Pests, Punks and Being Phadouche

I really have to hand it to Adrian Dater this season. His blog All Things Avs (though it's more of an online journal, which is different than a blog) has been quite the Blender Of Feces. His latest spoon in the toilet is this post, in which he calls Dion Phaneuf "a punk" for his dirty tricks on the ice and his tendency to go running for cover when somebody tries to call him on it.
Dater didn't just stop there, though, he dragged Detroit into it by comparing Phadouche to Pistons pest-of-the-past Bill Laimbeer, one of the most infamous dirty players in NBA history. In the days before defense was banned completely from professional basketball, Laimbeer's elbows made Chris Pronger's look pillowy in comparison. Cheap shots after the whistle, clutching and grabbing for no reason, quick jabs into the back and head, you name it, Laimbeer did it. And he ran his big mouth the whole time.
He was so annoying even Larry Bird tried to kick his ass once.
Well, of course the Detroit faithful didn't like that comparison, because anyone who's ever played for a Detroit team is somehow Mother Theresa to them. They are outraged that Dater, who has often defended Claude Lemieux (the Avalanche uberpest of long ago), would both criticize Phaneuf and bring one of Emptytown's patron saints of sports into it. Boo hoo hoo.
It's impossible to deny that Dion Phaneuf is a dirty, cheap player who hides behind his face shield, his teammates and the refs. Claude Lemieux did the same thing. That's why they are/were valuable to their teams, and that's what they are/were paid to do. Of course, Lemieux was also ridiculously clutch during the playoffs, and Phaneuf hasn't won jack in the post-season. That's really the only difference. Oh, and Lemieux played better against the Wings.
For as much as I (and everyone else here) criticize Phadouche (see what I did there with his name?), I freely admit that he's accomplished exactly what he means to do: get under our skin. His sole purpose is to throw the opposition off their game by annoying the crap out of them. Whether it's a petty wisecrack at Peter Forsberg or a cheap elbow to the back of Paul Stastny or a late, from-behind hit on Tyler Arnason, Phadouche exists solely to shake his opponents up and make them lose their focus.
That's what Claude Lemieux did, too. And Bill Laimbeer.
Sure, the stupid instigator penalty doesn't make it easy for the victims of Phadouche to get back at him, and it encourages cowardly acts by pests like him and Steve Ott, but those players still have a place in the game and always will.
I tend to believe that sports should always be a partisan affair. I don't trust people who claim to like a particular sport but like (or dislike) all teams equally (I'm looking at you, Buccigross). That's bullshit. Take a side, and root for your team with all your heart---and against whoever they play in every single game. Pests are there to focus our partisanship, either for or against a team. Dion Phaneuf helps me hate the Flames, which is what I'm supposed to do, as an Avalanche fan. Darren McCarty helped me hate the Wings. Steve Ott helps me to hate the Stars, and so on.
Honestly, I have to give props to Phadouche, because what he does on the ice really makes it easy for me to hate him and his stupid team. And that's exactly how it should be.
ADDENDUM: Oh, and by the way, Elisha is now officially dead to me. I'll stick with Marissa, or Jamie, or Scarlett, thanks.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Crazy Adrian
Greg Wyshynski approves of Crazy Adrian:
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/...
by Dan Winkler on Mar 25, 2008 1:52 PM MDT reply actions
Me too
I wish I would have seen his rant against ESPN.
by Bob in Boulder on Mar 25, 2008 2:24 PM MDT up reply actions
Re: Me too
You are in luck, sir. I took a screenshot before it was taken down. You can read it in all its glorious entirety:
Re: Me too
by Bob in Boulder on Mar 25, 2008 3:00 PM MDT up reply actions
Dater is Backing Down
In his following blog post dater says, "'Punk' is probably a bad word to describe him. It’s a blog, and I throw some words around easier than usual probably. But, while I’m not backing down from my overall assessment of him as a player, I think I’m going to officially take that word back now. And no, nobody has told me to do this. I could take down the whole blog, but am not doing that. I’ll just say that it’s not a very articulate word, and I’m going to do think up a better word than that and insert it."
Douche?
nope, he probably won't use that either. But it would be funny.
by Bob in Boulder on Mar 25, 2008 3:55 PM MDT up reply actions
Re: Douche?
