HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Tanguay will undergo shoulder surgery.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-23-2009, 12:40 PM
  #51
ChemiseBleuHonnete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
Kessel, Krejci, Savard, Ryder all played in every game and didn't complain once. Kessel had 4 goals, Ryder had 3 or 4 goals, Savard must have had 6 or 7 points in the series. What did that soft piece of **** Tanguay do? These players may be physically as soft as Tanguay but the evidence suggests that they are at least mentally a lot more committed to winning.

Kostopoulos? Who said anything about Kostopoulos? What about a Chris Kunits, a Ryan Getzlaf, a Brandon Dubinsky? Someone who has talent and guts.

No more soft, gutless players - physically or mentally soft.
Catch-22... Isn't that a Lost episode?

ChemiseBleuHonnete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 12:44 PM
  #52
freakerz
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by havok78 View Post
Demers explains himself on RDS:
"Certains de mes propos au sujet de Mathieu Schneider et Alex Tanguay ont été mal interprétés et ont été mal traduits, ce qui a laissé place à une certaine ambiguïté. Je vais profiter des prochaines lignes pour tenter de clarifier les choses.

Il est important de préciser que je n'ai jamais insinué que les deux joueurs avaient refusé de jouer. Ils sont blessés et ils ont décidé de ne pas courir le risque d'aggraver leurs blessures. Ils ont vu Francis Bouillon se blesser à nouveau lors du deuxième match et ils ne voulaient pas revenir s'ils n'étaient pas à 100% et je peux les comprendre. Ils seront joueurs autonomes sans compensations le premier juillet et blessés, ils pourraient avoir du mal à dénicher un contrat.

Je n'ai jamais prétendu que Schneider et Tanguay refusaient de jouer. Ils sont blessés et j'ai simplement expliqué dans quelle situation ils se trouvent actuellement. Je les comprends."
That's what I heard him say on CKAC... after watching Bouillon probably worsen his injury, they choose not to play (since they'll be UFA this summer).

freakerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:16 PM
  #53
Kikizaz
Registered User
 
Kikizaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,960
vCash: 500
Well, not here but with friends I refered to him as a big puss. It is too bad we never really got to see the real Tanguay, he still can be a good scorer (err playmaker) but I don't know if I want him back, he's just so soft.

Kikizaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:19 PM
  #54
Habsfan18
The Future
 
Habsfan18's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
He's very skilled, but he's probably soften than Plekanec.

And that's saying something.

Habsfan18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:21 PM
  #55
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by freakerz View Post
That's what I heard him say on CKAC... after watching Bouillon probably worsen his injury, they choose not to play (since they'll be UFA this summer).
So it's okay for Demers to be misquoted, but when a player is, he's full of crap.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:21 PM
  #56
CanadienErrant*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Cook Islands
Posts: 4,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsfan18 View Post
He's very skilled, but he's probably soften than Plekanec.

And that's saying something.
Put him on a line with Lecavalier and Kovalev, and watch the fireworks.

CanadienErrant* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:29 PM
  #57
Le depisteur
Registered User
 
Le depisteur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Québec
Posts: 3,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendextall View Post
Lets take a look at points per game for the season. Tanguay was one of our top players.

Alex Kovalev 0.833333333
Andrei Markov 0.820512821
Alex Tanguay 0.82
Robert Lang 0.78
Saku Koivu 0.769230769
Andrei Kostitsyn 0.554054054
Tomas Plekanec 0.4875
Mathieu Schneider 0.47761194
Guillaume Latendresse 0.464285714
Sergei Kostitsyn 0.410714286
Roman Hamrlik 0.407407407
Christopher Higgins 0.403508772
Matt D'Agostini 0.396226415
Maxim Lapierre 0.35443038
Yannick Weber 0.333333333
Max Pacioretty 0.323529412
Mathieu Dandenault 0.292682927
Patrice Brisebois 0.290322581
Josh Gorges 0.283950617
Tom Kostopoulos 0.282051282
Kyle Chipchura 0.230769231
Glen Metropolit 0.223684211
Michael Komisarek 0.166666667
Francis Bouillon 0.166666667


But lets just keep alienating the players that we can get to play for us, since it is so easy to attract UFA's.
With us, Schneider is: 0,73913043478260869565217391304348

Le depisteur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:29 PM
  #58
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,513
vCash: 500
Either Montreal goes Philly style and completely re-tools or you rebuild.

