Why did nobody respond to the hit by Adam Mair ---I mean, Radko Gudas?

[TMac21]

Too bad, first Frank and now Austin, a couple of young guys starting off on the wrong foot.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Since you are so insistent on making this about wins and losses...
How many more do you figure they will win because they didn't respond?




Good to see

1) People are claiming that camaraderie will be built based on a response.
2) They then claim that camaraderie is important to winning.
3) Thus the onus is on them. I didn't say NOT responding leads to wins. I'm saying that people claiming that a response was necessary have the burden of proof.

And yes, it should be about wins and losses. What else is there?

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

1) People are claiming that camaraderie will be built based on a response.
2) They then claim that camaraderie is important to winning.
3) Thus the onus is on them. I didn't say NOT responding leads to wins. I'm saying that people claiming that a response was necessary have the burden of proof.

And yes, it should be about wins and losses. What else is there?

Listen, you're one of my favorite posters but you're just baiting someone into an argument here and you should probably let it go.

Obviously it's impossible to quantify how much sticking up for teammates improves a team's chances of winning games in the future, but ask just about anybody in the NHL and they will tell you that stuff like that matters. Stats and results are important, but there is a human element to the sport that's impossible to measure, but is very real (if unpredictable and inconsistent).

 

[Colt.45Orr]

1) People are claiming that camaraderie will be built based on a response.
2) They then claim that camaraderie is important to winning.
3) Thus the onus is on them. I didn't say NOT responding leads to wins. I'm saying that people claiming that a response was necessary have the burden of proof.

And yes, it should be about wins and losses. What else is there?

I tend to like your posts in different areas of analysis but you always bog down these types of threads (anything questioning the physical component of the game) with the same rubbish and you end up making the same ridiculous arguments. I hate saying this because it sounds so lame and chotchy: but if you had ever played this organized, competitive TEAM sport --not beer league but the dangerous and physical version of hockey-- you would realize how hollow and silly your "points" sound.

 

[Ladyfan]

Ugg I hate this. Head injuries again...

 

[Dr Quincy]

I tend to like your posts in different areas of analysis but you always bog down these types of threads (anything questioning the physical component of the game) with the same rubbish and you end up making the same ridiculous arguments. I hate saying this because it sounds so lame and chotchy: but if you had ever played this organized, competitive TEAM sport --not beer league but the dangerous and physical version of hockey-- you would realize how hollow and silly your "points" sound.

We completely disagree, and that's fine. But to me there's nothing "hollow" or "silly" about saying that the lack of a fight in a preseason game will in no way hurt this team or damage their season. I think it's silly to say it will. I also don't think that the lack of a fight was a moral, intestinal or tactical mistake.

And no offense, but your appeal to authority at the end is negated by the fact that a group of people who have played a much higher level than you or I decided last night that a fight wouldn't really do much good.

I know you appreciate the physical side of the game and put a lot of stock in it and its tradition in the game, but honestly, I think the day is coming closer every day that while the game will retain physical play, it will lose fighting.

 

[Over the volcano]

1) People are claiming that camaraderie will be built based on a response.
2) They then claim that camaraderie is important to winning.
3) Thus the onus is on them. I didn't say NOT responding leads to wins. I'm saying that people claiming that a response was necessary have the burden of proof.

And yes, it should be about wins and losses. What else is there?

Rather than saying what you are not saying, and saying things about other posters, why don't you just say what you mean about gudas and the Bruins - should someone have responded?

 

[LouJersey]

I think for the Bruins during their glory run fighting and physical play without a doubt helped them win games and play better. They were better when physically engaged. I forget the record from 11-13 but it was really good compared to when they didn't. For this version in 16-17 I don't see them getting fired up over the physical aspect they just don't have the players that play that way anymore.

None of it has anything to do with yesterday. There is no two point excuse. It was just the right thing to do. Doesn't lead to more wins but one would think it help the foxhole mentality of a locker room.

I do enjoy the two sides in the debate though. I think Colt and Doc are two of the best hockey minds this board has to offer.

 

[JCRO]

Marc Savard went after Sean Avery for a low hit on Lucic in ...08? And again got into a skirmish in an Atlanta- Boston brawl after a low bridge hit from Meyers on looch.

If that small, non physical, elite player can do that, there's no excuse for anyone else.

And as many have mentioned, it's preseason, nothing on the line. Kick his ***

 

[DKH]

Haven't followed this all day so what's the verdict ?

Bruins are soft and suck?

Players on ice are soft and suck?

We need to get more physical players ?

 

[Colt.45Orr]

Haven't followed this all day so what's the verdict ?

