Kaleta

[shrader]

Maybe this is a generational argument. I grew up watching professional sports believing that a professional conducts himself in a certain way. He should at all times carry a certain respect for the game they play. I can imagine that such ideals are fading away considering the state of the professional athlete today. A state in which contracts, ESPN air time and drawing attention away from the team onto themselves are prominent.

 

Unless you're about 90 years old, this statement is complete BS.

[carpandean]

Thank you. Kaleta is not a dirty player.

Turtleing makes him something worse.

:blink:

 

I can understand wanting him to "man up" and take the occasional fight when he hits someone hard, but how could turtleing possibly make him worse than being dirty?! I would never want a dirty player on the Sabres. Sure, it would be even worse to have a dirty player that also turtles, but I just can't fathom how a clean player, even a hard-hitting one, can be worse than a dirty player just because he doesn't always fight back when he makes someone mad. No, no, no ...

[Samson's Flow]

So it's OK for a player to do anything he wants as long as the Sabres win? Maybe they should let Peters go back on Andro or whatever he was taking. It made him a better player. For that matter let Tallinder female fans in between periods.

 

Maybe this is a generational argument. I grew up watching professional sports believing that a professional conducts himself in a certain way. He should at all times carry a certain respect for the game they play. I can imagine that such ideals are fading away considering the state of the professional athlete today. A state in which contracts, ESPN air time and drawing attention away from the team onto themselves are prominent.

 

If you want to hide behind "the ends justify the means" go ahead. IMO, the actions that have been occurred embarrass me as a 30+ year Sabre fan. There is no place in the game for it and I will never condone it no matter the end result. I know I live in a fantasy world where the Sabres to have young tough hockey players that stay on their skates and fight. Just like in my world where the Bills can win without a rookie wide receiver who hits women and a running back that doesn't leave women laying in the street after hitting them with their SUV. Call me a dreamer.

 

thats some pretty personal attacks your throwing out there. You might want to step away and think a bit... :unsure:

 

It's all well and good to criticize players on the ice/field while they are playing their respective sport. Nobody here will blink if you criticize Tallinder or Max or Kaleta for that matter, as long as it is in response to their play ON THE ICE. But thats where it should end. The minute you go from the play as an athlete to the personal life of an individual is when you cross the line.

[FogBat]

I love Patty but his lack of dropping the gloves makes me uncomfortable. I know if he was on another team, he just might be my least favorite player in the game.

Could he be our answer to Sean Avery or, better yet, (a flash from the past) Ulf Samuelsson?

[FogBat]

do you have respect for the guy like Mara that grabs someone from behind and just starts punching him in the head? Just sayin' ... is that somehow more worthy of respect?

Hey, it's DeLuca. Look at who you're dealing with. What more do you expect from him?

[FogBat]

Well, based on last night's game, Kaleta is already a marked man. He'll need the same kind of radar that guys like Chris Neil and Tootoo have to survive, because everyone is going to be looking to take shots at him.

 

FWIW, I think he'll probably fight between 1/3 and 1/2 of the time he's challenged, and look to draw penalties the rest of the time (often successfully). This is fine with me.

:thumbsup:

[FogBat]

thats some pretty personal attacks your throwing out there. You might want to step away and think a bit... :unsure:

 

It's all well and good to criticize players on the ice/field while they are playing their respective sport. Nobody here will blink if you criticize Tallinder or Max or Kaleta for that matter, as long as it is in response to their play ON THE ICE. But thats where it should end. The minute you go from the play as an athlete to the personal life of an individual is when you cross the line.

Exactly. :worthy:

 

Yes, I know I go a bit over the top with some of my OT postings (but that is a topic for another day). I own up to them if I go out of line, though.

 

Having said that, DeLuca's posting yet confirms what I have said before (and I will say again), "A man's morals dictate his philosophy." It's not the first time he's done it either.

[deluca67]

Exactly. :worthy:

 

Yes, I know I go a bit over the top with some of my OT postings (but that is a topic for another day). I own up to them if I go out of line, though.

 

Having said that, DeLuca's posting yet confirms what I have said before (and I will say again), "A man's morals dictate his philosophy." It's not the first time he's done it either.

"Morality" is subjected. I may not fit your definition as you do not fit mine since yours are bases on fairy tales.

