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

[bb_fan]

So how many less games are you predicting they win this season because they didn't respond?

It's not a debate, a discussion a difference of opinion.

You take something that you know isn't quantifiable and (because of that) demand it be quantified to prove your point.

Countless articles and quotes from smaller less physical players over the years expressing their appreciation for a less skilled physical guy stepping up for them, having there back etc etc and how sometimes it gives them just a touch more confidence and attitude.

But hey, down play all that because someone else can't directly quantify that into wins and loss's.

 

[DKH]

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.

I actually think McQuaid is useful and his contract is good

Been watching him closely for years and not one time in the 2011 or 2013 Cup Finals did I think 'oh my God. McQuaid's out here we are screwed'

To be 100% honest this McQuaid crap is an HF thing. It's a group here that just piss and moan about him. In my world and it's a pretty big world the people I interact with are 99.9% on McQuaid side. My hockey buddies I tend to think are quite sharp.

I'm cool with people undervaluing on McQuaid or thinking I don't know what I'm talking about I'm pretty much thinking thinking the same thing the other way- but even if he's a bottom pair guy he's on my team. And I'm quite reassured with the type of people who see it this way.

I like Randell and I am a big McQuaid advocate.

 

[DominicT]

I actually think McQuaid is useful and his contract is good

Been watching him closely for years and not one time in the 2011 or 2013 Cup Finals did I think 'oh my God. McQuaid's out here we are screwed'

To be 100% honest this McQuaid crap is an HF thing. It's a group here that just piss and moan about him. In my world and it's a pretty big world the people I interact with are 99.9% on McQuaid side. My hockey buddies I tend to think are quite sharp.

I'm cool with people undervaluing on McQuaid or thinking I don't know what I'm talking about I'm pretty much thinking thinking the same thing the other way- but even if he's a bottom pair guy he's on my team. And I'm quite reassured with the type of people who see it this way.

I like Randell and I am a big McQuaid advocate.

With all due respect Dan finals are going on 6 and 4 years ago. Game has changed even in that short time and it doesn't favor players like McQuaid.

I'm going to obviously be in the very small minority here but I'd much prefer discussions on how to get guys like Gudas out of the game as opposed to why no one responded.

So to answer the thread title: Only the players and the coaching staff know why (or why not). No one here has a damn clue as to why they didn't respond.

 

[Fenian24]

I don't see this as an indictment on the organization at all. The game is changing so much I don't even think anymore of having a team that can fight. If it wasn't for this I wouldn't have even been aware of my change in philosophy. The players have so much respect for each other by and large predators like Gudas are becoming rarer and rarer.

I was there and wasn't really sure what happened other than they pos Gudas was the guy. Should they have reacted probably but I'm not as bothered as I used to be. Kevan Miller was there but not sure what he saw and he 100% is a stand up team guy and tough

The 2011 Bruins were an anomaly and belong in a scrap book never to be forgotten- but the league is different as most players realize you can destroy a life with a head shot not a just a career

Give Gudas 10 games as a start and see if that dumb ass can understand it m

He's the problem not the Bruins response

Both are the problem. Gudas for cheap hits and the sickening lack of response from the team.

I'm not going to read the rest of this thread, the pacifists who are happy with Bettman's speed skating NHL and rely on "player safety office" to handle what players should handle will never get it and it's a waste to try and point out the way the game used to be played and still should be.

Tyler Randell should be the 12th, not 13th, forward on this team. Also the reason Adam McQuaid will always have a place on my team. The analytics/pacifists have singled McQuaid out this year for their "He's not an NHL player" crap. Ask other teams and GM'S what they think of McQuaid.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

It's not a debate, a discussion a difference of opinion.

You take something that you know isn't quantifiable and (because of that) demand it be quantified to prove your point.

Countless articles and quotes from smaller less physical players over the years expressing their appreciation for a less skilled physical guy stepping up for them, having there back etc etc and how sometimes it gives them just a touch more confidence and attitude.

But hey, down play all that because someone else can't directly quantify that into wins and loss's.

We saw in 08-09 regular season through the Cup win what being a team did for the Bruins. It may not be statistically quantifiable but we all witnessed it.

 

[Pia8988]

Tyler Randell should be the 12th, not 13th, forward on this team.

