Well an article that was written in the NY Times was just about that subject, was talked about today. And it dealt with the statistical evidence that pretty much concluded that winning or losing a fight, has little to do with giving a team momentum. - MJL
Sometimes there is a short-term spark of energy, but the team only has a shift or two to capitalize off it before it has zero effect.
Last night's game in Minnesota is an example. The Stars were leading the Wild, 2-1, and seemingly in control of the game. Darroll Powe dropped the gloves with Steve Ott. Minnesota scored on the next shift and went on to score two more goals in the next 2:20 or so to turn a 2-1 deficit into a 4-2 lead.
Did the fight make the difference? Both the Wild and Stars players and coaches afterwards thought it was a turning point.
But I think most of the time, a fight makes no difference on the outcome. It has to be done at the right time -- Sean O'Donnell has a real good sense of it -- and the rest of the team has to respond right away.
Sometimes there is a short-term spark of energy, but the team only has a shift or two to capitalize off it before it has zero effect.
Last night's game in Minnesota is an example. The Stars were leading the Wild, 2-1, and seemingly in control of the game. Darroll Powe dropped the gloves with Steve Ott. Minnesota scored on the next shift and went on to score two more goals in the next 2:20 or so to turn a 2-1 deficit into a 4-2 lead.
Did the fight make the difference? Both the Wild and Stars players and coaches afterwards thought it was a turning point.
But I think most of the time, a fight makes no difference on the outcome. It has to be done at the right time -- Sean O'Donnell has a real good sense of it -- and the rest of the team has to respond right away. - bmeltzer
Anytime your dealing with statistical evidence of a situation, there's going to be times when it goes both ways. But according to the article, and 3 different analysis from different sources. It's overwhelmingly in favor of a fight not affecting the outcome of a game in any way. And we also know that statistical analysis isn't fool proof.
I've read that a lot of Chicago fans wish that he was. Whatever that's worth. - MJL
Right, not saying he's a savior or anything. But I'd take him over Lilja and Walker. And obviously with all our injuries, it would be good to have him around.
Sometimes there is a short-term spark of energy, but the team only has a shift or two to capitalize off it before it has zero effect.
Last night's game in Minnesota is an example. The Stars were leading the Wild, 2-1, and seemingly in control of the game. Darroll Powe dropped the gloves with Steve Ott. Minnesota scored on the next shift and went on to score two more goals in the next 2:20 or so to turn a 2-1 deficit into a 4-2 lead.
Did the fight make the difference? Both the Wild and Stars players and coaches afterwards thought it was a turning point.
But I think most of the time, a fight makes no difference on the outcome. It has to be done at the right time -- Sean O'Donnell has a real good sense of it -- and the rest of the team has to respond right away. - bmeltzer
I really, really liked Powe. Maybe even more so now that I'm hearing he fought Ott. He was asking for too much in price but if Powe took in what was fair, I'd be happy to still have him.
Right, not saying he's a savior or anything. But I'd take him over Lilja and Walker. And obviously with all our injuries, it would be good to have him around.
I really, really liked Powe. Maybe even more so now that I'm hearing he fought Ott. He was asking for too much in price but if Powe took in what was fair, I'd be happy to still have him. - Schenn2shine
I really, really liked Powe. Maybe even more so now that I'm hearing he fought Ott. He was asking for too much in price but if Powe took in what was fair, I'd be happy to still have him. - Schenn2shine
Who would you rather have on this team, Powe or Shelley? Basically the same price, Powe just a bit cheaper.