I rather start from scratch and get a top 5 pick than "competitive rebuild" like we have seen since Andre Savard took over.

Kirk Muller is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 01:36 PM
  #59
maci4life
Registered User
 
maci4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Country: Macedonia
Posts: 890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DriveFor25IsAlive View Post
Lemaire, having played 12 seasons with Montreal, saying he would never come back to this place shows how bad the media really is.

Laraque saying that this team will have trouble attracting free agents shows how bad the media really is.

And when Gainey basically has to tell the fans where to go, how can this team possibly succeed?

Fans telling the players they suck, analysts saying players are faking injuries etc. It's just so ridiculous.

If we had this exact same team in a market like Atlanta, i can almost guarantee we compete with Boston for the Eastern Conf. title, and at worst come 4th in the east.
Don't forget that an Atlanta based team would be allowed to have the best coach possible. Language spoken would not be a barrier.

maci4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 03:26 PM
  #60
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by franchise player View Post
Catch-22... Isn't that a Lost episode?
It's a satirical novel by Joseph Heller written around 1960. Actually many people consider it one of the best books of the 20th century and the phrase "catch-22" is now an idiom for expressing a no-win situation or a vicious circle. It describes the situation with the Habs pretty well, I think, especially when you have all these fans who have sentimental attachments to players for reasons other than hockey.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 03:57 PM
  #61
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,025
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
It describes the situation with the Habs pretty well, I think, especially when you have all these fans who have sentimental attachments to players for reasons other than hockey.
It's interesting to read you write that, because your objection to Tanguay really don't seem rooted in actual hockey reasons, seeing as he was bar none the most productive Hab this year.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 04:08 PM
  #62
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It's interesting to read you write that, because your objection to Tanguay really don't seem rooted in actual hockey reasons, seeing as he was bar none the most productive Hab this year.
That's because I'm not a math man. To me stats are only part of the equation. Hockey is a team sport and the goal is to win the stanley cup, not have a talented individual player who wins the regular season scoring race on his team. Besides points, I also care about how competitive players are and how much they sacrifice for the team, and especially how they compete in the playoffs when it counts. That's why I think Koivu is the best player on our team. It's because in the playoffs, he always is. Other teams seem to find talented players who sacrifice. It's time for us to do the same.

Tanguay is not a competitor. He proved it all year long AND it's been shown in years past. Lots of points, no sacrifice. I have no doubt that that's why Sutter and Keenan in Calgary were so eager to get rid of him. I mistakenly thought he'd be an upgrade over Ryder. I reiterate....mistakenly. My new position is that you can't change these players. Just forget about them. You've got to find players who already want to win the cup more than collect points.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2009, 04:50 PM
  #63
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,025
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
That's because I'm not a math man. To me stats are only part of the equation. Hockey is a team sport and the goal is to win the stanley cup, not have a talented individual player who wins the regular season scoring race on his team.
That's your prerogative, but you should be aware that in the end who wins a hockey game is purely a question of stats.

GF > GA = win. That's as simple as it gets -- and Tanguay generates GF and prevents GA to a greater degree than any other Hab.

It's ludicrous to want to get rid of arguably the team's best forward for a reason as nebulous and as subjective as "he doesn't compete". It's tavern GMing at its very worst. As if a player reaches his level of ability without being competitive to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
Tanguay is not a competitor. He proved it all year long AND it's been shown in years past. Lots of points, no sacrifice.
We're talking about a guy who came early with a bum shoulder to help his team make the playoffs and is the best Hab at even-strength when it's hardest to get points, right?

A guy with a 21-points-in-23-games playoff performance as a rookie and a Stanley Cup winning goal on his resume, right?

Just checking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I have no doubt that that's why Sutter and Keenan in Calgary were so eager to get rid of him. I mistakenly thought he'd be an upgrade over Ryder. I reiterate....mistakenly.
Tanguay is a much better player than Ryder, and you have to be looking at reasons other than hockey not to realize that. Sutter got rid of him because of the cap squeeze and because his coach was forced to use Tanguay as a checker so his second line wouldn't get torched, resulting in lowered stats for Tanguay.