[deluca67]

thats some pretty personal attacks your throwing out there. You might want to step away and think a bit... :unsure:

 

It's all well and good to criticize players on the ice/field while they are playing their respective sport. Nobody here will blink if you criticize Tallinder or Max or Kaleta for that matter, as long as it is in response to their play ON THE ICE. But thats where it should end. The minute you go from the play as an athlete to the personal life of an individual is when you cross the line.

So it's OK for Larry Little to keep playing football after killing a women? Then getting caught drinking and driving a second time. These are professional athletes who are brought into our community. Their conduct and lack of character is very much a topic to be discussed at any time. If these players don't what the topics discussed? Don't run women over or engage in gang bangs.

[Taro T]

Thank you. Kaleta is not a dirty player.

 

...

 

 

Refs see when guys turtle and I'm sure it's only human nature on their part to look for something else. Like when Kaleta got interfered with in the Canucks game. The refs sent him for diving, which I'm not so sure he did.

 

I love his play and how he pisses guys off. I'm happy he fought last night. That will keep him honest.

 

 

I don't see how turtling would lead to diving penalties. Kaleta does seem to flop a bit sometimes after hits. He takes enough big hits though that I can't imagine him being called for it too often.

To date, most if not all of Kaleta's hits have been clean. Let's hope he keeps that up. Let's also hope that he can increase his overall hockey skills because if all he is bringing to the game is hitting everything in sight he will have a very short career due to the constant (self-inflicted and not) beating his body is taking.

 

I'm not particularily concerned about his "turtleing" nor the rep it could/is creating for him. As Lindy mentioned, that is more talk from the opponents trying to goad him into creating offsetting minors/majors when they decide to be cementheads. I'm also not certain the rep is deserved as he has fought a few times already in his brief career. He's probably had more fights to date than Ulfie did in his entire career, so he isn't close to taking the title from him.

 

As for the "dive" he took the other night, it didn't look like one to me, but the ref had a much better view of it than I did. It is probably good for him that Briere isn't still on the roster as the Sabres (well, Roy) don't seem to get accused of diving nearly as much as they did when Danny was here. Kaleta will need to make sure he's skating balanced because he will start getting called for dives if the refs think he flails when he wasn't bumped too hard. Part of the downside of getting a rep as a guy that checks anything that moves; if you can throw a check that well, the refs expect that you probably know how to take one (even one that was caused by what was determined to be interference).

[Stoner]

So it's OK for a player to do anything he wants as long as the Sabres win? Maybe they should let Peters go back on Andro or whatever he was taking. It made him a better player. For that matter let Tallinder female fans in between periods.

 

Maybe this is a generational argument. I grew up watching professional sports believing that a professional conducts himself in a certain way. He should at all times carry a certain respect for the game they play. I can imagine that such ideals are fading away considering the state of the professional athlete today. A state in which contracts, ESPN air time and drawing attention away from the team onto themselves are prominent.

 

If you want to hide behind "the ends justify the means" go ahead. IMO, the actions that have been occurred embarrass me as a 30+ year Sabre fan. There is no place in the game for it and I will never condone it no matter the end result. I know I live in a fantasy world where the Sabres to have young tough hockey players that stay on their skates and fight. Just like in my world where the Bills can win without a rookie wide receiver who hits women and a running back that doesn't leave women laying in the street after hitting them with their SUV. Call me a dreamer.

 

Wow, you just keep digging yourself deeper with no way out. This thread is like your personal Vietnam.

 

You're equating steroid use and violence against women with Kaleta turtling? Wow. Double wow.

 

Speaking of honor, where is the honor in just starting to wail on someone? Don't the Marquis of Queensbury rules dictate an "invitation" to fight?

 

Kaleta was assaulted, nothing more, nothing less. He had no obligation to "man up." Would you require Derek Roy to drop the gloves the next time he's high-sticked?

[deluca67]

Wow, you just keep digging yourself deeper with no way out. This thread is like your personal Vietnam.

 

You're equating steroid use and violence against women with Kaleta turtling? Wow. Double wow.

 

Speaking of honor, where is the honor in just starting to wail on someone? Don't the Marquis of Queensbury rules dictate an "invitation" to fight?