Bruins are soft and suck?

Players on ice are soft and suck?

We need to get more physical players ?

My conclusion is that this team --that disappeared down the stretch 2 years in a row-- needs to reestablish an identity where they have each other's backs.

It seems like McQuaid and Randell are the only ones on the roster willing to go after the guys that target our players. I'm really wonder about Kevin Miller's physical game. Brilliant his rookie year, somewhat questionable --like his hockey sense-- ever since.

 

[HumBucker]

How many of those guys you just listed were on the team when Savard got hit? How many responded?

The details and circumstances of one incident can't be used as a yardstick for a larger issue.

Having a feeling of solidarity and cohesion with your teammates - whatever kind of team you're on – generally helps. That's been my experience, and I would argue, the experience of the vast majority of people who have participated in teams of one kind or another.

You're saying that knowing your teammates have your back doesn't help your confidence?

 

[BklyNBruiN]

The details and circumstances of one incident can't be used as a yardstick for a larger issue.

Having a feeling of solidarity and cohesion with your teammates - whatever kind of team you're on – generally helps. That's been my experience, and I would argue, the experience of the vast majority of people who have participated in teams of one kind or another.

You're saying that knowing your teammates have your back doesn't help your confidence?

I know you're not directing your question at me but, you're damn rite it does Buck. I played team sports and know the feeling. And were talking pro sports, of course it does..

 

[Ice Nine]

1) People are claiming that camaraderie will be built based on a response.
2) They then claim that camaraderie is important to winning.
3) Thus the onus is on them. I didn't say NOT responding leads to wins. I'm saying that people claiming that a response was necessary have the burden of proof.

And yes, it should be about wins and losses. What else is there?

Hey Doc, I'm also a fan of your postings on here, on pretty much every count, but this is one of the few issues on which we seem to disagree.

For me it's not necessarily Wins/Losses, though maybe indirectly. Rather, responding provides a measure of deterrence: if you try a cheap shot / dirty hit on one of our guys, there will be a response. You may take a punches to the teeth. You may take a big hit back. You may very well experience some pain in return for your dirty cheap shot.

So next time, maybe that dirty player thinks twice before running one of our guys. They'll be hearing footsteps all the time, and think twice.

In that since, a response may help protect players, over the long haul, from injury, thus securing more Wins with a healthier team -- it's a deterrent to injury-causing dirty hits.

That's going to be almost impossible to quantify, but it's something intuitive about the way teams interact.

 

[DKH]

My conclusion is that this team --that disappeared down the stretch 2 years in a row-- needs to reestablish an identity where they have each other's backs.

It seems like McQuaid and Randell are the only ones on the roster willing to go after the guys that target our players. I'm really wonder about Kevin Miller's physical game. Brilliant his rookie year, somewhat questionable --like his hockey sense-- ever since.

I think it's foolish to deal McQuaid and I'm very cool with Randell 13th forward

 

[BklyNBruiN]

Well they're you go, Austin Czarnik will be out for a week to 10 days. Season starts this coming Thursday.

https://www.nhl.com/news/flyers-radko-gudas-to-have-player-safety-hearing/c-282513520?tid=277549076

 

[Pia8988]

How many Bruins players did we see headshotted even when they were tough? Where was the deterrent when Loui got hit? Not only that, he got hit AGAIN, just after coming back from injury. Where was the deterrent there? Pretty sure Lucic, McQuaid, Iginla, Chara and Thornton were all on the roster then. What about when James Neal kneed Marchand in the head while he was down on the ice.

Are other teams going to see Randell skating around 7 minutes a game and be scared if they maybe cross the line on a hit?

It's great to see the response and see an opponent 'pay' for doing something dirty against the Bruins, but let's not pretend it prevents anything. It's reactionary, not preventative.

 

[Baddkarma]

A week to 10 days and may never be the same. We have seen it before.

 

[DKH]

A week to 10 days and may never be the same. We have seen it before.

Sadly you are right - this guy needs to have his wits to think fast and avoid getting splattered legally

A shame but the good news it's mild not moderate or severe at least going by time frame they have to sit a week out so he had issues in the quiet room check over

Hopefully next time he does this patented borderline predatory hit the player will react quick enough and butt end him right in his ****ing ugly face

If I'm Claude I have a meeting and tell my team I have no problem about losing faceoffs outside the zone with defenseman rushing in to aid a teammate or even getting a penalty for **** like that Flyers did

It's not saying goon it up or calling anyone out its just telling the players if you feel like you need to aid a teammate don't worry about this and how the coaching staff will view it

 

[northeastern]

A week to 10 days and may never be the same. We have seen it before.

