making fun of an actual issue I have to deal with in my actual life?

Exactly right. The videos offered wasn't the entire argument you offered. It was just part of it. And whether right or wrong, you at least backed your argument up, rather then offering an irrelevant analogy on climate.
- MJL

How in the (frank) was that analogy irrelevant.

This video was a poor example to offer, for a few simple reasons. For one, for the majority of time that Hartnell was on the ice, the Flyers had the puck. In fact he had possession of the puck for a larger portion of the shift. And he was battling with the puck along the wall, and tired to take the puck to the net. And really the only opportunity he had in the shift to make a hit, was when Hjamalsson had the puck, but he wisely backed off of that, because Hjamalsson's back was to Hartnell. So offering this video as evidence for Hartnell not being physical is silly.
- MJL

The video was a (frank)ing satire