 

Kaleta was assaulted, nothing more, nothing less. He had no obligation to "man up." Would you require Derek Roy to drop the gloves the next time he's high-sticked?

Derek Roy's game is not predicated on physical play. So I wouldn't expect him to get involved physically. I would actually expect a Kaltea type to do it for him. Since Kaleta isn't willing to fight his own battles I doubt he would fight others.

 

And nice attempt to avoid the question. You posted that I should just be happy Kaleta is helping the team win and ignore how his does it. How about answering my question. What actions should we ignore as long as the team wins? Where is your line? I offered a broad spectrum of player activity for you to determine where your line is.

 

Kaleta had to have known Mara was looking for him when he took a run at him. Mara responding and Kaleta balled up. I will guess that Kaleta knew how Mara would react.

[nfreeman]

So it's OK for a player to do anything he wants as long as the Sabres win? Maybe they should let Peters go back on Andro or whatever he was taking. It made him a better player. For that matter let Tallinder female fans in between periods.

 

Maybe this is a generational argument. I grew up watching professional sports believing that a professional conducts himself in a certain way. He should at all times carry a certain respect for the game they play. I can imagine that such ideals are fading away considering the state of the professional athlete today. A state in which contracts, ESPN air time and drawing attention away from the team onto themselves are prominent.

 

If you want to hide behind "the ends justify the means" go ahead. IMO, the actions that have been occurred embarrass me as a 30+ year Sabre fan. There is no place in the game for it and I will never condone it no matter the end result. I know I live in a fantasy world where the Sabres to have young tough hockey players that stay on their skates and fight. Just like in my world where the Bills can win without a rookie wide receiver who hits women and a running back that doesn't leave women laying in the street after hitting them with their SUV. Call me a dreamer.

 

Well, I'll back up DeLuca to a degree on this. I think it's important for players to respect the game they play, and I want the guys on my teams to be "high character" guys, the same way Marv did. I don't want to cheer for thugs -- and I don't want my kids to cheer for thugs -- just because they're wearing my team's jersey.

 

Having agreed with that principle, I will also say that I don't think what Kaleta does sinks to the level of disrespecting the game. I don't think he plays like Ken Linseman played. Kaleta doesn't slash or high-stick and then hide behind bigger teammates. He lays out big bodychecks that are usually well within the rules (although he did leave his feet on the attempted check on Mara in the Rangers game this year, which is outside the rules). And although he turtles frequently and tries to draw penalties, he does fight periodically. I think (and this may sound crazy) that as long as he fights between 1/3 and 1/2 of the time, he's not disrespecting the game. I would agree that if he always turtled and never fought, it would be disrespecting the game.

 

As for the guys on the Bills, I don't like what they did either, but I'm not willing to write them off as thugs yet. In both cases I think a combination of tough circumstances and youthful stupidity is enough for me to give the players involved a 2nd chance. Certainly though if this behavior turned into a consistent pattern I would not want them on my team.

 

Just my opinion.

[Eleven]

I'm just glad to see that Kaleta read the first few posts in this thread on Saturday afternoon as he was preparing for Atlanta.

[That Aud Smell]

although he did leave his feet on the attempted check on Mara in the Rangers game this year, which is outside the rules

sorry if this was addressed elsewhere in this thread, but i posed the question last week and still don't have a solid answer: is leaving your skates to hit someone a penalty per se? if so, can you cite me to the rule?

 

when i read the rule on charging last week, the penalty was defined in terms of an undue level of "violence" and the "distance traveled" to deliver the hit, but there was nothing to the effect that leaving your skates is tantamount to charging. (and as others have noted, 2 former captains of this team (peca and lala) regularly left their skates when hitting people, and, iirc, only peca was sometimes penalized for doing so.)

 

as best i can tell, the charging call is discretionary with the ref. so is it the case that when a player's leaving his skates after lining someone up, he's far more likely to be perceived as charging someone, and, by extension, people have some to see leaving your skates as illegal?

[deluca67]

Well, I'll back up DeLuca to a degree on this. I think it's important for players to respect the game they play, and I want the guys on my teams to be "high character" guys, the same way Marv did. I don't want to cheer for thugs -- and I don't want my kids to cheer for thugs -- just because they're wearing my team's jersey.

