CanucksCorner.com Forums

He's an asshole...

donlever wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:20 pm He's an asshole...

Unquestionably!

Part of my point was I don't think there's much overlap in the groups of players.

Again, unless I'm misunderstanding the ideas.

We want/need both.

You know that though.

donlever wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:14 pm We want/need both.

You know that though.

You over-estimate my understanding of professional hockey.

Like I said earlier, I'm really not clear on what the asshole factor brings to the mission of winning a championship. Selling tickets, maybe, but not winning.

For example, even in one of the most violent periods in League history, I don't remember who the assholes were on the 1970s Canadiens teams that won so many Cups. It could be that I was just very young and naive, but I remember the Flyers having an abundance of assholes in the same period.

Or (and this is only a matter of written history for me) Stan Mikita deliberately scaled back the asshole factor, and became more effective as a result.

There aren't any stats that I know of for such things, but let's take Marchand as an example. How would be doing less to help the Bruins win if he weren't an asshole?

And I know I didn't hire you to be my hockey tutor. If it's just too tiresome to explain, no hard feelings.

Larry Robinson was an asshole and perhaps the toughest guy in the league.

Pierre Bouchard.

Gilles Lupien.

....were there to fight the Stan Jonathan's or Dave Schulzes of the world (although Robinson would have fought either any time any place).

Mario Tremblay was an asshole.

...assholes are tougher to compete against because they'll gladly knock your teeth out (or claim to have had sex with your old lady) to win.

Only so many guys are willing to have said teeth knocked out or hear that Mindy took the entire D corps dicks up her ass last night.

This weakens their fight back and emboldens your forces.

Assholes also tend to get players off their coached or game plan roles which then allows your lads a greater chance of success.

With Tom Wilson, or even Brad Marchand, on his line EP11.6 would be a far better (and more secure) hockey player.

With Tom Wilson and Matt Martin in the lineup the Canucks would be in the WCF conversation.

.....caveat re: the D of course which may be moving in the right direction, we shall see.

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:30 pm

donlever wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:14 pm We want/need both.

You know that though.

You over-estimate my understanding of professional hockey.

Like I said earlier, I'm really not clear on what the asshole factor brings to the mission of winning a championship. Selling tickets, maybe, but not winning.

For example, even in one of the most violent periods in League history, I don't remember who the assholes were on the 1970s Canadiens teams that won so many Cups. It could be that I was just very young and naive, but I remember the Flyers having an abundance of assholes in the same period.

Or (and this is only a matter of written history for me) Stan Mikita deliberately scaled back the asshole factor, and became more effective as a result.

There aren't any stats that I know of for such things, but let's take Marchand as an example. How would be doing less to help the Bruins win if he weren't an asshole?

And I know I didn't hire you to be my hockey tutor. If it's just too tiresome to explain, no hard feelings.

Did you watch the 2011 SCF?

While there were some injuries at play (Kesler and Hamhuis)…..the Bruins beat them in the alley. When you look at the rosters, the loss of Horton should have been heavily felt and certainly offset Kesler playing hurt. Our blueline was deep enough that Hamhuis playing injured should have been weatherable (not a word, I know).

We had no physical answer, and Boston knew it. There was no deterrent in blue and green. They weren’t afraid of picking on our best players because they knew that we would never pick on theirs. It wasn’t about having to answer the bell with gloves off.

Assholes doesn’t mean glove dropping scrappers . It means guys with a mean streak who can/will go after the other team.

On a scale of Nail Yakapov to Bobby Clarke, how bad do you want to win?

...or you could just say that.

Mëds wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:50 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:30 pm

donlever wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:14 pm We want/need both.

You know that though.

You over-estimate my understanding of professional hockey.

Like I said earlier, I'm really not clear on what the asshole factor brings to the mission of winning a championship. Selling tickets, maybe, but not winning.

For example, even in one of the most violent periods in League history, I don't remember who the assholes were on the 1970s Canadiens teams that won so many Cups. It could be that I was just very young and naive, but I remember the Flyers having an abundance of assholes in the same period.

Or (and this is only a matter of written history for me) Stan Mikita deliberately scaled back the asshole factor, and became more effective as a result.

There aren't any stats that I know of for such things, but let's take Marchand as an example. How would be doing less to help the Bruins win if he weren't an asshole?

And I know I didn't hire you to be my hockey tutor. If it's just too tiresome to explain, no hard feelings.

Did you watch the 2011 SCF?

While there were some injuries at play (Kesler and Hamhuis)…..the Bruins beat them in the alley. When you look at the rosters, the loss of Horton should have been heavily felt and certainly offset Kesler playing hurt. Our blueline was deep enough that Hamhuis playing injured should have been weatherable (not a word, I know).

We had no physical answer, and Boston knew it. There was no deterrent in blue and green. They weren’t afraid of picking on our best players because they knew that we would never pick on theirs. It wasn’t about having to answer the bell with gloves off.

Assholes doesn’t mean glove dropping scrappers . It means guys with a mean streak who can/will go after the other team.

M Pettersson plays with an edge. Has good hit totals and has fought Nurse, Deslauriers, Wilson, Domi, Bennett among others. He is a legit #3 D man. If they stumble and cant sign him they have five weeks to move him for a late 1st.

Topper wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 7:32 pm On a scale of Nail Yakapov to Bobby Clarke, how bad do you want to win?

You have often sought to make pithiness a trademark. This post is a triumph in that respect.

Thank you all for your patient explanations.

re 70's Habs dynasty tough guys. Larry Robinson, Pierre Bouchard, Gillesw Lupien, Rick Chartraw were among the best fighters in the league.. Doug Risebrough was an agitating asshole. Guy Lapointe, Mario Tremblay, Yvon Lambert and Bill Nyrop were hard nosed players. Those Habs team were as tough as Cherry's Bruins.

Once saw a story on Robinson, a few fights early in his career let the league know that he was not someone to challenge and rarely needed to drop the gloves after that. Oor was similar in that respect. Modern time, I'd say Chara.

Robinson vs Dave Schultz. https://youtu.be/HZmRWz_Dyk0?si=6SEvXkv5u1GirOHG

There's got to be some footage of Big Bird vs Dave Hutchison.

And I'm a big fan of Larry.

No idea what the 76-79 Habs have to do with this situation.

Blob Mckenzie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 9:22 pm
No idea what the 76-79 Habs have to do with this situation.

Defining assholes for RG.