Say he's the 12th forward, he's going to get maybe 7-8 minutes of night of ice time. Do you think other teams will play the game differently knowing Randell is on the ice so little? They're not going to think maybe I shouldn't commit to this hit or else Tyler Randell is going to come and get me.

 

[Fenian24]

Say he's the 12th forward, he's going to get maybe 7-8 minutes of night of ice time. Do you think other teams will play the game differently knowing Randell is on the ice so little? They're not going to think maybe I shouldn't commit to this hit or else Tyler Randell is going to come and get me.

More than if it's Jimmy Hayes. May look over their shoulder or think twice if they know player safety is all they have to answer to. A fine hurts less than a broken nose

 

[Pia8988]

Doubtful, the game is too fast for that kind of thought process. Harsher penalties on the players who commit such hits, especially repeat offenders (See Torres) as well as penalties to the organizations that employ such offenders. They won't be able to hurt as many people if they're out of a job.

 

[pierre gagnon*]

Time for the NHL to get serious about protecting players by removing idiot low lifes like Gudass. You have to wonder why they do not. Is it good for the shock and awe promoting the primitive side? Competing with combat sports or is that the angle they still sell. Such a shame we have so many talented and tough players that play within the rules.

Its a quick, physical game and the ones that cross the line never get penalized enough to deter them. No amount of arms race is going stop that kind of stupid. Other sports would not tolerate this. Same as soccer, they need to get the diving out and it could be easy but they are not serious about it either. Controversy sells, any news is good news.

The league has concussion monitors now but I say they should have idiot monitors and over rule a ref and kick the guy out and suspend him till he has a meeting. I see a victim Czarnik on his knees and a predator like Gudass, spending 2 minutes in a box. Something in his brain said I can do this. I can also fight so go ahead come at me.

He cannot fight the rules but the rules right now are toothless, change it, change the actions. Do not change, then go play somewhere else. Anyone else who wants to play that way this is the law, expect a short career. Deterent needs to be strong enough that guys like this that never learn are removed. Teams should pay a penalty for employing them and hit them hard for putting him on the ice.

 

[Morris Wanchuk]

I hate what the NHL has become, I watch less and less games, post less on this site, no more season tickets. Its just boring now.

 

[PlayMakers]

I don't know.

On one hand, Couturier responded to Backes' hit but did it help his team win?

On the other hand, I'm a big believer in the things that are hard to quantify. As a coach (who dreams about being 1/10th as good as these guys) I see it in the locker room and on the bench. I see how our team takes it personally when a player is hurt on a cheap shot. I see how it can deflate our team if we're getting pushed around. I also see how our players play with more courage and drive when we are the ones imposing our will and playing physical. The little guys have a little more jump and moxie. The big players are chirping and playing with swagger.

I read a study about the hardest sport in the world to play and sports like hockey and boxing were near the top. The reason wasn't because of the skill involved in skating and stick handling (though that is a big part of it), but the article talked more about the psychology of composure. Making plays in the face of physical harm. That the body has a very real reaction when you know you're about to get hit. Pulse quickens, emotions run high, it affects you cognitively. The players (and sports that required players) who can manage all that internal chaos AND STILL make plays got higher marks. I think I might have mentioned some of this in the thread about the value of hitting.

At any rate. I would have liked to see a response... Don't know if that's the old cave man in me or what. I also don't know how many wins it gives you, it's just a pride thing I guess. There will always be hitting in hockey and if there's hitting then there will always be late hits. Do you stand together or not?

Maybe it's enough, in this kindler, gentler, "enlightened" age that the players are vocal about it and respond by playing hard and winning a game. Even a meaningless one. It is practice for the regular season. You play how you practice. Do you want your team to start a fight after that happens in the regular season or do you want them to get angry and play harder? That's the way we have to teach it at the amateur level because A) we're coaching kids and we OBVIOUSLY can't/wouldn't ever encourage them to go out and hurt another kid and B) fighting = automatic suspension for players and coach. So you try to teach them to channel that anger towards playing harder. Doesn't always work, but I think that's the direction they want to go with all this.

 

[GloveSave1]

I gave up a long time ago on this team standing up for each other...having a "team" mentality...

