View Single Post
01-16-2012, 06:10 PM
Smug Teuvo
HockeySensible's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,801
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
So what you are saying is we should of paid Brouwer 2.35mil so he could play on our 3rd and 4th lines?

he wouldn't play with Toews and Kane (Stalberg)
He wouldn't play with Hossa and Kruger (Sharp)

The only place he could play is 3rd line, or 4th line.

Our 3rd line plays against the other teams top players every night, and Brouwer is horrible defensively. You want Brouwer playing every shift against other teams top offensive players? No

Do you want to pay a 4th liner 2.35mil a year? No.

I'm glad he is doing ... well....about as well as he did in Chicago.
There was no place for him here, and it was time to move on.
First of all.. Which line is our third line right now? Surely it can't be Brunette-Bolland-Hayes line.. I mean, Brunette is the slowest player in the league, sucks defensively and has an ugly -10 to show for it.. but wait! Lets just bump Brunette down and put Bickell on the left side, right? Well, no, not so fast.. because now you have a lazy, floating player on your third line, who looks like he doesn't give a **** 95% of the time... that doesn't sound very good, does it? Hmm.. well, I must say, given the choice between Brouwer and Brunette/Bickell on our third line, I'd glady take Brouwer over each.

Brouwer's "horrible" defense on this board has been drastically overstated. I'm not saying he's in line for the Selke, but he's nowhere near as bad as he's been made out to be.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote