Is it time to bring back a pure enforcer to the Canucks line up

[Tortorella's Rant]

It's not like he can fight as was the old days so he's already self-defeated. 

[Patel Bure]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Its like finding a virgin in Kelowna. 

Just poll the Kelowna residents asking if anyone amongst them posts on HF Canucks.

[Arrow 1983]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

Meh.

 

Fundamentally disagree with what I think is a bad take regarding teams having '3 or 4 wasted spots in the lineup anyway'.

 

Fourth lines have never been better.

There has never been such a deep, worldwide pool of talent with which to build rosters.

 

And 'bottom six' players are the most cost effective way of improving a lineup imo - depth matters - a lot - and there are very few, if any, teams that play their depth players only 6 or 8 minutes a night.  When that happens it tends to be when teams face a considerable amount of injuries and have players that aren't as 'trusted'/effective called up into those depth spots.

Rolling four lines is more and more vital - and it also makes the hockey more entertaining/up tempo - the quality of players at the 'bottom' of lineups has considerably improved the on ice product, over those times when fourth lines actually were 5 minute crash and bangers who weren't particularly good/talented hockey players.   I'll take Beagle and Motte types - true, dedicated shutdown units - (or a talented 'kid' line/secondary scoring depth line when the top 6 is veteran/in their prime) - over the traditional 4th line, anyday

 

The dedicated 'enforcer' is a thing of the past.  Period.  Thankfully.  And should remain so.

 

Would love to have more toughness - that can play - love having guys like Kassian, Dorsett, Gudbranson in the lineup - to answer in kind any attempts to push this team around - but at the same time, toughness that can play, effectively is not easy to find, acquire.  Teams, whether you like it or not - need 'team' toughness / 'pack' mentality. 

Hopefully the team can add a player that makes opponent fear consequences - but it's not a priority - and hopefully that player does so in a way that commands respect (imo guys like Dorsett - who wasn't an 'enforcer' by any stretch, but was certainly toughness that could play, who got in opponents faces - and Gudbranson - were guys that did not wear a "penalize me at any opportunity" badge on their jersey - as guys like Roussel, unfortunately do).

 

Perhaps Gadjovich will bring some more toughness if he's able to stick.

I'm also game for guys like Myers taking the odd liberty - one of my favorite penalties of the season was a punch he threw in the face of Ketchup...

All this to refute something that you miss read.

I said other then 3-4 teams have a wasted spot (spot the singular not spots the multiple). I only mentioned the 12th forward in the post not the 4th line. 

As the forth line always contains a center one of the most valuable positions in the league. A forth line center often plays on a 1st or 2nd unit PK. 

So you fundamentally disagree with your own miss reading. As I only believe that teams have 1 spot wasted unless they are one of 3-4 teams just to clarify it. The Canucks have probably 2 wasted spots right know but that is with Beagle out.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Arrow 1983

[oldnews]

lol

 

Edited May 9, 2021 by oldnews

[oldnews]

GDT post

Edited May 9, 2021 by oldnews

[oldnews]

and another....

Edited May 9, 2021 by oldnews

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

Canucks "leading the way" in a return to 90s hockey?  You must've forgotten how badly our players get burned by the NHL's DoPS.  We will be leading the way in penalties and suspensions if we put a goon out on the the ice.

[Arrow 1983]

3 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

Canucks "leading the way" in a return to 90s hockey?  You must've forgotten how badly our players get burned by the NHL's DoPS.  We will be leading the way in penalties and suspensions if we put a goon out on the the ice.

I got a solution for that does Parros have a son who plays hockey

[PetterssonOrPeterson]

I think we kind of already have that in MacEwen.

Thing is though, he has all the tools (size, can fight...etc) but he doesn't really seem mean enough.

 

I feel like most of his fights, he's either defending himself or teammates rather than really instigating them.

[cuporbust]

Lol. Ya , that's the issue 

[Dumb Nuck]

3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I like the idea, just don't know where we can find one. Its like finding a virgin in Kelowna. 