I'm sorry, but you're confusing style with effectiveness here. Next you'll want to get rid of Markov because he doesn't compete enough; in many ways he's the same kind of player as Tanguay.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 07:34 AM
  #64
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
That's your prerogative, but you should be aware that in the end who wins a hockey game is purely a question of stats.

GF > GA = win. That's as simple as it gets -- and Tanguay generates GF and prevents GA to a greater degree than any other Hab.

It's ludicrous to want to get rid of arguably the team's best forward for a reason as nebulous and as subjective as "he doesn't compete". It's tavern GMing at its very worst. As if a player reaches his level of ability without being competitive to begin with.



We're talking about a guy who came early with a bum shoulder to help his team make the playoffs and is the best Hab at even-strength when it's hardest to get points, right?

A guy with a 21-points-in-23-games playoff performance as a rookie and a Stanley Cup winning goal on his resume, right?

Just checking.



Tanguay is a much better player than Ryder, and you have to be looking at reasons other than hockey not to realize that. Sutter got rid of him because of the cap squeeze and because his coach was forced to use Tanguay as a checker so his second line wouldn't get torched, resulting in lowered stats for Tanguay.

I'm sorry, but you're confusing style with effectiveness here. Next you'll want to get rid of Markov because he doesn't compete enough; in many ways he's the same kind of player as Tanguay.

Quite honestly, I don't have the time to write an essay on this. What I will tell you is that you are categorically wrong. And if you think you're right, ask any NHL player or GM if the only thing that matters is the number of points you have. Having played myself, I know this intuitively but many people I know have figured it out by watching point getters like Ribeiro, Yashin and co., who you wouldn;t want on your team if you were going into the playoffs.

GF > GA = win but as with so many math-based theories, they fail to capture the human elements of a problem. Your equation also makes the egregious error of assuming that one's opponent represents a constant force and that productivity for the player in question is consistent. All of this is significant. It changes the the equation altogether, and changes the nature of what is required to achieve a positive GF balance. It's worth noting that paper teams constructed on principles like this led to the Rangers of the late 1990s and early 2000s. Great on paper, yes. Couldn't get the job done. Add variable T (tough) to you opponent and the net contribution of soft players goes WAAAAAY down.

Sakic and Forsberg must have been nice linemates to have, btw. Maybe if we can get players like this, we can afford to have Tanguay as a complementary player. As it is, he's extremely overrated and we can't count on him to be a central player.

For now, I think the Habs have to focus financially on getting talented players who are more physical, won't get dominated in tough games, and who have that passion for winning. Tanguay doesn't fit the criteria so unless he's cheap, I want to get rid of him. Same goes for any other mature players.


Last edited by Catch-22: 04-24-2009 at 08:36 AM.
Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 07:57 AM
  #65
DougHarvey
Registered User
 
DougHarvey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadienErrant View Post
Put him on a line with Lecavalier and Kovalev, and watch the fireworks.
When did Kovalev and Tanguay sign with Tampa Bay

DougHarvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 08:35 AM
  #66
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,025
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
Quite honestly, I don't have the time to write an essay on this. What I will tell you is that you are categorically wrong.
No, I will tell you you are categorically wrong.

Glad we've had this exchange, I'm sure we've advanced the discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
And if you think you're right, ask any NHL player or GM if the only thing that matters is the number of points you have. I've played with several of them and also had the fortune of knowing several personally so I know this intuitively but many people I know have figured it out by watching point getters like Ribeiro, Yashin and co., who you wouldn;t want on your team if you were going into the playoffs.

GF > GA = win but as with so many math-based theories, they fail to capture the human elements of a problem.
Unfortunately, until they start handing out wins for "competitiveness", the winner of any game is still whichever team has the most goals at the end. That being said, there is much more to the personal accumulation of goals and assists to helping a team achieve their goals. Some players try to do it by deploying a physical game, and you can see their impact reflected in rate stats.

A player like Tanguay or Markov does so with positioning, offensive skill, and by making the players around them better. It's interesting to note that despite the goals-and-assists totals, both are also excellent defensive players, something which doesn't show up in the stat sheet next to their names (but it does show up in the big numbers at the top which decide which teams have won). Tanguay is such a valuable player precisely because he does more than just rack up points. He prevents goals as well, to the point that Calgary last year built a checking line around him so they'd at least have a second line that wouldn't get torched -- in the rough-and-tumble West, no less. It hurt his point totals, but it helped his team.