 

Having agreed with that principle, I will also say that I don't think what Kaleta does sinks to the level of disrespecting the game. I don't think he plays like Ken Linseman played. Kaleta doesn't slash or high-stick and then hide behind bigger teammates. He lays out big bodychecks that are usually well within the rules (although he did leave his feet on the attempted check on Mara in the Rangers game this year, which is outside the rules). And although he turtles frequently and tries to draw penalties, he does fight periodically. I think (and this may sound crazy) that as long as he fights between 1/3 and 1/2 of the time, he's not disrespecting the game. I would agree that if he always turtled and never fought, it would be disrespecting the game.

As for the guys on the Bills, I don't like what they did either, but I'm not willing to write them off as thugs yet. In both cases I think a combination of tough circumstances and youthful stupidity is enough for me to give the players involved a 2nd chance. Certainly though if this behavior turned into a consistent pattern I would not want them on my team.

 

Just my opinion.

I hear what you are saying. The player I hear associated with Kaleta a lot is Barnaby. I seem to remember Barnaby taking on guys much bigger than he was. Barnaby did a job which included eating some right hands. Kaleta doesn't seem willing to pay that price. Kaleta has to prove that he can his style, take a beating when he has to and continue to play that style. Everyone knows I dislike Peters. At least he takes his beatings on a nightly basis.

 

I will disagree with the actions not being disrespectful. I feel actions like turtling and diving are disrespectful and I wish they were called more often and called by themselves instead of each player getting the penalty. I hated when B-Rod and Roy would flop all over the ice and I hate what Kaleta has done just as much.

[Stoner]

And nice attempt to avoid the question. You posted that I should just be happy Kaleta is helping the team win and ignore how his does it. How about answering my question. What actions should we ignore as long as the team wins? Where is your line? I offered a broad spectrum of player activity for you to determine where your line is.

 

I ignored it because it was ridiculous. If you tell me how a in between periods, or running over a woman on the street, helps the Sabres win, I'll address it. You're all over the place here.

 

By the way, have there been any studies that show professional athletes run amuck of the law more than the fans or the media? Criticism of professional athletes like DeLuca is offering is hypocrisy in its purest form. Judging by any visit to One Bills Drive on game day will prove there are many more degenerates in the general population than on the field.

[inkman]

If you tell me how a in between periods...helps the Sabres win...

Improved team chemistry? :thumbsup:

[nfreeman]

Improved team chemistry? :thumbsup:

outstanding.

[Taro T]

sorry if this was addressed elsewhere in this thread, but i posed the question last week and still don't have a solid answer: is leaving your skates to hit someone a penalty per se? if so, can you cite me to the rule?

 

when i read the rule on charging last week, the penalty was defined in terms of an undue level of "violence" and the "distance traveled" to deliver the hit, but there was nothing to the effect that leaving your skates is tantamount to charging. (and as others have noted, 2 former captains of this team (peca and lala) regularly left their skates when hitting people, and, iirc, only peca was sometimes penalized for doing so.)

 

as best i can tell, the charging call is discretionary with the ref. so is it the case that when a player's leaving his skates after lining someone up, he's far more likely to be perceived as charging someone, and, by extension, people have some to see leaving your skates as illegal?

43.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.

 

Charging shall mean the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A ?charge? may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

 

A minor, major or a major and a game misconduct shall be imposed on a player who charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease.

 

A goalkeeper is not ?fair game? just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

[deluca67]

I ignored it because it was ridiculous. If you tell me how a in between periods, or running over a woman on the street, helps the Sabres win, I'll address it. You're all over the place here.

 

By the way, have there been any studies that show professional athletes run amuck of the law more than the fans or the media? Criticism of professional athletes like DeLuca is offering is hypocrisy in its purest form. Judging by any visit to One Bills Drive on game day will prove there are many more degenerates in the general population than on the field.

Actually I'm right on point.

 

Let me simplify it for you with another question that hopefully you can/will answer. Do you enjoy watching Andrew Peters fight? I can say I don't. Much like turtling, Peters fighting style is to say the least embarrassing. I will guess that since you have no problem with falling to the ground to avoid getting hit you would have no problem with how Peters fights.