I'd like to say it started when Chara retired his physical game and went about his business with blinders on. "Just get through my minutes...that's it." But it was before that. Watching the Bruins play the Kings, but even more so the Ducks, puts a spot light on it. They are beat into submission in those games. They have no response. It's not in them.

The captain sets the tone. No different here. And the tone has been set for years. Clode falls right in line. "We let the league handle it."

The thought process of having someones back isn't even there. Like deer in the headlights.

It's tough to take.

Remember when Jarno Kultanen even dropped'em once? It was a team mentality. He was fitting in. You stood up for yourself and others.

Everyone is just fitting in today.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

With all due respect Dan finals are going on 6 and 4 years ago. Game has changed even in that short time and it doesn't favor players like McQuaid.

I'm going to obviously be in the very small minority here but I'd much prefer discussions on how to get guys like Gudas out of the game as opposed to why no one responded.

So to answer the thread title: Only the players and the coaching staff know why (or why not). No one here has a damn clue as to why they didn't respond.

IMO a problem with the NHL right now is that for as much as they are trying to get guys like Gudas out of the game, their obsession with expansion is only going to allow guys like him to hang around longer as the talent pool is watered down by having more teams.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

I don't know.

On one hand, Couturier responded to Backes' hit but did it help his team win?

On the other hand, I'm a big believer in the things that are hard to quantify. As a coach (who dreams about being 1/10th as good as these guys) I see it in the locker room and on the bench. I see how our team takes it personally when a player is hurt on a cheap shot. I see how it can deflate our team if we're getting pushed around. I also see how our players play with more courage and drive when we are the ones imposing our will and playing physical. The little guys have a little more jump and moxie. The big players are chirping and playing with swagger.

I read a study about the hardest sport in the world to play and sports like hockey and boxing were near the top. The reason wasn't because of the skill involved in skating and stick handling (though that is a big part of it), but the article talked more about the psychology of composure. Making plays in the face of physical harm. That the body has a very real reaction when you know you're about to get hit. Pulse quickens, emotions run high, it affects you cognitively. The players (and sports that required players) who can manage all that internal chaos AND STILL make plays got higher marks. I think I might have mentioned some of this in the thread about the value of hitting.

At any rate. I would have liked to see a response... Don't know if that's the old cave man in me or what. I also don't know how many wins it gives you, it's just a pride thing I guess. There will always be hitting in hockey and if there's hitting then there will always be late hits. Do you stand together or not?

Maybe it's enough, in this kindler, gentler, "enlightened" age that the players are vocal about it and respond by playing hard and winning a game. Even a meaningless one. It is practice for the regular season. You play how you practice. Do you want your team to start a fight after that happens in the regular season or do you want them to get angry and play harder? That's the way we have to teach it at the amateur level because A) we're coaching kids and we OBVIOUSLY can't/wouldn't ever encourage them to go out and hurt another kid and B) fighting = automatic suspension for players and coach. So you try to teach them to channel that anger towards playing harder. Doesn't always work, but I think that's the direction they want to go with all this.

Great post.

 

[ODAAT]

I don't know.

On one hand, Couturier responded to Backes' hit but did it help his team win?

On the other hand, I'm a big believer in the things that are hard to quantify. As a coach (who dreams about being 1/10th as good as these guys) I see it in the locker room and on the bench. I see how our team takes it personally when a player is hurt on a cheap shot. I see how it can deflate our team if we're getting pushed around. I also see how our players play with more courage and drive when we are the ones imposing our will and playing physical. The little guys have a little more jump and moxie. The big players are chirping and playing with swagger.

I read a study about the hardest sport in the world to play and sports like hockey and boxing were near the top. The reason wasn't because of the skill involved in skating and stick handling (though that is a big part of it), but the article talked more about the psychology of composure. Making plays in the face of physical harm. That the body has a very real reaction when you know you're about to get hit. Pulse quickens, emotions run high, it affects you cognitively. The players (and sports that required players) who can manage all that internal chaos AND STILL make plays got higher marks. I think I might have mentioned some of this in the thread about the value of hitting.

At any rate. I would have liked to see a response... Don't know if that's the old cave man in me or what. I also don't know how many wins it gives you, it's just a pride thing I guess. There will always be hitting in hockey and if there's hitting then there will always be late hits. Do you stand together or not?

