Past Canuck Players

[Madcombinepilot]

… and throw fast.

His punch count was off the charts..

[Megaterio Llamas]

Troy Stecher is on waivers https://puckpedia.com/waiver-wire?utm_s ... nt=primary

Somewhere up north, deep in the bowels of the earth, an haggard old miner just twitched at the thought of Stencher coming back...

Lol. The likes of him don't come around every day.

Stay safe, miner, wherever you are

[Cousin Strawberry]

Troy Stecher is on waivers https://puckpedia.com/waiver-wire?utm_s ... nt=primary

Somewhere up north, deep in the bowels of the earth, an haggard old miner just twitched at the thought of Stencher coming back...

More likely he's somewhere in the east chilcotin plateau sitting in his Taco Idling for 10 straight hours a day entering core sample data into a Panasonic toughbook questioning why he hasn't posted at his favorite Internet chatroom in months

[Ronning's Ghost]

Rick Rypien (with perhaps some guidance from his father, Wes) figured out some technical elements of hockey fighting that still do not seem to have been widely adopted. It's why he was able to be so effective against much larger opponents, and an important part of my argument of why it would be possible to coach much more of the fighting element of hockey toughness into a given lineup, irrespective of past pugilistic proclivities, if a management or coaching group believed it would help.

I do agree you can teach the aspects of hockey fighting - I still remember it used to be the tough guy's job on the team to show the basics to rookies coming in, George Laraque comes to mind with the Habs.

Rypien's blocking technique wasn't widely seen, and the ability to throw a quick jab with that blocking arm caught a lot of opponents off guard.

Yes, those, but the thing that I think was an equalizer for Rypien against heavyweights was an insight (or perhaps experimental discovery) about punching mechanics on skates, and one that few others seemed to have picked up on, or else lack the necessary skill to exploit. For most punches, skates and Newton's 3rd law work against you when trying to transmit forces horizontally, and so in most hockey fights they're really only throwing arm punches. Some of the players are so big and strong it still hurts, but you'll notice that a smaller number of punches landed between equally large boxers ends the fight in a knockout. What Rypien noted, though, was that ice reacted just as well as canvas against vertical forces, so when he threw a well-structured uppercut driving with his legs, he was actually hitting far harder than most of the big men throwing looping haymakers.

Another coachable aspect would be fighting for grips on the jersey, which is something judo competitors practice all the time. I have seen getting the better grip be decisive in many hockey fights. I think there would be other transferable skills from judo, though some posters have argued that those would seen as an escalation beyond the implied social contract. But we have been speaking in terms of a "nukular" deterrent.

I think what made him so successful, was his ambidextrousness - hard to teach that, and being able to throw with both equally was a game changer for Rick.

Ambidextrous would be asking a lot, but every boxer can throw at least some punches with either hand. If the player's preferred hand was doing the gripping, and that led to enough of a control advantage on the grip, second-best punches that actually landed would be enough to win a fight.

… and throw fast.

His punch count was off the charts..

Yes, speed is very hard to coach. But don't most (or at least, many) hockey players have fast hands, anyway, for stick-handling and tucking in loose pucks around the net? I don't why that wouldn't be transferable, with a little practice. Maybe some throw slowly because it's an unfamiliar motion, so they have to think about it? Or, lacking skill, they think they really have to wind up to throw anything worth landing ?

My own strong preference would be that the League and its officials enforce the rules, but ultimately, they are selling an entertainment product, and seem to believe that current level of enforcement is what their paying audience wants.* So until and unless the League makes that shift, the Canucks should be pursuing advantage in that element of the game with the same vigor as any of the other aspects.

*as a counter-point to that position, observe the rigor and millimeter precision with which North America's most financially successful professional league enforces the rules. They still get it wrong sometimes, but they make a convincing showing of endeavouring mightily to get it as right as mortals can.

[donlever]

The NFL refs get it wrong a lot in my estimation.

Disturbingly so.

They seemingly can not even catch false starts during the horrific Tush Pushes.

This was called offensive pass interference costing the Giants a TD.

https://x.com/Rate_the_Refs/status/1982 ... -vs-eagles

The Chiefs have received so many favorable calls over the years people are calling out NFL refs as Tom Donaghy clones.

There are 7 of them on the field and 2 supporting in the booth to total 9 for 22 players.

It should be better than it is.

Its far and away my favourite sport but way to many missed calls in that league for my liking.

[Ronning's Ghost]

The NFL refs get it wrong a lot in my estimation.

As I said, less than perfect. You and I probably have many of the same complaints.

But the important difference is that the implied underlying philosophy is that it should be as perfect as they can get it.

There are upper limits on what they will ever be likely to achieve in that regard. Pass interference and offensive holding -- to pick the most obvious two -- inevitably involve a degree of subjectivity, and players have to get a sense of how tight a given officiating team is calling it. But once the threshold is established, I think officiating crews do a pretty solid job of sticking to it, for the most part.

But there exists no argument that I've ever heard that the officiating crew should just let some proportion of the fouls go in the name of not interrupting the flow of the game. (I've watched some really tedious games where the officiating crew seemed to be involved in half the plays, but the suggestions were not that they should let stuff go; it was that professionals ought know the rules and be able to follow them.) And no time in the 21st century have I ever seen officials just let a dangerous foul go unpenalized in the name of "let 'em play" or "it's the playoffs".

No NFL team has a program of imposing their own sanctions on opposing players whose tactics they do not like through reciprocated fouls, nor any designated players responsible for doing so.

Now of course, as a matter of market positioning, the NHL doesn't want to offer exactly the same fan experience as some other league. But my point is that there does seem to be strong market for leagues in which there is a sincere attempt -- or a narrative of a sincere attempt -- to fairly enforce the rules. The NFL has over 10 times the revenue of the WWE.