Myth of in-experience: Case Study: Joe Kocur

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Would like to try and dispel this myth that age and in-experience plays a role in explaining a bad performance. More often than not it is a charade used to mask a loss, oft times an embarrassing loss by some of the more rabid and less objective. Lets use Joe Kocur’s lead up to his shot in the NHL as a case study. – What was Joey doing before he got to the big dance? Dishwasher? Painter? Architecht? Nuclear scientist? Why no, of course not. Here is a hint:

WHL, AHL, IHL opponents to name a few:
Lyndon Beyers, Ken Baumgartner, Stu Grimson, Mark Tinordi, Val James, Craig Coxe, Kevin McGuire, Marty McSorely, Archie Henderson, Serge Roberge

[RetardedChimp]

Riveting.

[acdcrocksno1]

Enlightening.

[nilan30]

Peter Ing

[mikebflorida]

Staggering

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by mikebflorida

Staggering

i see u r back to mimicking other peoples styles, opinions - think about it a little more, maybe Friday u'll have something original

[acdcrocksno1]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

i see u r back to mimicking other peoples styles, opinions - think about it a little more, maybe Friday u'll have something original

The other two of us get a free pass though? Your opinions on posters is just as muddled as your opinions of fighters

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by acdcrocksno1

The other two of us get a free pass though? Your opinions on posters is just as muddled as your opinions of fighters

LOL - your ad-hominem attack of me instead of the proposition is as all intelligent and informed people know is cowardly and evasive - pathetic

[acdcrocksno1]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

LOL - your ad-hominem attack of me instead of the proposition is as all intelligent and informed people know is cowardly and evasive - pathetic

Your proposition is a waste of time and deserves no valid response. I've given a million and one intelligent and infrormed post on your subjects but yet you still beat the same dead horse over and over and over and over and over and over

[brawl lover]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

i see u r back to mimicking other peoples styles, opinions - think about it a little more, maybe Friday u'll have something original

Now this is staggering

[pesadillamal]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

Would like to try and dispel this myth that age and in-experience plays a role in explaining a bad performance. More often than not it is a charade used to mask a loss, oft times an embarrassing loss by some of the more rabid and less objective. Lets use Joe Kocur’s lead up to his shot in the NHL as a case study. – What was Joey doing before he got to the big dance? Dishwasher? Painter? Architecht? Nuclear scientist? Why no, of course not. Here is a hint:

WHL, AHL, IHL opponents to name a few:
Lyndon Beyers, Ken Baumgartner, Stu Grimson, Mark Tinordi, Val James, Craig Coxe, Kevin McGuire, Marty McSorely, Archie Henderson, Serge Roberge

I'll entertain your thought BBBB. Kocur fought these guys before he was in the NHL but obviously they were not in the NHL yet either. It is not like Kocur was fighting proven veterans. They were all in the same boat and trying to perfect their trade. Are you saying that none of these guys changed their styles or their approach as the years went on? I would hope they did.

You have to look at someones career because every fighter is different. Some people came into the league ready for anything, Wilson and Probert come to mind, while others needed to learn in the NHL, Grimson and McSorley come to mind. Marty was 4-8-4 in his rookie year. Anybody with an ounce of knowledge knows He is a much better fighter than that record. So how is it possible that age and inexperience did not play a role in his rookie season?

Holding someone accountable every time they fight is your prerogative. Saying age and inexperience does not play a role for most of these guys is way off base. And to judge every single fight with blinders on like there are no variables just gives a break to those who only fought when they wanted to while diminishing the accomplishments of those that fought at times they obviously did not want to, or for much longer than others. Like Probert, the best ever!

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by pesadillamal

I'll entertain your thought BBBB. Kocur fought these guys before he was in the NHL but obviously they were not in the NHL yet either. It is not like Kocur was fighting proven veterans. They were all in the same boat and trying to perfect their trade. Are you saying that none of these guys changed their styles or their approach as the years went on? I would hope they did.

You have to look at someones career because every fighter is different. Some people came into the league ready for anything, Wilson and Probert come to mind, while others needed to learn in the NHL, Grimson and McSorley come to mind. Marty was 4-8-4 in his rookie year. Anybody with an ounce of knowledge knows He is a much better fighter than that record. So how is it possible that age and inexperience did not play a role in his rookie season?

Holding someone accountable every time they fight is your prerogative. Saying age and inexperience does not play a role for most of these guys is way off base. And to judge every single fight with blinders on like there are no variables just gives a break to those who only fought when they wanted to while diminishing the accomplishments of those that fought at times they obviously did not want to, or for much longer than others. Like Probert, the best ever!