I’ve met lots of virgins from Kelowna in my day, sorry for reducing the numbers.

[MikeBossy]

I don't think we need an enforcer however Barclay Goodrow is a definite target in Free Agency this summer for me.

 

I always loved Gudbranson but at his age and what he would want money wise not really an option - Barclay sticks up for his teammates.

[ShawnAntoski]

Would rather prefer a team approach rather than a one player approach , especially, with the cap and the rules.

Edited May 9, 2021 by ShawnAntoski

[IBatch]

12 hours ago, Josepho said:

Enforcers are &^@#ing awful and don't do anything. No.

Probert, Williams, Semenko...There were guys that could actually play the game and score too.   Dave Manson went to several all-star games.   Heck Stevens in today's game would be an enforcer, same with Wendel Clark,  Kevin Stevens, Tochett (who was an enforcer when he came in), Curt Fraser, Neely and on and on.   Game doesn't even have power forwards in it really anymore.  Roberts..Shanny...where did this guys go?

 

Chara is the last remaining one - he came in as an enforcer for NYI...

 

Yes i'd be absolutely thrilled if we could an enforcer.   Difference between that and a goon.    The 4-5 minute guys of yesterday.   Probert at his peak in Detroit played 20 hard minutes a night.  But no instead we should have AR or Boyd or whomever. 

[tas]

team toughness, team aggression, and team "take no bull$&!#" are what's required, not an enforcer. 

[oldnews]

12 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said:

All this to refute something that you miss read.

I said other then 3-4 teams have a wasted spot (spot the singular not spots the multiple). I only mentioned the 12th forward in the post not the 4th line. 

As the forth line always contains a center one of the most valuable positions in the league. A forth line center often plays on a 1st or 2nd unit PK. 

So you fundamentally disagree with your own miss reading. As I only believe that teams have 1 spot wasted unless they are one of 3-4 teams just to clarify it. The Canucks have probably 2 wasted spots right know but that is with Beagle out.

how could I possibly have "miss read" that OP?

thanks for the 'clarification'.

 

but I still think your 'proposal' is really poorly conceived / outdated / a 'waste' of a roster spot when you need players that are effective between the whistles far more in the present NHL.

[Pickly]

11 hours ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Would rather prefer a team approach rather than a one player approach , especially, with the cap.

Pretty much this. The days of a one off enforcer on the 4th line are almost over. What’s needed, especially in playoff hockey, is a contagious, physical team culture that every player buys into. It starts with the team leaders and trickles down the roster. A problem that has plagued this team for years. 

[ShawnAntoski]

14 minutes ago, Pickly said:

Pretty much this. The days of a one off enforcer on the 4th line are almost over. What’s needed, especially in playoff hockey, is a contagious, physical team culture that every player buys into. It starts with the team leaders and trickles down the roster. A problem that has plagued this team for years. 

Ditto, it should be a war mentality in the playoffs rather than depending on the GAME MANAGERS TO BAIL YOU OUT - it should be about sending the right message and the whole team follows up on that message (having flash backs of the unresponsive stoic Sedin and the baffled Marchand (due to the Sedins’ lack of reaction)).  
 

The gentleman type hockey has to end: where the team depends on the Zebras for PP time.  

Edited May 9, 2021 by ShawnAntoski

[Arrow 1983]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

how could I possibly have "miss read" that OP?

thanks for the 'clarification'.

 

but I still think your 'proposal' is really poorly conceived / outdated / a 'waste' of a roster spot when you need players that are effective between the whistles far more in the present NHL.

NHL is a entertainment business fighting in NHL is entertaining it is not a wasted spot. Plus 4 of you bottom 6 are pk players. That leaves 2 guys that play no special teams  often get less then 10 mins. First it would probably be hard to find a pure enforcer so that player will still be able to skate and at least produce like a 11 or 12th forward. Of course it has to be a winger. Centers are to important I actually think the 11th forward should be a centerman not a winger. Therefore atleast having 5 centers and 7 wingers.