Maybe it's enough, in this kindler, gentler, "enlightened" age that the players are vocal about it and respond by playing hard and winning a game. Even a meaningless one. It is practice for the regular season. You play how you practice. Do you want your team to start a fight after that happens in the regular season or do you want them to get angry and play harder? That's the way we have to teach it at the amateur level because A) we're coaching kids and we OBVIOUSLY can't/wouldn't ever encourage them to go out and hurt another kid and B) fighting = automatic suspension for players and coach. So you try to teach them to channel that anger towards playing harder. Doesn't always work, but I think that's the direction they want to go with all this.

Great post. I too still have some caveman in me but I have come to terms with an NHL where that kind of response is seen less these days.

I watched/listened to an interview on Prime Time Sports down here a few years back. Bob McCown was interviewing some stat geek about the percentages of fights that occur and how they do or do not affect momentum in a game.

I wish I could dig it out in their archives but any way you cut it, the impact of a fight on the game was negligible over 95% of the time.

"Some" of the criteria for this guest determining whether or not a fight seemed to push a team to play better was a) had to be tied and/or behind in the game b) they looked at offensive zone time, was the player that responded by challenging another player`s team being outplayed as far as offensive zone attack c) did this fight result in a clear change of momentum once completed, did the team come back from being behind and/or win after the fight occurred

Now, not sure how scientific this stuff is but the interview and the data I was listening to was not terribly surprising. Oh sure, some fan here will post the epic game against the Stars from years ago and yes, won`t disagree, that game and that incident(s) definitely seemed to bring the B`s even closer together and they played great the rest of the year but IMO, that was an outlier

I love scraps, love tough games but in this day and age, while responding to a hit like Gudas` on Czarnik would have been nice, sadly, I rarely expect it these days outside of a few players here and there, Bruins or otherwise

 

[BruinDust]

I actually think McQuaid is useful and his contract is good

Been watching him closely for years and not one time in the 2011 or 2013 Cup Finals did I think 'oh my God. McQuaid's out here we are screwed'

To be 100% honest this McQuaid crap is an HF thing. It's a group here that just piss and moan about him. In my world and it's a pretty big world the people I interact with are 99.9% on McQuaid side. My hockey buddies I tend to think are quite sharp.

I'm cool with people undervaluing on McQuaid or thinking I don't know what I'm talking about I'm pretty much thinking thinking the same thing the other way- but even if he's a bottom pair guy he's on my team. And I'm quite reassured with the type of people who see it this way.

I like Randell and I am a big McQuaid advocate.

McQuaid was fine, until he returned from his concussion last year. Until then I never had a problem with his play, he was what he was, a very solid 5th D-man. Absolutely loved his intangibles.

But I'm not living in the past on him. No one complained when he pushed another heart and soul guy Stuart out the door. But now that he should be moved to make way for at least one of Carlo/O'Gara/Colin/Morrow, people desperately want to hang onto the guy.

Tell me, what can McQuaid do that Carlo and O'Gara can't, besides throwing punches?

 

[Dr Quincy]

I'm going to obviously be in the very small minority here but I'd much prefer discussions on how to get guys like Gudas out of the game as opposed to why no one responded.

And to me the main thing is that while punish and blame and hold accountable players like Gudas, it's simply not enough.

Look at it like a risk/reward thing for a guy like Gudas (or any other "on the edge" guy).

Play as close to the line and sometimes go over it:
Risks- might have to fight once in awhile, but hey I'm a fighter myself so no big deal
might have to pay a fine, but hey I make a decent living playing this way

Rewards- I play this way and the coach loves me, fans love me, and most importantly I collect an NHL paycheck.

Guys like this feel they HAVE to play this way to stay in the league. And they are probably, to an extent, correct. So the threat of having to take a punch or 2 from Tyler Randell or getting a 3 game suspension and fine aren't going to outweigh the benefit of having an NHL job.

Thus we have to go higher up the food chain. Coaches and GMs have to feel the pain too. Coach your guys to play on the line and you'll have consequences when they go over. Sign guys with histories like this and have them go over the line, consequenes for the GM.

