His play in our end is beastly.
- Atomic Wedgie

But this is a great example - what made Lidstrom so dominant (and what holds Jakey boy back) is the ability to read the game and play with elite NHL smarts. Lidstrom never went around smushing people with hits, but he read the game so damn well and had phenomenal vision. He was able to get the puck from you with his stick before you even knew it was gone, and he had vision/passing ability like Jumbo Joe so was able to drop a pass on a dime from 100 feet.

But this is a great example - what made Lidstrom so dominant (and what holds Jakey boy back) is the ability to read the game and play with elite NHL smarts. Lidstrom never went around smushing people with hits, but he read the game so damn well and had phenomenal vision. He was able to get the puck from you with his stick before you even knew it was gone, and he had vision/passing ability like Jumbo Joe so was able to drop a pass on a dime from 100 feet.
- lumlums

there's no question/doubt that Lidstrom was elite.

but he NEVER played with plugs = and during the early part of his career - the team was stacked both on defense and in the forward ranks.

Exactly... Big guys are more suited for trap style hockey where you sit back and let the play come to you.

People tend to forget that the original reason to check a guy was to do nothing more than separate man from puck.... Sure... It's fun to watch a guy get laid out but it isn't necessary to hit like that.

Also, big guys aren't really as effective anymore now that they get called for interference if they try to clear out the opposition forwards parked in front of the net.
- Dozzer

this is all true... but it overlooks a simple issue that is "guys being taught how to use their size or not"...

reach is a huge advantage - that is what has kept Jagr able to compete until age 44.
Lindros was anomaly because he carried the puck ... he would still be a dominant player now... arguably much more so - because you can't stop him or hold him back. Brett Burns, Joe Thornton, both pretty big guys utilize size to their advantage - but the issue with large young kids is that they develop foot speed and coordination usually much more slowly ... and get relegated to 'he's big.. .he can play D"...

Hungary wins their first game in 77 years.

And we thought the Leafs were bad.

there's no question/doubt that Lidstrom was elite.

but he NEVER played with plugs = and during the early part of his career - the team was stacked both on defense and in the forward ranks.
- BorjeFan4Ever

This is true... though my personal opinion is that these others benefited more from playing with Nick than he did from playing with them...

I miss the days before the instigator rule was put into place
- Dozzer

I'm at a loss with the instigator rule.... it hardly ever gets called anyway.

I wonder what the reluctance is to take it out again... try it for 1/2 a season and see what happens.

On that note, I wouldn't mind seeing Colin Greening play with Kadri and possibly Soshkinov or Leivo on the right side. I though Greening played with energy and he's not shy to mix it up when necessary.

I'm at a loss with the instigator rule.... it hardly ever gets called anyway.

I wonder what the reluctance is to take it out again... try it for 1/2 a season and see what happens.

On that note, I wouldn't mind seeing Colin Greening play with Kadri and possibly Soshkinov or Leivo on the right side. I though Greening played with energy and he's not shy to mix it up when necessary.
- BorjeFan4Ever

Yeah, I'm down for keeping Greening, though would probably drop him onto a fourth line with Laich and whoever else... both are smart, hardworking guys who can show the youngsters how to be NHL pros

This is true... though my personal opinion is that these others benefited more from playing with Nick than he did from playing with them...
- lumlums

that's revisionist history. Early in his career while he had losts of assists yearly... he didn't win the Norris until the early 2000s. Take a look at who the defense consisted off in 1992 - 1997.

Yeah, I'm down for keeping Greening, though would probably drop him onto a fourth line with Laich and whoever else... both are smart, hardworking guys who can show the youngsters how to be NHL pros
- lumlums

it will be interesting to see what Bablord does... he has said multiple times he likes on banger on each line approach.

and of course IF Stamkos is signed (that's a big IF)... the entire upper part of the roster will be impacted.

Actually, as we're talking smaller defencemen/Detroit/Tyson Barrie we would be remiss to not bring up Rafalski... essentially identical in size, both righties. Rafalski didn't even play NHL until age 26, and had a season high points of 59 (at age 36)... Barrie has a season high of 53 by age 24, and has already played 260+ games.