Let's stay positive here. Maybe they're just keeping him out for safety sake. He'll be fine, light it up on the big club when he's back.

 

[Ice Nine]

How many Bruins players did we see headshotted even when they were tough? Where was the deterrent when Loui got hit? Not only that, he got hit AGAIN, just after coming back from injury. Where was the deterrent there? Pretty sure Lucic, McQuaid, Iginla, Chara and Thornton were all on the roster then. What about when James Neal kneed Marchand in the head while he was down on the ice.

Are other teams going to see Randell skating around 7 minutes a game and be scared if they maybe cross the line on a hit?

It's great to see the response and see an opponent 'pay' for doing something dirty against the Bruins, but let's not pretend it prevents anything. It's reactionary, not preventative.

FWIW, you have no evidence to back up anything you assert here about whether there's any deterrent effect. Zero. None.

Yes, we sustained cheap shots even when we had a tough team. No surprise, that's hockey. But for all we know, there could have been 5 times more head shots / cheap shots on our players that were deterred by our willingness to respond.

It's impossible to prove a counter factual-- that but for a response, there would have been X many more hits. We'd have to do exit interviews of players and then they'd have to be honest about their intentions to do dirty hits. "I would have blindsided Loui a second time, but for Lucic being on the ice". Of course, we'd never know either way.

I think some dirty shots can be deterred and others not. Sometimes you have players, like Matt Cooke, who are basically sociopaths on ice and don't think through their actions. Others try to stir up play, but would think twice after a response.

 

[Pia8988]

FWIW, you have no evidence to back up anything you assert here about whether there's any deterrent effect. Zero. None.

Yes, we sustained cheap shots even when we had a tough team. No surprise, that's hockey. But for all we know, there could have been 5 times more head shots / cheap shots on our players that were deterred by our willingness to respond.

It's impossible to prove a counter factual-- that but for a response, there would have been X many more hits. We'd have to do exit interviews of players and then they'd have to be honest about their intentions to do dirty hits. "I would have blindsided Loui a second time, but for Lucic being on the ice". Of course, we'd never know either way.

I think some dirty shots can be deterred and others not. Sometimes you have players, like Matt Cooke, who are basically sociopaths on ice and don't think through their actions. Others try to stir up play, but would think twice after a response.

Can't the exact same be said about your quote?

"So next time, maybe that dirty player thinks twice before running one of our guys. They'll be hearing footsteps all the time, and think twice."

Fighting isn't a deterrent to make them stop, this can be proven by the simple fact that it hasn't stopped. Harsher penalties to the player and to the team who regular employ such players would. A GM would be less likely to carry a Matt Cooke if the team got fined and draft picks threatened every time he hit someone in the head.

 

[DKH]

This is a Gudas issue not a league.

It's pretty simple you explain to players not that they need to the serious issues facing all athletes with concussions and to show respect.

99% get it - this stuff is going way down. It's just a few bad apples and Gudas is one if not the top of the food chain. It's an art to him - it's like a golf club in his bag. Part of his game.

 

[BruinDust]

Sadly you are right - this guy needs to have his wits to think fast and avoid getting splattered legally

A shame but the good news it's mild not moderate or severe at least going by time frame they have to sit a week out so he had issues in the quiet room check over

Hopefully next time he does this patented borderline predatory hit the player will react quick enough and butt end him right in his ****ing ugly face

If I'm Claude I have a meeting and tell my team I have no problem about losing faceoffs outside the zone with defenseman rushing in to aid a teammate or even getting a penalty for **** like that Flyers did

It's not saying goon it up or calling anyone out its just telling the players if you feel like you need to aid a teammate don't worry about this and how the coaching staff will view it

On one hand, your concerned about Czarnik's ability to think the game coming back from a concussion. And I agree it's a concern.

Yet you continue to advocate to not deal McQuaid (and specifically his albatross contract) as if concussion he had has no impact on his awful performance since then.

What McQuaid brings (sticking up for teammates) isn't enough to justify not moving him before it's too late.

What good is Randell (who I like) as the 13th forward. I didn't know he could seek retribution on guys who do the Bruins dirty from the press-box. No one is scared of Randell anyways.

If it's a retribution seeker they want, go find a LW/RW for the 4th line who can play a regular shift/ be a everyday player AND put some fear into people.

 

[Gee Wally]

Being somewhat old school Im disappointed somebody didnt beat the hell outta him.

But the world is changing. The best deterrent to this stuff is via the wallet. Make that a true pain point along with so many infractions and you are out. I mean done.