Sam Bennett Value: Have the Flames held on TOO long? OR is he awesome?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I’m glad someone is talking about minor hockey because that is the issue. I’m not really familiar with the levels you are referring to. But are you saying elite bantam and midget players should allow hitting but not at other levels? That’s a fair position to throw out there but not one I would support.

That is correct - if you're on a trajectory where you could conceivably play at a higher level, IE AAA, club teams etc, then by all means have the hitting.

If you're a kid who has a mid-range division 3 (think Single-A, B, BB level) bantam hockey game tonight and a math test tomorrow, you need your brain.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Well, I think it's pretty dumb to assume if you take a borderline charge out of hockey you won't see guys stand up at the blueline or bang a guy in the corner or put a hip on someone in the neutral zone.

There was all kinds of hitting in that game and the only one that appears to have caused a head injury is the hit that was borderline charging.

Like, if we don't allow Dion Phaneuf to almost kill Kyle Okposo in a meaningless preseason game, then adrian aucoin won't be able to hit a guy in the corner to turn the puck over?

Just to circle back to this, I find it interesting that two mods thanked this post which is calling an assumption dumb.

First of all I didn't assume anything. I thought the point of this was Jiri wanted to discuss what hitting should/could be like if rules were changed. If you want real discussion perhaps don't call assumptions dumb and have mods thank that post.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

That is correct - if you're on a trajectory where you could conceivably play at a higher level, IE AAA, club teams etc, then by all means have the hitting.

If you're a kid who has a mid-range division 3 (think Single-A, B, BB level) bantam hockey game tonight and a math test tomorrow, you need your brain.

Yeah they all need their brain. That’s why I’m not a big fan of that proposal.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

But shouldn't you have some sort of input, more than "I think that hit shouldn't be in the game"? You are the one who wants to make the changes afterall, so I would think that the responsibility of laying out some new ideas should fall to you. Discussion would then easily continue from there.

Off the top of your head, ideally what would be an acceptable amount of contact in your mind? Do you want any hit where players are not travelling in the same direction banned? Do you want it like most beer leagues where no contact is allowed? Do you want it a little more complicated where hitting is allowed but "big hits" aren't?

If you really do want to discuss the topic I feel like you should be giving a little more than "a hit like this shouldn't happen anymore".

Personally I find it annoying when someone pretends to have all the answers when they don't.
But I'll try
The acceptable amount of contact for me is whatever is required to take the puck. So that removes "finishing the check" which I think is a big part of the overall shift that needs to be made.
I think checking should be more about stick checking, angles, and body positioning.
The challenge is figuring out what that means for open ice contact. I've been meaning to go back and watch players like Nik Lindstrom, who I view as being a model for how this should work, to sense check if
- was he more physical than I recall?
- How did he check in open ice

Body positioning is hard when players are moving on skates. But was does an open ice check look like if the intent is to get the puck, not punish the player?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I'm confused how it can be great it was boarderline illegal.

Also, still wasn't borderline anything.

I think it's dumb to think a hit was good and clean until it's found out later that an injury occured on the play, and that same hit is now bad for the game.

1) It was a reaction to the hit in real time.
2) some of the best hits are the borderline type, from both a entertainment and in-game impact perspective
3) I think being able to change one's opinion when presented with conflicted or alternative information is the opposite of dumb.

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Just to circle back to this, I find it interesting that two mods thanked this post which is calling an assumption dumb.

First of all I didn't assume anything. I thought the point of this was Jiri wanted to discuss what hitting should/could be like if rules were changed. If you want real discussion perhaps don't call assumptions dumb and have mods thank that post.

you wrote, "We say, well if you take this hit out of the game you pretty much take all hitting out of the game."

That's a dumb thing to say.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I know we're not supposed to derail the Sam Bennett thread, but you've reminded me that I never liked Adrian Aucoin. Hated the acquisition when it was made, for an old, slow defenseman Chicago fans were only too happy to see go away. They were barely happier when Old Man Wirtz died.

But a quick look at his Hockey Reference page reveals he had two 30+ point seasons, sub-50 PIMs each year, and was up over 20 minutes a night each year. Whatever the reasons they didn't get it done those years, it wasn't Aucoin's fault.

