What The Players Really Think

RALEIGH--It's going to be hard for Grapes to explain this one away.

With the inimitable one, Donald S. Cherry, having spent years from his Hockey Night in Canada pulpit assuring his viewers that NHL players hate the instigator rule, a poll conducted by HNIC itself in conjunction with the NHL Players Association suggests he's dead wrong.

The survey of 318 NHL playes showed an overwhelming 66 per cent would be opposed to the elimination of the instigator, with only 33 per cent in favour. 

The poll had other intriguing results, including another negative result for the Maple Leafs, with head coach Ron Wilson voted by 24 per cent of the players to be the coach they'd least like to play for, more than any other NHL coach. That came after Phil Kessel was the last player taken in Friday's all-star draft.

Sidney Crosby was voted the toughest forward to play against by 29 per cent of respondents, with Alex Ovechkin a distant second at 11 per cent. Washington is regarded by players as the most overrated team, Loui Eriksson of Dallas is the most underrated player, while the Islanders (27 per cent) and Oilers (20 per cent) are the teams most would least want to play for.

The entire poll can be viewed on the NHLPA's web site. 

Comments

[Dennis Regan]

Yah! Cherry knows eh! A!!! Maybe some of us should look elsewhere for our answers. Cherry is only aware of what comes out of his mouth. But that is a hell of a lot EH!

[MZ]

Also, no mention here of our Colton Orr being voted the second-toughest player in the league? That's pretty good, isn't it? Especialy because it says explicitly there that "toughest" is NOT all about fighting.

But speaking of fighting, 98% of players said that banning fighting would be a bad idea.

I guess only news that's bad for the Leafs, or that doesn't advance Damien Cox's pet agenda makes it into his pages.

[jeff]

you mean to say what 318 player say about hockey NOt all the players how many players in the league Damien?? 33% could easily rise with the rest of the players speaking their minds too

[80s Leafs]

If a player wants to give another player a beating badly enough, the instigator penalty is not going to deter him.
Evidence: Clark going after McSorely in '93 after "the hit" on Gilmour, and more recently, the Gleason incident with Kulemin.

And, do we know how many current Leafs were part of that 24 per cent on Wilson??

[beerguy1001]

There are only 318 of almost 700 players voting and of the 318 against this rule, how many are the guys slashing and hacking that don't want an enforcer beating them off the ice?? Sometimes these polls can be interpreted however you want them to be interpreted. So, less than 50% of the players voted and 66% don't want the instigator rule...not very strong evidence to me. Especially since each team only has 1-2 enforcers and there are a lot more that hack and slash that wantr to get away with it. Sorry, I agree with Cherry....many of these guys are cowards and would rather talk with their stick than with their hands.

[Max]

Damien, what I'm more interested in is this: 5% (or 16 of the 318 respondents) said Toronto would be the least desirable place to play. FIVE lousy percent, but all I hear on the radio, TV and read in the paper is that nobody wants to play in Toronto. Since when did 5 percent become the majority?

[Joel]

It's clear that some commenters here do not understand basic research and survey methods. 45% (318 of 700) of any group is actually an enormous sample size. Think of the polls they do for federal voting intentions-- usually these involve 1000 citizens or less out of 15 million voters in Canada. That's a 0.006% sample, and yet those results are accurate within 2-5%. The likelihood that 33% of players in favour of eliminating the instigator could turn into 50+% , as jeff suggests, is statistically very very slim.

The reality is, scientific data gathering means nothing to Cherry, as long as it contradicts his own superior ignorant opinion.

[WeeDram]

No, not Ruff!!!

[barberofcivil]

Joel, while you have somewhat of a point regarding sample sizing for the poll, consideration would also have to be given of how that sample was arrived at. Was it truly a random sample group, or was it the number that decided to participate, while others felt it inappropriate to rate their peers and employers and declined to participate? If it was the latter, there is a good possibility that the results could be skewed, even quite drastically. If you go out and ask who wants to fill a survey about 'X' topic, the likelihood is that you are going to get mostly people who have a beef regarding 'X' topic.

Additionally, the whole presentation of the survey questions were kind of ambiguous to begin with. For example, asking which coach you'd most like to play for doesn't necessarily translate into who the best coach is. In school, I mostly wanted to be taught by that nice easy-going teacher who didn't make us do our homework and baked cookies, but she certainly wasn't better than the one who made us work hard and actually learn.