View Single Post
Old
08-04-2006, 05:31 PM
  #41
sXe
Yuuuuuup!
 
sXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
I am partial to the idea of trying to assemble a Sabres-like team that can come at you from all directions. So I don't think that we lack a roster spot for Dumont. Is he better than Downey? Yes he is. Ergo, we have room for him. Not really as the 13th forward, but then with Samsonov and Koivu on our roster, I think there's a pretty decent chance we might have some games to fill in on the upper lines at times.

I see where you're coming from and if what you say could work "in principle" it may not when applied to real ife.

It's not just about being "better" but often times it's about fufilling your role better.
Kovalchuk is better than Plekanec but I'd rather have the latter playing against the other team top lines and on the PK. And no it doesn't mean Plek is the better player he just "fits" more for where he is.

Dumont anywhere outside the top 6 is a recipe for disaster. The most recent example of this was Bulis this year and his complaints.

In theory rolling four lines (Sabres rolled 3 mostly) seems the way to go but then again Communism in theory was supposed solve the poverty problem. Besides I want Kovalev to play more than Murray because I think we can win more games that way.
So , that being said, I'd rather have Downey on the bench with his great character in the lockeroom over Dumont on the ice playing on a 4th line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doug mckenzie View Post
funny dumont a guy who crashes the net fights in the corners fiesty maybe not the best defensivly but we dont need a guy like that ?..
Your sentence is missing a couple of "ifs". If Dumont was that guy, yes, we could use him.

sXe is offline   Reply With Quote