HFBoards

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

Will Bryzgalov ever be worth his contract? All Bryz Discussion Here. Part Two

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-12-2012, 06:54 PM
  #51
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
I'm feeling Deja Vu. Now is when I say "nuh-uh" in about 6 paragraphs, right? It's pretty clear that you don't think proper allocation of cap dollars is of vital importance to putting a team in the best position to win, and it's clear that no evidence will change your mind.
It is interesting to me that winning a Stanley Cup is not being in the best position to win.

Quote:
Including the fact that the Hawks themselves immediately decided that Huet and his 20+ wins during a Cup season weren't worth it.
That's irrelevant. He played on the team for two years of a four year contract. They won they Cup in year two in which he won half of the team's games. During his time in Chicago, he earned his contract.

Quote:
No, he wouldn't have been worth it, because Leighton wouldn't have been the vital key to winning that Cup. That run was all on the excellent performance of the skaters in front of him.
Ugh. This again? Leighton/Bryz win = defense is why! Leighton/Bryz lose = goaltending is so bad!

EDIT: Also you never answered my question from before (and let me make it even easier for you). Two choices:

1) Bryz at his current contract with 1 cup and 8 last place finishes.

2) Another goalie (that could have been had at the time like Vokoun or just keeping Bob) but no guaranteed Cup.

I'd take the Cup every single time.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 06:58 PM
  #52
Mgkibbles
Registered User
 
Mgkibbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gilbertsville, Pa
Posts: 2,081
vCash: 500
If Ed Snider would've used common sense Bryzgalov, or any goalie that moved this offseason, wouldn't be a Flyer. It was obvious last year that Bob got tired after Lavi kept throwing him in net after the midseason point. Bob had never played that many games before, and it was evident that he was burning out. The Flyers should've just put their faith in Bob to put work in over the offseason, because it's plain to see the kid has a good mindset and all the potential you'd want in a goalie. But as usual, Snider couldn't stand being embarrassed, and now he's paying for it out of his pocket. Thankfully we're just paying with our time.

Mgkibbles is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 07:04 PM
  #53
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
FAT SLOB
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 44,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
It is interesting to me that winning a Stanley Cup is not being in the best position to win.



That's irrelevant. He played on the team for two years of a four year contract. They won they Cup in year two in which he won half of the team's games. During his time in Chicago, he earned his contract.



Ugh. This again? Leighton/Bryz win = defense is why! Leighton/Bryz lose = goaltending is so bad!

EDIT: Also you never answered my question from before (and let me make it even easier for you). Two choices:

1) Bryz at his current contract with 1 cup and 8 last place finishes.

2) Another goalie (that could have been had at the time like Vokoun or just keeping Bob) but no guaranteed Cup.

I'd take the Cup every single time.
Again. Stop using hindsight.

Chicago won a Cup DESPITE Huet. This isn't rocket science. If their GM prepares wisely they would have been better an even better team; their chances would have been even better. I prefer a GM who puts the team in the best possible position to win by using assets wisely.

I'm not even going to address your dishonest appraisal of the Leighton/Bryz/Defense thing. I always give Bryz credit when it's due, and Leighton was pretty clearly carried by excellent defensive play. Any time the defense wasn't perfect the other team generally scored lots.

Much of the time when Bryz wins it's because our offense was great and bailed out the weak goals he allowed. He has perhaps three wins that could be attributed to him, and that's shoddy considering he's supposed to be the solution. Instead, he's been a big part of the problem.

Edit: Also, how the hell was Huet earning his contract? If he was earning it, Chicago wouldn't have made it disappear. Because he wasn't earning it, they neutralized it.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.

Last edited by Beef Invictus: 01-12-2012 at 08:08 PM.
Beef Invictus is online now  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:03 PM
  #54
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Again. Stop using hindsight.
Dude, really? So a GM that puts together a team that is picked to finish at or near the top of their conference and winds up winning the Cup is not putting them in the best position to win? And I am coming to that conclusion because of hindsight? Get real. And you still haven't answered my question.

Pick one:

Bryz's contract, 1 cup guaranteed, 8 losing seasons.

Any other goalie and no guarantee of a Cup.

EDIT: Also, they didn't win the cup DESPITE Huet. He won half of their games. He didn't hurt them in the playoffs. He didn't hurt them in the regular season. His contract was big, yes, but it clearly was not hurting them, considering they won the Cup. And just because a player is traded/waived/whatever doesn't mean he isn't earning his contract. People get traded/waived for a number of reasons. He had a huge cap hit and they had a capable goalie behind him. Doesn't mean he didn't earn his contract (just look in the rafters at the United Center to see that banner that says 2009-10 Stanley Cup Champions).


Last edited by DrinkFightFlyers: 01-12-2012 at 10:14 PM.
DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:25 PM
  #55
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I don't think anyone was saying Huet won the Hawks the Cup or would have said Leighton won us the Cup. What I do think is that if the Flyers did win the Cup with Leighton in net, he would be worth every penny at any price.
You seriously think that Leighton would have been worth $5 million a year because he was on a team that won the cup even though he was awful? Holy....