 

Professional athletes are held to to a higher standard and rightfully so. It is the price of fame and celebrity. It's why they make the big bucks as they say. It's all part of being a professional athlete. Professional athletes crave the fame and attention. The attention doesn't stop at the final whistle.

[Stoner]

43.1 Charging - A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.

 

Charging shall mean the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.

 

A minor, major or a major and a game misconduct shall be imposed on a player who charges a goalkeeper while the goalkeeper is within his goal crease.

 

A goalkeeper is not "fair game" just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

 

Yeah but Aud is apparently a lawyer and loves to parse words. It's terribly written. The comma is misplaced. Is it a penalty to skate into any opponent?

 

And how vague is "distance traveled"? How far is that?

[Taro T]

Yeah but Aud is apparently a lawyer and loves to parse words. It's terribly written. The comma is misplaced. Is it a penalty to skate into any opponent?

 

And how vague is "distance traveled"? How far is that?

If he's the goalie, yes. (Provided that in the eyes of the impartial third party, hereafter referred to as the referee, the charger didn't attempt to avoid contact w/ the chargee while said chargee was outside chargee's designated on-ice in-game area of increased protective scope, hereafter referred to as the crease, and playing the black disk henceforth mentioned and previously forementioned as a puck.)

 

Agree that it's poorly written. It's actually reorganized from an earlier version of the rule, which was also poorly written, but it had the focus of the rule being on the violent nature of the check. The part about jumping was a clarification, not the main focus of the originally written rule and IMHO the older version of the rule was clearer.

 

I actually don't take issue w/ the "distance travelled" caveot as how far a player needs to "get a head start to lay someone else out" will be a function of speed, direction, and how he hits him. A guy who's been shadowing his check the entire length of the ice who puts a shoulder into him at the top of the face off dot will not draw a charge but a guy who did a "power start" 6 feet away and then leapt into his check possibly/probably will draw a charge.

[carpandean]

And nice attempt to avoid the question. You posted that I should just be happy Kaleta is helping the team win and ignore how his does it. How about answering my question. What actions should we ignore as long as the team wins? Where is your line? I offered a broad spectrum of player activity for you to determine where your line is.

Well, I would start by saying that they should be legal in both the NHL and the country in which they occur. Now, I'm not saying that I like every possible thing that is within the rules -- Avery has a knack for finding those few that I don't (though, the league is quick to change them when he does) -- but the list is pretty short. If Kaleta were out there regularly making potentially career, or at least season-ending, injuries with hits that are illegal (elbows to the head, etc.), then he would definitely deserve a beating. He's not, so anyone who doesn't like his legal hits needs to either (1) get the rules changed, or (2) accept that if the start pounding on him and he doesn't fight back, then they'll will be penalized. Kaleta, in making big hits, accepts the fact that he will either (1) have to drop his gloves when he pisses someone off, or (2) take a beating to draw a penalty. He fights from time-to-time and takes the beating the rest of the time. Call it taking one for the team.

 

I will disagree with the actions not being disrespectful. I feel actions like turtling and diving are disrespectful and I wish they were called more often and called by themselves instead of each player getting the penalty. I hated when B-Rod and Roy would flop all over the ice and I hate what Kaleta has done just as much.

Ummm ... turtling isn't a penalty, so how can they call it more often?

[Stoner]

Well, I would start by saying that they should be legal in both the NHL and the country in which they occur. Now, I'm not saying that I like every possible thing that is within the rules -- Avery has a knack for finding those few that I don't (though, the league is quick to change them when he does) -- but the list is pretty short. If Kaleta were out there regularly making potentially career, or at least season-ending, injuries with hits that are illegal (elbows to the head, etc.), then he would definitely deserve a beating. He's not, so anyone who doesn't like his legal hits needs to either (1) get the rules changed, or (2) accept that if the start pounding on him and he doesn't fight back, then they'll will be penalized. Kaleta, in making big hits, accepts the fact that he will either (1) have to drop his gloves when he pisses someone off, or (2) take a beating to draw a penalty. He fights from time-to-time and takes the beating the rest of the time. Call it taking one for the team.

 

 

Ummm ... turtling isn't a penalty, so how can they call it more often?

 

I gotta admit, two minutes for "turtling" would be a pretty cool penalty. I also think "shrinking" should be a penalty.