• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Is TO tough enough?

Is TO tough enough?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 50.0%

  • No

    Votes: 3 50.0%
  • Total voters
    6
H

hobarth

New member
I don't think most of us really valued tough guys that had no skill, I know I didn't so is TO in a better place because skill be it ever so humble has replaced Orr and the boys.

I still think BB was right, all teams need the agitators and the bullies but because he went to such extremes we have lost our appetite for tough guys but surely there is a Leaf need for players that can play hockey and be enforcers. Successful teams like Detroit and Chicago have been successful without designated thugs relying on team toughness. Other teams are probably going along the same path like TB.

We all remember the Broad Street Bullies, now there was a team I liked, they had bullies that contributed as hockey players as well and this is the type of team I wouldn't mind seeing TO model itself after. Philly did also have some incredibly talented players but some of their bullies appeared better than they were because of their ruff reputations.

I'm not keen in watching TO go down a path that follows the trend setters of this day, I'd love to see TO become a version of the Broad Street Bullies, how about you? 
 
This team is not being designed for the coming year to be good enough at anything.
There will not be enough scoring, defense, toughness or skill in any area.  That is by design.
The least of which I am concerned about is toughness.
We will lose an incredible amount of games next year.
 
I went to my daughter's rugby game today.  Hockey definitely has no need for toughness.  I actually don't understand why the prospect camp isn't half full of women players.
 
Define tough!  ;)

If it means having players that are more durable than Lupul, then, sure thing!

If it means being able to beat the other team in the alley, then, no.  I think that NHL is becoming a thing of the past.

If tough means being able to take, and hand out, big hits, then, maybe we're not tough enough yet.

We need big players that can play any style the opposition wants to play IMHO.
 
Detroit had 8 fighting majors last year. I would have to think Babcock had something to do with that. And if that's the case, I'm not sure having tough guys would make much difference.
 
The only toughness I care for is the mental toughness required for players to sacrifice themselves to make plays happen for the team (take a hit to make a pass/tip, blocked shots). Everything else is a waste of time (fighting, getting out of position for an open ice hit), so I disagree with OP's preference.
 
herman said:
The only toughness I care for is the mental toughness required for players to sacrifice themselves to make plays happen for the team (take a hit to make a pass/tip, blocked shots). Everything else is a waste of time (fighting, getting out of position for an open ice hit), so I disagree with OP's preference.
Click to expand...

Well, I may be in the minority here, but I like watching a physically tough team.  I'm not going to say that I want a bunch of thugs on the fourth line, but I like watching Leaf players that don't back down from the physical aspects of the game.  Think more Kadri, less Orr...and that's no knock on Orr.  I think Orr did what was expected of him well.

Looking at the proposed roster today, I think they've got some size there.  I'll wait to see how the new guys make out, then we can discuss whether or not they're getting outplayed because of a lack of physical play. 
 
Frank E said:
herman said:
The only toughness I care for is the mental toughness required for players to sacrifice themselves to make plays happen for the team (take a hit to make a pass/tip, blocked shots). Everything else is a waste of time (fighting, getting out of position for an open ice hit), so I disagree with OP's preference.
Click to expand...

Well, I may be in the minority here, but I like watching a physically tough team.  I'm not going to say that I want a bunch of thugs on the fourth line, but I like watching Leaf players that don't back down from the physical aspects of the game.  Think more Kadri, less Orr...and that's no knock on Orr.  I think Orr did what was expected of him well.

Looking at the proposed roster today, I think they've got some size there.  I'll wait to see how the new guys make out, then we can discuss whether or not they're getting outplayed because of a lack of physical play.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many here would have been satisfied with a straight up trade Kessel for Wayne Simmonds.
 
Frank E said:
hobarth said:
Joe S. said:
You're just a posting machine aren't you
Click to expand...

Who me, I only have what 100 posts?
Click to expand...

Your impeccable research skills on display again...
Click to expand...

One of the nice things about this site is I don't have to do the reasearch someone else will and if someone is disagreeing with me but not providing their conception of factually substantiated arguments then I can be pretty sure their position isn't as comfortably supported as they think.

I think most of the disagreements here spring from concepts as opposed to certifiable and irrefutably supported proofs. Johnny scored 10 goals last year, easy to look up and prove, it would be pointless to argue this but can/will Johnny score more next year, that is a basis for a disagreement. 

Pulling out self serving stats or figures isn't enough to end disagreements but it does explain where someone is coming from. Many suppose that if they can support their argument with facts then anyone not seeing their point of view is an idiot but sports aren't totally based on logic.

I can give you a generally accepted principle that exists in golf, if your tee shots go right you should aim further left to compensate, seems logical and a sound principle, it isn't mostly unless you plan to play a weak slice. Better advice would be to change your grip, stance, posture, how you swing and if all that doesn't work then aim your tee shots to the right because you will learn to not hit the ball to the right. Aiming to the right is probably the best way to cure a slice but would seem so counter to what should be logical. This isn't hockey analogy but sports are sports, I cured my slice by aiming to the right(I'm right handed) but this might not work for everybody so supposed commonly accepted principles might seem right and supportable, but believe me they're not. Sports are confusing even for one person playing a single person sport, how much more so are sports for teams.
 
hobarth said:
Frank E said:
hobarth said:
Joe S. said:
You're just a posting machine aren't you
Click to expand...

Who me, I only have what 100 posts?
Click to expand...

Your impeccable research skills on display again...
Click to expand...

One of the nice things about this site is I don't have to do the reasearch someone else will and if someone is disagreeing with me but not providing their conception of factually substantiated arguments then I can be pretty sure their position isn't as comfortably supported as they think.
Click to expand...

So, you're not willing to do any research when putting forth an argument. But you are willing to take exception with someone who has done research, but that isn't up to your standard... except you don't have a standard... unless it's somebody else's standard.... or research... or something.  Sorry, I thought I had a handle on this but I clearly haven't figured it out yet...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top