It's also worth nothing that Jarome Iginla -- which I'm sure fits your highly subjective "competitive" label -- had a career season the one time he had Tanguay on his line. Tanguay, as an elite playmaker, makes guys around him better, even when he's not in on the play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
Sakic and Forsberg must have been nice linemates to have, btw.
I'm sure they must have been, but since they weren't Tanguay's linemates during that Cup run, it's a bit of a moot point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
For now, I think the Habs have to focus financially on getting talented players who are more physical, won't get dominated in tough games, and who have that passion for winning. Tanguay doesn't fit the criteria so unless he's cheap, get rid of him.
And yet, Tanguay is arguably the most useful of all the Habs' forwards. He is the one most likely to be generating goals at even-strength when they're toughest to come by -- and unless it's changed since I started typing, goals still win hockey games.

Your "criteria" still has little to nothing to do with hockey effectiveness.

To ditch a player as useful and as impactful as Tanguay for no other reason than the fuzzy notion that he's "soft" -- for which we have no evidence other than the fact that you don't like his playing style -- would be a brutal decision for a GM. Tanguay was an effective player out West where we're told repeatedly the hockey is incredibly tougher, his supposed "softness" mustn't be getting in the way much. And Montreal isn't cap crunched like Calgary -- they don't need to get their second-best forward crowded out by the suck on the rest of the team.

Answer me this: should we ditch Markov, too? After all, he's not any more competitive than Tanguay and plays the same style of cerebral game. He's done even less in these playoffs than Tanguay and doesn't have as much playoff experience. I want to evaluate just how much you value this "competitiveness" aspect.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 09:35 AM
  #67
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
No, I will tell you you are categorically wrong.

Glad we've had this exchange, I'm sure we've advanced the discussion...



Unfortunately, until they start handing out wins for "competitiveness", the winner of any game is still whichever team has the most goals at the end. That being said, there is much more to the personal accumulation of goals and assists to helping a team achieve their goals. Some players try to do it by deploying a physical game, and you can see their impact reflected in rate stats.

A player like Tanguay or Markov does so with positioning, offensive skill, and by making the players around them better. It's interesting to note that despite the goals-and-assists totals, both are also excellent defensive players, something which doesn't show up in the stat sheet next to their names (but it does show up in the big numbers at the top which decide which teams have won). Tanguay is such a valuable player precisely because he does more than just rack up points. He prevents goals as well, to the point that Calgary last year built a checking line around him so they'd at least have a second line that wouldn't get torched -- in the rough-and-tumble West, no less. It hurt his point totals, but it helped his team.

It's also worth nothing that Jarome Iginla -- which I'm sure fits your highly subjective "competitive" label -- had a career season the one time he had Tanguay on his line. Tanguay, as an elite playmaker, makes guys around him better, even when he's not in on the play.



I'm sure they must have been, but since they weren't Tanguay's linemates during that Cup run, it's a bit of a moot point.



And yet, Tanguay is arguably the most useful of all the Habs' forwards. He is the one most likely to be generating goals at even-strength when they're toughest to come by -- and unless it's changed since I started typing, goals still win hockey games.

Your "criteria" still has little to nothing to do with hockey effectiveness.

To ditch a player as useful and as impactful as Tanguay for no other reason than the fuzzy notion that he's "soft" -- for which we have no evidence other than the fact that you don't like his playing style -- would be a brutal decision for a GM. Tanguay was an effective player out West where we're told repeatedly the hockey is incredibly tougher, his supposed "softness" mustn't be getting in the way much. And Montreal isn't cap crunched like Calgary -- they don't need to get their second-best forward crowded out by the suck on the rest of the team.

Answer me this: should we ditch Markov, too? After all, he's not any more competitive than Tanguay and plays the same style of cerebral game. He's done even less in these playoffs than Tanguay and doesn't have as much playoff experience. I want to evaluate just how much you value this "competitiveness" aspect.
The qualitative element of hockey is highly subjective. I have no problem with my opinions and nothing you've said suggests that they're wrong. You just happen to believe that these soft players can get the job done. Either that or you're telling me he's not soft, in which case we've got nothing more to discuss. I do think if there's something we should have learned from our last two playoff series, it's that soft, skilled players don't win the day. We need a team with Getzlafs, Hartnells, Kunitzs, not these players who play on the perimeter all evening. That's my opinion and yes, it's based on a combination of qualitative and quantitative factors.

I will forward one more opinion, and that's that anyone who believes that stats are the only assessable criteria in hockey (or any part of life) is brutally naive. The ability to analyze qualitative factors is a key to success in any part of life. Hockey is no different. Otherwise every math PhD would be a qualified NHL GM. Intangibles mean a lot. An understanding of this understanding comes with the experience of playing or observing with an able and open mind. You can't build a paper team and win. Hopefully Bob, who talked yesterday about this, which is otherwise known as "expertise", will make the right move. In my mind, that means to sign Tanguay cheaply or get rid of him, and focus on getting talented, skilled players who will sacrifice and do whatever it takes to win.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 01:25 PM
  #68
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 17,025
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I do think if there's something we should have learned from our last two playoff series, it's that soft, skilled players don't win the day. We need a team with Getzlafs, Hartnells, Kunitzs, not these players who play on the perimeter all evening. That's my opinion and yes, it's based on a combination of qualitative and quantitative factors.
I don't see how you can infer that from the last two playoff series, one that the Habs lost due to a difference of finish (and not, as the myth suggests but the play on the ice doesn't support, physicality) and another where the Habs were crippled by injuries.

(And please don't get me started again on the Philly series. Both the play of the games, the shot charts, AND the stats thoroughly debunk the quantitative and qualitative urban myth of the Flyers dominating physically.)

At any rate, I'd rather build a team on the Detroit model than the Anaheim model, and I think that's a fair avenue to success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I will forward one more opinion, and that's that anyone who believes that stats are the only assessable criteria in hockey (or any part of life) is brutally naive. The ability to analyze qualitative factors is a key to success in any part of life. Hockey is no different.
My qualitative estimation of Tanguay is also that he's an excellent player, sound positionally, very smart, not nearly as soft as is claimed (rather unfairly I think), and excellent on both offense and defense -- but since this is a subjective assessment, I don't see that it's very useful to discuss it. It's quite clear we won't be able to convince each other about it.

Stats may not be everything, but they do have the advantadge of objectivity. They may not tell the whole story, but they paint a whole picture, and they're there for anyone to consult.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
In my mind, that means to sign Tanguay cheaply or get rid of him, and focus on getting talented, skilled players who will sacrifice and do whatever it takes to win.
See, to me there's no reason why Tanguay doesn't fit in that philosophy -- he's certainly skilled and talented, and he's competitive enough to have done well in past playoffs. He's disliked by players who'd rather go the Anaheim route, of course, but I posit that that assessment is both unfair to him, and that to get rid of the Habs' most useful forward on that basis is not demonstrating expertise, it's demonstrating bias and it's working to make the team worse, and not better.

You still haven't told me if you feel Andrei Markov fits that philosophy and whether you'd keep him. I realize the notion may seem ludicrous, but every argument you've used against Tanguay can be applied equally to him, so I'd like to know what's your position on him.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 01:40 PM
  #69
LeMAD
Registered User
 
LeMAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsfan18 View Post
He's very skilled, but he's probably soften than Plekanec.

And that's saying something.
I don't care if he's soft, as long as he doesn't disapear in the playoffs.

There are gritty, hard working players that are useless in important games.

LeMAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2009, 03:29 PM
  #70
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
Kessel, Krejci, Savard, Ryder all played in every game and didn't complain once. Kessel had 4 goals, Ryder had 3 or 4 goals, Savard must have had 6 or 7 points in the series. What did that soft piece of **** Tanguay do? These players may be physically as soft as Tanguay but the evidence suggests that they are at least mentally a lot more committed to winning.

Kostopoulos? Who said anything about Kostopoulos? What about a Chris Kunits, a Ryan Getzlaf, a Brandon Dubinsky? Someone who has talent and guts.

No more soft, gutless players - physically or mentally soft.
Tanguay had his left shoulder finished! Finished! Had Kessel, Krejci, Savard, Ryder's shoulders finished? And it's only when he also got injured on his right shoulder also that he could not play.

Kimota is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.