Sorry, Adrian. You went on and played 20+ a night for another three years, and finished your career as a Jacket, sure showing me.

He won the Flames hardest shot contest using a wooden stick, and told kids there was no need to ask their parents to spend $300+ on a stick to shoot hard. I will forever like that about Aucoin.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Yeah they all need their brain. That’s why I’m not a big fan of that proposal.

That's fair. Maybe not at all levels, but certainly below certain levels of skill. I want to say this is already the case, but I may be wrong. For example, division 5 or lower, where the skills are not developed enough, you don't want to have people just rambling around the ice trying to kill each other.

I played one year of forward, I think I threw five hits. I can't say I'dve missed it much if the hitting was gone, but I also remember one hit being incredibly satisfying.

Again, I think the biggest problem might be rooted in sending kids back out. Maybe you don't need to be as extreme as one concussion and you're done, but as a parent you need to be aware of that sort of thing and protect kids from themselves a bit.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Yeah they all need their brain. That’s why I’m not a big fan of that proposal.

Are you in favour of removing all hitting from minor hockey then?

I coached high level bantam quite a bit in my early 20s. When the changes they were making came up this was the most common suggestion from people in our circles (div 2 peewee and higher should be hitting. Div 3 at any level should be minimal contact. No necessarily NO contact, more like the women’s game).

Not many actual participants were in favour of removal of hitting in peewee. Most of else felt there was less danger of sever injuries to learn proper hitting technique in peewee when most kids are around the same size. Leaving it until Batam allowed for greater size differences and IMO more room for bad hits between inexperienced players.

Another thing that could be more focused on is instead of taking hitting out, Go the other way and our way more effort into teaching proper checking technique. Usually that is up to individual coaches whose expertise can be extremely varied and in some cases detrimental. Hockey Canada should be stepping in with checking clinics.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

1) It was a reaction to the hit in real time.
2) some of the best hits are the borderline type, from both a entertainment and in-game impact perspective
3) I think being able to change one's opinion when presented with conflicted or alternative information is the opposite of dumb.



you wrote, "We say, well if you take this hit out of the game you pretty much take all hitting out of the game."

That's a dumb thing to say.

2) No clean hits are the best hits, like this one was.
3) So what new information was supplied that changed your mind to this was a boarderline charge? Can you please also tell me why this is close to a charge?

Yes, this is as clean of a hit as you can get. If you take this hit and others out of the game what are you left with? I've asked that question a few times and haven't got an answer. Perhaps if no one has an answer for that it isn't a stupid thing to say.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Personally I find it annoying when someone pretends to have all the answers when they don't.
But I'll try
The acceptable amount of contact for me is whatever is required to take the puck. So that removes "finishing the check" which I think is a big part of the overall shift that needs to be made.
I think checking should be more about stick checking, angles, and body positioning.
The challenge is figuring out what that means for open ice contact. I've been meaning to go back and watch players like Nik Lindstrom, who I view as being a model for how this should work, to sense check if
- was he more physical than I recall?
- How did he check in open ice

Body positioning is hard when players are moving on skates. But was does an open ice check look like if the intent is to get the puck, not punish the player?

If the Avs player holds the puck a second longer, Bennett stil blows him up and result is the same. But then he’s not finishing the check. A lot of finishing the check involves rubbing guys out along the boards after playing the puck, which IMO are the less violent hits and not as likely to lead to injury.

So I’m not sure the direction you’re going is necessarily the one that results in fewer injuries.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Just to circle back to this, I find it interesting that two mods thanked this post which is calling an assumption dumb.

First of all I didn't assume anything. I thought the point of this was Jiri wanted to discuss what hitting should/could be like if rules were changed. If you want real discussion perhaps don't call assumptions dumb and have mods thank that post.

He called the assumption dumb, not the person.
But I largely thanked it because of the rest of the post.

[soulchoice]

Originally Posted by Coach

Are you in favour of removing all hitting from minor hockey then?

I coached high level bantam quite a bit in my early 20s. When the changes they were making came up this was the most common suggestion from people in our circles (div 2 peewee and higher should be hitting. Div 3 at any level should be minimal contact. No necessarily NO contact, more like the women’s game).

Not many actual participants were in favour of removal of hitting in peewee. Most of else felt there was less danger of sever injuries to learn proper hitting technique in peewee when most kids are around the same size. Leaving it until Batam allowed for greater size differences and IMO more room for bad hits between inexperienced players.

