Comments on: Code of Conduct

By: J Scott Moore

J Scott Moore — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 04:09:55 +0000

Nice job Pucks, I think the code is a lot more complicated than most people realize.
Another part of the deterrence is that non-fighters realize that THIER tough guy may have to fight the other teams tough guy due to anything a non-fighter may do on the ice. This keeps guys that are not fighters in line.

By: David Koci is about to be run out of Denver | Hockey Independent

David Koci is about to be run out of Denver | Hockey Independent — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:28:28 +0000

[...] at Puck Daddythinks Koci will be getting a suspension while On Frozen Blog thinks an enforcer on the Caps roster might have prevented this in the first [...]

By: Randy

Randy — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:59:17 +0000

I’ve read parts of The Code, and it’s an excellent book. However, I’m afraid that it’s now outdated. The majority of fights are started not to retaliate or enforce the rules, but to swing momentum back to the losing team. Fights are started over clean but physical checks.

In the Koci case in Colorado, how does an enforcer who is sitting on the bench go after an offending player after he has been ejected from the game? When you are leading 5-0, there isn’t much reason to start a fight. Most coaches now tell their players not to start fight if they are leading by a couple goals to keep from giving the opposition any spark.

I haven’t been watching the Rangers much this year, but has Brashear’s presence on the team protected anyone? I love Brash, but are the Rangers a better team than last year?

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:42:52 +0000

This is not my area of expertise, but how does an enforcer help you with Koci? What the enforcer does is keep everyone other than Koci cautious. But Koci? His whole purpose in life is to try to hurt people when his team has been embarrassed all evening. I don’t think he would behave differently if we had a Brashear on our side. If he did, what good would he be?

This is not to say we couldn’t use an enforcer. Just that I think the only way to avoid something like what happened last night is serious league discipline against the player *and* the team.

By: pucksandbooks

pucksandbooks — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:49:25 +0000

Melvis, you’re spot on, and thank you for sharing that important elaboration. Bernstein richly details the vast environment of hockey’s enforcers, and it’s one that extends well beyond the occasional 90 seconds of dance at center ice.

This is a terribly important discussion, and we’ve not had the last of it at this blog by any stretch.

By: melvisdog

melvisdog — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:32:12 +0000

Pucks, nice timing. I’ve been thinking along the same lines for the last two weeks. One thing you failed to mention that could bolster your not-so-subtle argument that the Caps could use a heavyweight, is that the book is filled with examples like the Ducks. You merely plucked one example that best fits this case. The book also points out that if the stars are getting wrung-up, that team’s enforcer can/will send a verbal message through that team’s captain or middleweight that retribution is about to come to one of the opposing stars and they need to layoff. I can’t find my copy of the book but I’m not sure I’d be able to find the passage to quote anyway… organizationally, it’s kind of a dog’s breakfast. Last night, Semin and Green were targeted frequently and a true enforcer may have been able to prevent the Koci shot.

By: pucksandbooks

pucksandbooks — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:22:54 +0000

The 2007 edition of the Ducks, in addition to winning the Stanley Cup, led the league in fighting majors, which to me is suggestive that it really need not be an “either/or” approach to assembling a tough and skilled roster. Brian Burke was the architect of that club, of course, and when he knuckle-fashioned Toronto this past offseason a lot of folks laughed. This morning, not so much, no?

By: mattymatty

mattymatty — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:12:55 +0000

That is some porous reasoning. There are many other things that could have happened to get the Ducks to the playoffs other than Grimson’s presence on the bench (?). I went back and checked and in ’97-’98, Selanne missed only 8 games. Meaning he played played 73 games, which means he didn’t miss much of the year.

Also, something else which could have had a major impact on the Ducks (9 win) turnaround other than Grimson was the 97-98 and 98-99 teams had different head coachs.

One can’t attribute anything in a team sport to one guy. Its like assigning wins to pitchers or quarterbacks – it completely ignores the contributions of all the other players on the field and actors off of it.

By: pucksandbooks

pucksandbooks — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:47:17 +0000

No.

Bernstein’s survey includes enforcers, coaches, referees, and the protected.

By: Yitzhak

Yitzhak — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:34:42 +0000

This may seem rather obvious, but, wouldn’t the opinions of those that these players “protected” be more relevant to this discussion? Asking thugs whether or not thuggery is important to the game seems rather pointless, no?