Line brawl & Crazy Torts - Aftermath

[moon]

Originally Posted by Stanley

I suppose you could argue that Hartley didn't "play" Torts as much as Torts "played" himself by allowing his own emotions to control his behaviour....

His team won the game which is what they needed to do.

So what is the downside for Tortorella and upside for Hartley that had hartley playing him?

I could understand if Hartley got the Sisters involved and tossed out giving Calgary a chance to win the game but in this case both teams lost their scrubs and Vancouver went on to win.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Stanley

I suppose you could argue that Hartley didn't "play" Torts as much as Torts "played" himself by allowing his own emotions to control his behaviour....

But Hartley knew that and took advantage of it.

Torts is too used to being the aggressor, so when he was put on his heels he lost it.

I'm not saying Hartley is some evil genius or the greatest coach in the universe, but he manipulated Torts by instigating the meltdown and proceeded to rather successfully make it look like all of Torts' fault.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by moon

His team won the game which is what they needed to do.

So what is the downside for Tortorella and upside for Hartley that had hartley playing him?

I could understand if Hartley got the Sisters involved and tossed out giving Calgary a chance to win the game but in this case both teams lost their scrubs and Vancouver went on to win.

About $80K and the potential for his team to be at a disadvantage for 6 more games.

[zamler]

Hartley totally played Tortorella, the results speak for themselves. I didn't realize the Canucks to a man were so gutless that the coach had to step in and defend their honour, didn't see that coming. Now Vancouver fans are cheering Torts for "standing up" for the team?

[Stanley]

Originally Posted by Locke

But Hartley knew that and took advantage of it.

Torts is too used to being the aggressor, so when he was put on his heels he lost it.

I'm not saying Hartley is some evil genius or the greatest coach in the universe, but he manipulated Torts by instigating the meltdown and proceeded to rather successfully make it look like all of Torts' fault.

...which is why I do believe that Hartley played that part well...

[Locke]

Originally Posted by zamler

Hartley totally played Tortorella, the results speak for themselves. I didn't realize the Canucks to a man were so gutless that the coach had to step in and defend their honour, didn't see that coming. Now Vancouver fans are cheering Torts for "standing up" for the team?

Agreed, which is why I say that he didnt really stand up for them so much as he fought their battle for them, and he lost and looked like a doofus doing it. He fits Vancouver so well.

Originally Posted by Stanley

...which is why I do believe that Hartley played that part well...

And I agree. And I certainly believe that Hartley knew what he was doing.

[mikeecho]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Shows a complete misunderstanding of the game of hockey, but nice try.

There's only one incident I can remember in recent history that has a goon attacking a talented player - and it was Scott Vs. Kessel, and it was a gong show. Kessel did well in protecting himself. It does not happen often, and McGrattan is one of the more respected "goons" in the league because he lives by that often criticized but very real unspoken code among players.

So, no - McGrattan and Westgarth would not have tackled the Sedins, and anyone who believes they would have isn't paying attention to the NHL and is just making noise for the sake of noise.

... To add to that, beyond Scott, I can only think of 3 recent incidents where a player tried to fight another player that didn't want to engage. All were Canucks with Sestito doing it twice in his last 2 games.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by Stanley

...which is why I do believe that Hartley played that part well...

yes, I agree. He was great in leading by example when Torts was in the hallway. All the flames players and coaches (besides Clint) were pretty calm, that is what made me laugh the most about that whole thing. I wish there was a camera pointing in the other direction.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by moon

I would guess that Westgarth took the FO because Hartley wanted his guys to fight.

My guess is that the lineup card had Jones at C.

And that is why Torts put Lain out there at C - to have another go at Jones. His act about not being sure about putting Lain out there or not was garbage - he put Lain out there against Jones.

But when they lined up at centre for the faceoff, Hartley (presumably, or maybe just the players) moved Westgarth to C to face Lain and protect Jones.

That's when Bieksa saw that Lain was in a bad place and played hero (until he actually played chicken ####)

[Locke]

Bieksa never played hero. Bieksa played pansy.

He took that faceoff because he knew the ref was right there and if he didnt want to fight he wasnt going to get hit. He may have momentarily 'protected the rookie' but he knew that he was going to be protected by the ref.

[Enoch Root]

I was using the term sarcastically

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

My guess is that the lineup card had Jones at C.

And that is why Torts put Lain out there at C - to have another go at Jones. His act about not being sure about putting Lain out there or not was garbage - he put Lain out there against Jones.

But when they lined up at centre for the faceoff, Hartley (presumably, or maybe just the players) moved Westgarth to C to face Lain and protect Jones.

That's when Bieksa saw that Lain was in a bad place and played hero (until he actually played chicken ####)

Either that or he put his 4th line center out there to center his 4th line.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Either that or he put his 4th line center out there to center his 4th line.

Really? Then why did SuperBieksaMan feel the need to save him? He even skipped the whole 'getting changed in a phone booth' rigmarole because the situation was so drastically dire.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Either that or he put his 4th line center out there to center his 4th line.

The guy was just called up and hadn't played a game yet, but okay.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Locke

Really? Then why did SuperBieksaMan feel the need to save him? He even skipped the whole 'getting changed in a phone booth' rigmarole because the situation was so drastically dire.

Who knows what Bieksa was thinking, but Lain was the only Canuck center on the ice so inferring that having him take the draw was some sort of devious plan by Tortorella seems a little far fetched.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The guy was just called up and hadn't played a game yet, but okay.

That doesn't change the fact that he's their current 4th line center due to Santorelli getting injured along with Richardson and Dalpe getting moved up. He's slated to center Sestito and Weise again tonight vs. EDM.

[SuperMatt18]

I hope the Oilers start their 4th line tonight against the Canucks, with a camera on Torts wherever he is watching the game.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by jschick88

Not sure where to put this.... Canucks and Oilers play tonight.

@EdmontonOilers I don't think these teams have liked each other for a very long time, and I don't think that's ever going to change." - Eakins on EDM/VAN

@SportsnetSpec Luke Gazdic on VAN: "I don't think a lot of people like that team. I grew up in ONT. These are the games I circle on my calendar."

@SportsnetSpec Gazdic: "That guy Sestito has been running around."

Eagerly looking forward to the one tough player the Oilers dealing with the Canucks. The Canucks might not be a tough team... but they would whip the Oilers around if they wanted.

EDIT: Guess they actually have two now with Hendricks.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by foshizzle11

yes, I agree. He was great in leading by example when Torts was in the hallway. All the flames players and coaches (besides Clint) were pretty calm, that is what made me laugh the most about that whole thing. I wish there was a camera pointing in the other direction.

Pretty much a tactic they use to try and piss other players off and definitely not the first time they have done it. Vancouver is pretty much the only team I usually recall doing that kind of stuff. The incident with Phil Kessel also comes to mind although I think he was genuinely scared at the time.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by mikeecho

... To add to that, beyond Scott, I can only think of 3 recent incidents where a player tried to fight another player that didn't want to engage. All were Canucks with Sestito doing it twice in his last 2 games.

Ference vs. Stempniak also comes to mind.