Another thing that could be more focused on is instead of taking hitting out, Go the other way and our way more effort into teaching proper checking technique. Usually that is up to individual coaches whose expertise can be extremely varied and in some cases detrimental. Hockey Canada should be stepping in with checking clinics.

They should have never removed checking from pee wee hockey. Where I played my whole life Saskatchewan, was the only province against the change. Kids need to learn at a young age how to play and check. Correct with the size aspect in pee wee vs bantam.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Personally I find it annoying when someone pretends to have all the answers when they don't.
But I'll try
The acceptable amount of contact for me is whatever is required to take the puck. So that removes "finishing the check" which I think is a big part of the overall shift that needs to be made.
I think checking should be more about stick checking, angles, and body positioning.
The challenge is figuring out what that means for open ice contact. I've been meaning to go back and watch players like Nik Lindstrom, who I view as being a model for how this should work, to sense check if
- was he more physical than I recall?
- How did he check in open ice

Body positioning is hard when players are moving on skates. But was does an open ice check look like if the intent is to get the puck, not punish the player?

See but the difference here is this isn't black/white yes/no, I'm curious as to what you think could be done.

I'm not sure I agree with you that this was finishing the check. Bennett was too close in my opinion to change from hitting Compher to going for the puck. If you pause it when Compher dumps the puck off his stick Bennett is within a stick length of him, at this speed that is under 1 second I'm sure.

This is why I'm saying that if you take this hit out of the game you take out almost or all hitting. This hit wasn't late, it wasn't a head shot, it wasn't a blind side, it wasn't a charge, it wasn't an open ice it.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

2) No clean hits are the best hits, like this one was.
3) So what new information was supplied that changed your mind to this was a boarderline charge? Can you please also tell me why this is close to a charge?

I watched a replay.

If you take this hit and others out of the game what are you left with? I've asked that question a few times and haven't got an answer. Perhaps if no one has an answer for that it isn't a stupid thing to say.

No one has answered because it's a stupid question. Like, it's really stupid, that's why no one is answering it.

There were 31 recorded hits in the game against the Avs, that hit by Bennett was one of them. Remove that hit and there are 30 hits left in the game.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

He called the assumption dumb, not the person.
But I largely thanked it because of the rest of the post.

And yet it isn't a dumb assumption.

If you genuinely want to have a discussion about the topic then don't assume that other people assumptions are dumb.

Just because I don't agree with you on this doesn't mean I think your stance of wanting to change the game is dumb.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I watched a replay.


No one has answered because it's a stupid question. Like, it's really stupid, that's why no one is answering it.

There were 31 recorded hits in the game against the Avs, that hit by Bennett was one of them. Remove that hit and there are 30 hits left in the game.

It really isn't stupid, but that's fine perhaps you just can't comprehend.

Care to answer my other question on how this was almost charging? You can google what a charge is and get back to me if needed.

Also this hit isn't in a bubble, so you can't say that if you get rid of it all the other hits still happen.

[soulchoice]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Personally I find it annoying when someone pretends to have all the answers when they don't.
But I'll try
The acceptable amount of contact for me is whatever is required to take the puck. So that removes "finishing the check" which I think is a big part of the overall shift that needs to be made.
I think checking should be more about stick checking, angles, and body positioning.
The challenge is figuring out what that means for open ice contact. I've been meaning to go back and watch players like Nik Lindstrom, who I view as being a model for how this should work, to sense check if
- was he more physical than I recall?
- How did he check in open ice

Body positioning is hard when players are moving on skates. But was does an open ice check look like if the intent is to get the puck, not punish the player?

If that is what you feel checking is about, What you're proposing is essentially men's A division beer league hockey or slightly more physical version of the womens game. I wont pay any amount of money to watch either of those types of games to be honest let alone pro mens hockey. Finishing the check is a fundamental.

At least you provided ideas but I'm sure the majority would not want such a drastic change to the game of contact pro hockey.

[H2SO4(aq)]

The Great Softening of Society continues...

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

The Great Softening of Society continues...

lol

Take me back to the roman coliseum please!

[theslymonkey]

Sam Bennett?

No?

See ya...