As I said if McKenzie, Simon, Brown, Kocur, Probert, come from the world of ballet right into the NHL, yeah they have an excuse....learning the proclivities and styles, habits of your opponents is homework.

[srehm1]

Then how do we explain the early woes of Grimson, Brashear, Ray, Cairns, McSorley-all of them became great fighters. A few of them can even claim to have been champ at some point in their respective careers. All of the above fought all the way through juniors/minors and sometimes against the same fighters they would later face in the NHL. Many struggled with physical issues-McSorley was very lean in those first few years in pittsburgh and perhaps not up to snuff against stronger seasoned veteran NHL heavies. Grimson was noted for his iffy balance when he first broke in-yet after working on it and getting better and better-he became a top-10 fighter for a number of years. Cairns left his chin hanging right out there in those early years providing an easy target for opponents. Brash was a hugger with scared eyes-he later went on to become a dominant force in the league and a lock as a top-5 all-timer. If you told me this when he first broke in with montreal-I would have laughed in your face. i never would have imagined he could accomplish that considering the way he looked early in his career. Ray stated in his book that his infamous fight with Dave brown-with that big stunning right hand-gave him the confidence he needed to become a better fighter.

these are all examples of fighters who had slow starts to their careers-yet they went on to become great fighters. Not everyone is in their prime when they first break into the league. Some are great right off the bat like McCarthy, Wilson, Simon, Laraque, Mckenzie etc. Some need more experience-more fights, more trainining, more confidence in themselves. Sure they almost all were fighting in juniors or the AHL/minors-but they weren't fighting NHL HW's.

I look at every fighter as being different. Everyone of them hits their peak at different times and begin to fade out at different times. It's all out there for us to see. No way was McCarthy the same fighter in Boston that he was in Calgary. Brashear was a totally different animal entirely with VAN/PHI/WAS than he was in Montreal. You simply cannot say that they are all the same from start to finish. that's painting with too broad a brush. Sure they were all fighting from day 1 in juniors but in juniors you are taking on 16, 17, 18 year olds-kids still growing into their bodies-not prime time NHL veterans.

I'd also say that probert wasn't the champ from day one either. he had some growing pains as well (berube, ewen, fraser)-yet learned and gained in experience/confidence with every fight until he hit his prime in 87-88.

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Then how do we explain the early woes of Grimson, Brashear, Ray, Cairns, McSorley-all of them became great fighters. A few of them can even claim to have been champ at some point in their respective careers. All of the above fought all the way through juniors/minors and sometimes against the same fighters they would later face in the NHL. Many struggled with physical issues-McSorley was very lean in those first few years in pittsburgh and perhaps not up to snuff against stronger seasoned veteran NHL heavies. Grimson was noted for his iffy balance when he first broke in-yet after working on it and getting better and better-he became a top-10 fighter for a number of years. Cairns left his chin hanging right out there in those early years providing an easy target for opponents. Brash was a hugger with scared eyes-he later went on to become a dominant force in the league and a lock as a top-5 all-timer. If you told me this when he first broke in with montreal-I would have laughed in your face. i never would have imagined he could accomplish that considering the way he looked early in his career. Ray stated in his book that his infamous fight with Dave brown-with that big stunning right hand-gave him the confidence he needed to become a better fighter.

these are all examples of fighters who had slow starts to their careers-yet they went on to become great fighters. Not everyone is in their prime when they first break into the league. Some are great right off the bat like McCarthy, Wilson, Simon, Laraque, Mckenzie etc. Some need more experience-more fights, more trainining, more confidence in themselves. Sure they almost all were fighting in juniors or the AHL/minors-but they weren't fighting NHL HW's.

I look at every fighter as being different. Everyone of them hits their peak at different times and begin to fade out at different times. It's all out there for us to see. No way was McCarthy the same fighter in Boston that he was in Calgary. Brashear was a totally different animal entirely with VAN/PHI/WAS than he was in Montreal. You simply cannot say that they are all the same from start to finish. that's painting with too broad a brush. Sure they were all fighting from day 1 in juniors but in juniors you are taking on 16, 17, 18 year olds-kids still growing into their bodies-not prime time NHL veterans.

I'd also say that probert wasn't the champ from day one either. he had some growing pains as well (berube, ewen, fraser)-yet learned and gained in experience/confidence with every fight until he hit his prime in 87-88.

I see it differently, no disrespect to your thoughtful and well reasoned post. In my view it is more to do with CONFIDENCE - obviously all these dudes had the inate ability..I mean what did Gillies have to fear from Wilson? same size Gillies could bang, what then? Why does not a Bob Nystrom intercede and challenge Brown? I'm sure they did not need a few more bouts under their belts to learn the ins and outs of the fight game. Rather, once the light goes on in their heads that Hey! Eureka! they are just human beings like me!