 

The best set up for any team IMHO is

6 top 6 forwards. 

Money wise. Your #1 center should be highest payed forward as long as he can both play make and score at least 30 + goals. Then your pure goalscorer and 2 line center should be next highest paid. Next your 3 other top wingers. With the only exception your 3rd line center could make more then your 4th winger. Your 4th and 5th winger could make close to the same amount. I have high respect for a number 5 winger as your top 4 wingers there is often an injury. In the Canucks circumstances that should be Hoglander. So that gets to your top 8. Then more important then your 6th forward is your 4th line center should be #2 unit PK center.  That's why I am not to grumpy with Beagle I have tons of respect for him plus he takes a ton of defensive zone face-offs. If Sutter was better in his position then yes Beagle would be over payed by .500-.750 mill. Your #7 winger has to be on the PK. But if not the 8th forward who should be a center can take that spot. But then the number 7 winger must bring more offense to the third line this is where Virtanen failed. He's not a pker and Hasn't been able to produce on the 3rd line. But Sutter his center has also under performed here this makes secondary score almost impossible for any team.

So that leaves your 9 winger and 12th forward. Really what is there responsibility. They often can't produce much. They often hit more but an enforcer could do that. They don't play PP or PK. They are often interchanged with a 13th forward. If you don't like a 12th forward as an enforcer then you could make the 13th an enforcer for specific games. All this said I really believe most teams can bring back the enforcer. I don't disagree with anyone there should be team toughness though out the line up but I don't expect to see everyone of them drop the gloves. The enforcer is there if a game gets out of hand a team can literally move the enforcer to a 1st or second line to ensure no one takes liberty on a team's star player's. This is best suited for teams that don't have the toughest in their top 6. Ferland might have given what Rooster is supposed to do, but a lot of these guys choice for some reason or other to under perform. I believe this is a team culture issue and the only reason a coach should get fired.

 

Between, Erickson, Sutter, Rooster and Virtanen it is starting to show there is a culture issue in the locker room and it is with primary the veteran group. This team more then anything else need a NHL veteran coach not one promoted from the AHL. One that will keep everyone one accountable.

 

Note clearly what people make will differ at different points of their Career Pettersson clearly is our 1st line center but makes less then a mill(more if you include the Bonuses). However I expect him and Hughes in the future to be our highest payed

 

[oldnews]

26 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

NHL is a entertainment business fighting in NHL is entertaining it is not a wasted spot.

 

Whatever.   "Enforcers" are human beings - many of whom had their quality of life ruined (if you actually take the time to listen to the many former 'enforcers' / players who have stated their experiences publicly).

 

And the whole "entertainment business" angle - save it for the WWF/WWE.

 

You're speaking for what you assume to be a prevailing interest - that might reflect existing fans of the game, and probably previous demographics - but that's now where you expand your market - you expand markets into untapped fanbases - which can't be precooked, or spoken for with sweeping one-liner reductions/assumption.

 

You're making an assumption that the majority of people want to see fist fighting in the NHL - but if you were to survey cross-sections of the populations of the countries in the world where you're hoping to extend the scope of the 'entertainment product' - the results aren't obvious/easy to speak for beforehand - for all you know the NHL could be losing potential new fans because of the perception that it's an outdated, distasteful aspect of the game.   You don't market/expand the game _or any product - based on presumptive whims - any real corporate interest would require/conduct an actual, real-world widespread survey of 'consumer' interest that you aren't qualified to speak for.   And beyond that, there's the ethical question of whether the impact on the players is worth the 'entertainment' value.  The game is about putting pucks behind the opponent's goaltender - like football, basketball, etc - that doesn't depend on punching players in the face - that is a side aspect / sideshow that is not essential to the game no matter how old school our perspective. 

 

Don't mistake/misrepresent any of that for not wanting more toughness that can play in the lineup.  I think there's room - and has been for some time - for more 'pushback' from this team - but a traditional "enforcer" is not the answer.

Edited May 9, 2021 by oldnews