Yeah, definitely. I have seen "Phadouche" appear in the comments of other blogs lately, including Deadspin.
Re: Dater
See Dater needs to be more careful, he is a journalist, and he has to cover Phaneuf with some sense of objectivity at some point.
I'm of the mind that journalists can have opinions and cover things objectionable, but if he uses words like that others could question his credibility. It's what separates a beat reporter employed by a newspaper and a blogger.
by Jibblescribbits on Mar 25, 2008 5:25 PM MDT up reply actions
Disagree with Joe
But I think this stuff actually hurts his team. The agitator/pest role works well for role players. If Jordan Tootoo or the Ruutu bros or someone of that ilk get under someone's skin by being a pest and fighting players and throwing people off their game it's an effective way of disrupting the other team.
But part of that is that if that player gets thrown out of a game, or gets 5Min for fighting their contributions aren't really missed on the ice. As a hockey player they are downright replaceable.
Phaneuf has 2 things working against him in that regard. Even though he's overrated, he's still a pretty good hockey player. Him being in the box for 5 minutes or whatever really hurts Calgary's chances of winning a game, unlike a guy like Tootoo for Nashville.
The other way it hurts is that Tootoo and Ott don't let the retaliation against them affect their game. They realize their style of play is going to draw the attention of the other teams pests and enforcers from time to time, in fact that's what they want. Phaneuf doesn't seem to realize this. When that retaliation comes it takes him off of his game, and that makes him a liability on the ice when that happens. If he's out there hunting guys like Arnason, Svatos, or Wolski he's less effective as a player.
by Jibblescribbits on Mar 26, 2008 10:35 AM MDT reply actions
Foppa's biggest flaw
has always been that he lets physical play impact his game. He engages, complains, gets pissed off, and generally allows it to distract him from what he needs to do. And other teams know it, so they keep doing it.
Haynes cracked me up when he said something about "waking the sleeping giant" the other night against Calgary. While that was sometimes true earlier in his career, I'm afraid it ain't anymore. I think Foppa then proceeded to fall down behind the net just trying to turn 180 on his skates, all by himself. It has saddened me to see how badly his game has degraded over time, especially his strength on his skates.
by Bob in Boulder on Mar 26, 2008 10:58 AM MDT up reply actions
Re: Disagree with Joe
You definitely make an important point about how the cheap play of a skilled player can hurt his team. Calgary's problems in that department are two-fold: Jerome Iginla also qualifies. He's undoubtedly skilled as hell, but he wears his emotions on his sleeve and he's not above an elbow to the head or the butt-end of a stick to the stomach.
It's true that Phadouche's skill makes his willingness to play cheap a liability. Chris Pronger also comes immediately to mind.
Peter Forsberg---in his prime---qualified, I think.
I suppose I was mostly looking at it from the perspective of a fan, rather than that of a coach. I appreciate Phaneuf as a motivator of hatred, something all pests specialize in.
Re: Foppa and Iggy
See Foppa and Iggy I like. Yes they both let their emotions get the better of them at times and other teams pests use that to their advantage, as Lappy did to Iginla the other night. Both of them do this as a response to others actions.
Phaneuf, on the other hand, nearly goads himself into it. He's a typical bully by starting it, and then getting upset when someone comes back at him. Look how flustered he was when Lappy came back at him, if you're going to play the pest you have to know that it's coming your way in return. Phaneuf doesn't get it
by Jibblescribbits on Mar 26, 2008 12:02 PM MDT up reply actions
Re: Foppa and Iggy
You're right, no doubt about it. How long has he played in the NHL now, three years? You'd think he would have figured it out by now.
See, part of me thinks he knows exactly what he's doing and expects the reaction he gets and then just plays up the whole surprised act for the refs. The other part thinks he's just not very bright.
The whole stolen SUV incident suggests the second option may be closer to the truth.
Plus
given Elisha's propensity for dating complete knuckleheads, he likely falls into the 'not very bright' category.
I don't know
what your talking about. Leaving your keys in your expensive car while you go get coffee sounds like a completely smart thing to do.
I mean he was in Calgary in Winter, and he wouldn't want his car to get cold. That's incredibly thoughtful right?
by Jibblescribbits on Mar 26, 2008 2:15 PM MDT up reply actions





