How anybody can use size to justify not trying to get Barrie if he's available is completely beyond me...

that's revisionist history. Early in his career while he had losts of assists yearly... he didn't win the Norris until the early 2000s. Take a look at who the defense consisted off in 1992 - 1997.
- BorjeFan4Ever

This is also the time when Scott Stevens was considered the pinnacle of how to play defense, as opposed to a cheap shot artist who'd be almost perma-banned in today's game

I'm at a loss with the instigator rule.... it hardly ever gets called anyway.

I wonder what the reluctance is to take it out again... try it for 1/2 a season and see what happens.

On that note, I wouldn't mind seeing Colin Greening play with Kadri and possibly Soshkinov or Leivo on the right side. I though Greening played with energy and he's not shy to mix it up when necessary.
- BorjeFan4Ever

No way in hell they eliminate the instigator rule - league can't be seen eliminating rules that reduce head injuries.

There's nothing wrong with the instigator rule.

Fighting in hockey is going the way of the dodo. Mandatory visors, concussion awareness, etc. Put 'em together, it adds up to no fighting.

It's a pretty archaic way to look at the game if you think you need to offset the skill the Leafs are amassing with size and strength. That's not the way the game is moving and Shanny & Co. are trying to get out in front of that. Adding a Barrie or Vatanen to this team would seem to fit the game plan perfectly.

It's a pretty archaic way to look at the game if you think you need to offset the skill the Leafs are amassing with size and strength. That's not the way the game is moving and Shanny & Co. are trying to get out in front of that. Adding a Barrie or Vatanen to this team would seem to fit the game plan perfectly.
- BetterCallSaul

People have been predicting that the game will evolve away from bigger players since 1977.

In a contact sport, there will always be a place for big guys.

None of this ever happened. Ghost blog

People have been predicting that the game will evolve away from bigger players since 1977.

In a contact sport, there will always be a place for big guys.
- Atomic Wedgie

Of course. The point is that size should not be the main determining factor in whether somebody is signed/traded for, and if the player possesses an elite skillset, then size shouldn't even be a concern. If the choice is between 6'4 230 and 5'10 185 where both players have the same skillset, it's a no-brainer... if the choice is between 5'10 190lb Tyson Barrie and 6'2 229lb Luke Schenn as a target to fill a hole on our RD, then it's also a no-brainer...

Actually, as we're talking smaller defencemen/Detroit/Tyson Barrie we would be remiss to not bring up Rafalski... essentially identical in size, both righties. Rafalski didn't even play NHL until age 26, and had a season high points of 59 (at age 36)... Barrie has a season high of 53 by age 24, and has already played 260+ games.

How anybody can use size to justify not trying to get Barrie if he's available is completely beyond me...
- lumlums

[/URL]

Rielly.

- Seanook[/URL]

Okay... I'm confused

Rielly.
- Phenom

Okay... I'm confused
- lumlums

Said in pretentious old world English accent "we would be remiss no not..... Slings and arrows ..... Blah blah blah"

- lumlums

Puzzling to me why he isn't on either PP group. They have Ceci on one and Dumba on the other. No being a homer, just wondering. Maybe they want a righty on the point, but they have a lefty playing the left boards. Doesn't make sense to me.

This guy's bigger than Lidstrom... must be a beast!!!

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com...lub/player.htm?id=8474581
- lumlums

You do have a point. I thought Lidstrom was bigger he certainly played bigger. In any event were originally discussing Barrie who is 5'10". Can you think of a contender in the NHL that has a 5'10" defender in their top pair?

A few years back Ottawa had to make a choice between two defensenen, one bigger (chara) and one smaller skill guy (redden) how did that work out for the sens or rangers

You do have a point. I thought Lidstrom was bigger he certainly played bigger. In any event were originally discussing Barrie who is 5'10". Can you think of a contender in the NHL that has a 5'10" defender in their top pair?

A few years back Ottawa had to make a choice between two defensenen, one bigger (chara) and one smaller skill guy (redden) how did that work out for the sens or rangers
- winsix

Had more to do with said Defensemans monstrous coke habit than his size or skill level.

- Seanook[/URL]

Alas, poor Honest Hockey.

I knew him well.