Black and Blue Leafs

[bustaheims]

Agreed. His effectiveness is in his intimidation factor not necessarily his fighting ability.

His effectiveness is in his forechecking and in his physical play, not his intimidation factor. When those things disappear, he's useless.

 

[Redleaf]

Agreed. His effectiveness is in his intimidation factor not necessarily his fighting ability.

His effectiveness is in his forechecking and in his physical play, not his intimidation factor. When those things disappear, he's useless.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one Busta.

 

[Corn Flake]

I agree that the fights did not change the momentum of that game.  However, the players sticking up for one another goes a long way to creating the bond that you need in a dressing room for a successful team and one where the stars feel free to be creative knowing that there are team mates that have there back. (see Gretzky---Semenko).  I was sick to my stomach last year when Gionta took out Reimer and no leaf went near him in response.  The message was "take liberties we won't respond."

Not thos year not under this coach.  A big step forward.

This. One hundred times this.

But I don't think anyone's talking about team toughness or standing up for your teammates as a negative. The issue is how it reflects on guys who are on the team for essentially no other reason. The game where Reimer got hit by Gionta, the Leafs had both Mike Brown and Jay Rosehill in the line-up. That there wasn't a fight in that game had nothing to do with whether or not the Leafs had guys in the line-up who could fight.

Yeah but in that example I think you can look to the broader makeup of the team and what Wilson was preaching vs. Carlyle has an effect on how the players use toughness/fighting/etc to send a message.  Also, this current team has 5-6 guys who would fall into the "willing to dust it up" category vs. 1-2 back then.  Strength in numbers to enforce a more physical approach is key.

Your example to me is a good one on how this team has distincivley changed its approach and is now using tough guys far more effectively.  The last several games are prime examples of how that intimidation factor that has been instilled is building an identity in this team again and they are using it to win games .. the most important stat. 

In the Leafs post game show last night, Osborne was talking about how he can't remember when he's seen the Flyers actually intimidated by the Leafs.  He thought it was very obvious that they were.. none of their bigger guys would even look at Colton Orr, etc.

The smaller, skilled guys say it over and over.. they feel far more able to do their thing and protected when the team has guys who can go out there and push back... or in the case of the last 2 games, run the other team right over.

 

[Kin]

Yeah but in that example I think you can look to the broader makeup of the team and what Wilson was preaching vs. Carlyle has an effect on how the players use toughness/fighting/etc to send a message.  Also, this current team has 5-6 guys who would fall into the "willing to dust it up" category vs. 1-2 back then.  Strength in numbers to enforce a more physical approach is key.

Well I agree with that. I mean it's like I said about the 92-93 Leafs. That wasn't a tough team because of Baumgartner, it was that toughness permeated the line-up. Even to the extent that when it got to when winning really mattered and the team sat Baumgartner they still had guys like Clark and Pearson and Osborne and Rouse and on and on. Like you say, the difference in toughness is more from the 5-6 guys who can dust it up but also play hockey and not the 1 or 2 standard issue goons that all teams will carry.