Like I said earlier, a few responses that might get some attention:
1. A team with a player suspended for a dirty hit may not replace him in the lineup and must dress 19 for as long as the player is out.
2. Fines for coaches and GMs along with players
3. Loss of draft picks if a team has 2 suspensions during the course of a season (with the round of the pick escalating with subsequent suspensions).

Rats will be rats as long as they are rewarded with NHL contracts. So, do something to keep them from getting those contracts, or at least seeing that by playing this way they may lose their contract.

 

[Dr Quincy]

We saw in 08-09 regular season through the Cup win what being a team did for the Bruins. It may not be statistically quantifiable but we all witnessed it.

I've said this before, but the problem with this is that most people are seeing what they want to see and believe... confirmation bias AND that they are applying it retroactively (Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy).

We look at a team that wins and say "Oh yeah look at all those times they were "a team"" and forget any times they displayed a lack of team cohesion. Likewise, we see a team that fails and say "Man do they lack togetherness" despite there being multiple times when they "stood up for each other".

Teams that "stand up for each other" finish last every year. They finish 6th. They finish 3rd and they even win the Cup.

It may be better to be together than not, and I'm not saying it's not. I'm saying the lack of a fight in a preseason game is not an indictment of the team or a failure in any way. It's not worrisome to me or a cause for concern. It says nothing about the team's chances this year. It may make some fans upset, but ultimately it means little more than that.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

I've said this before, but the problem with this is that most people are seeing what they want to see and believe... confirmation bias AND that they are applying it retroactively (Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy).

We look at a team that wins and say "Oh yeah look at all those times they were "a team"" and forget any times they displayed a lack of team cohesion. Likewise, we see a team that fails and say "Man do they lack togetherness" despite there being multiple times when they "stood up for each other".

Teams that "stand up for each other" finish last every year. They finish 6th. They finish 3rd and they even win the Cup.

It may be better to be together than not, and I'm not saying it's not. I'm saying the lack of a fight in a preseason game is not an indictment of the team or a failure in any way. It's not worrisome to me or a cause for concern. It says nothing about the team's chances this year. It may make some fans upset, but ultimately it means little more than that.

I do agree with this perspective now. I do think it plays into the team's confidence, but so doesn't scoring goals and winning games.

I've accepted I enjoy fighting for the entertainment and to see the team sticking together.

 

[NeelyDan]

I couldn't possibly care less about any downstream impact on wins or losses.

It's about pride, and about what's right.

The fact that the approach is being grandfathered out of the sport is incredibly disappointing to me.

 

[BigGoalBrad]

I couldn't possibly care less about any downstream impact on wins or losses.

It's about pride, and about what's right.

The fact that the approach is being grandfathered out of the sport is incredibly disappointing to me.

There is a fine line though. And the best idea is always going to be removing garbage like Gudas from the league.


Do we need to see a Gregory Campbell ****** staged crappy fight after every big hit no matter how clean? It looks like the Flyers are going to use that strategy after the Backes clean hit on Voracek. I'm not sure it should be allowed. Gudas hit different of course. But the league should really do what they can to remove garbage players who contribute nothing to the appeal of the game and play to hurt other guys.

 

[LouJersey]

Quick research shows that the Bruins were 13-14-2 in games they fought last season.

I remember it being really good during their recent history, but again has more to do with talent.

I'll try to break it down further to see when the fights were and at what point. Were they staged, or in the heat of the game, standing up for a team mate, maybe in a blow out either way.

 

[pierre gagnon*]

Gudass should out as long as Czarnik or punish the guilty party double the time. That will hit the pocket book and his chances of staying on the team. It would hit the team for provided idiots with icetime and now they have to pay 2 guys for one job. If the player is borderline then he may lose his spot to another in the mean time. When it comes to your livelyhood it may deter someone more than a punch in the face.

 

[Colt.45Orr]

The Krug Exhibits:

Exhibit A:
(Bruins without McQuaid or Randell in the lineup)


Exhibit B:
(Bruins with McQuaid in the lineup)


Exhibit C:
(Bruins with Randell in the line-up)



None of the responses from McQuaid or Randell will result directly in wins or losses and fighting Randell isn't going to change how Reaves plays but you can either be a team that responds to your guys getting run or not. It is quite simple.

As a player, I know what team I would want to be on.

 

[northeastern]

2011 Boston Bruins would have responded.