MsWoof is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:34 PM
  #56
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 15,396
vCash: 500
DFF, there's no such thing as a guaranteed cup, so that hypothetical is ridiculous. The best thing about being a fan of the Flyers in the last 20 years is that they have constantly adjusted to remain competitive with really only one ****** season since the Lindros era.

You want the team's management to put the Flyers in the best position to be successful. Signing Bryzgalov was a move in the right direction to shoring up the ever-present goaltending laughingstock. Signing Bryzgalov for 9 years doesn't leave a lot of options should he constantly underperform. The length of the contract was surprising, as well, especially when Bobrovsky had such a promising rookie campaign.

I want to feel comfortable watching a playoff game with Bryz in net. That's when he'll scrape the surface of earning his contract.

Also, Huet faced all of 3 shots in the 2010 playoffs. His signing was terrible.

__________________
I deride your truth handling abilities
CanadianFlyer88 is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:38 PM
  #57
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
It is a hypothetical, so anything is possible. Beef is saying winning a Cup doesn't make a guy worth his contract. I'm saying it does. So I'm just curious what Beef's thoughts would be if Bryz won the Cup this year, then we sucked for 9 years. If he would rather have that, or just a different goalie with a shot at winning. Not really an outrageous hypothetical.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:40 PM
  #58
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
FAT SLOB
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 44,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Dude, really? So a GM that puts together a team that is picked to finish at or near the top of their conference and winds up winning the Cup is not putting them in the best position to win? And I am coming to that conclusion because of hindsight? Get real. And you still haven't answered my question.

Pick one:

Bryz's contract, 1 cup guaranteed, 8 losing seasons.

Any other goalie and no guarantee of a Cup.

EDIT: Also, they didn't win the cup DESPITE Huet. He won half of their games. He didn't hurt them in the playoffs. He didn't hurt them in the regular season. His contract was big, yes, but it clearly was not hurting them, considering they won the Cup. And just because a player is traded/waived/whatever doesn't mean he isn't earning his contract. People get traded/waived for a number of reasons. He had a huge cap hit and they had a capable goalie behind him. Doesn't mean he didn't earn his contract (just look in the rafters at the United Center to see that banner that says 2009-10 Stanley Cup Champions).
Huet didn't win half their games in the Finals. He also DID hurt them by being bad costing them games.

As for your question: I'll gladly take 9 years of being a competitor. At least then you can have multiple shots at Cups, instead of just 1 and then being terrible. I don't look forward to Bryz's decline (Which, when you look at other goalies...could possibly be for the majority of his contract) because his potential role as a Huet-esque cap anchor is going to make it more difficult to put together teams that can compete.

Beef Invictus is online now  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:45 PM
  #59
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Huet didn't win half their games in the Finals. He also DID hurt them by being bad costing them games.
??? They won the Cup. What games that they lost (regardless of whether it was because of him or not) hurt them??? That doesn't make sense. They were the #2 seed and won the Cup. I guess if they won one more game and were the #1 seed they would have won two Cups that year...

Quote:
As for your question: I'll gladly take 9 years of being a competitor. At least then you can have multiple shots at Cups, instead of just 1 and then being terrible. I don't look forward to Bryz's decline (Which, when you look at other goalies...could possibly be for the majority of his contract) because his potential role as a Huet-esque cap anchor is going to make it more difficult to put together teams that can compete.
And this is where our fundamental difference is. I'd rather have one Cup and 9 years of ****. You'd rather have a shot at multiple Cups. Fair opinion, I just don't share it.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 10:46 PM
  #60
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
FAT SLOB
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 44,917
vCash: 500
"It is a hypothetical, so anything is possible. Beef is saying winning a Cup doesn't make a guy worth his contract. I'm saying it does. So I'm just curious what Beef's thoughts would be if Bryz won the Cup this year, then we sucked for 9 years. If he would rather have that, or just a different goalie with a shot at winning. Not really an outrageous hypothetical."

Sorry. Quote is broken at the moment. Montreal has broken the boards.

That would be terrible. I'd hate sucking for 9 years. I'd happily take a different, cheaper goalie who would allow for greater depth and more shots at winning a Cup than a one and done deal where we're miserable for 9 years and caught with a cap anchor that prevents them from adequately improving. That's a no-brainer.

Edit: BTW, this is an extreme hypothetical. You're grasping at straws at this point.

What really amuses me here, is that you say Huet was worth his contract because they won a Cup. If that's the case then why didn't Chicago keep him? I mean, if he was worth it and all.

Edit 2: What's extreme about it is that there is no such thing as a guaranteed Cup. The best thing a GM can do is manage his assets and Cap space well to give his team the best possible chance every year. That's the whole issue here. Very long, expensive contracts for aging players are counter-productive to that in the long run. The chances of Bryz being worth it when he's 35 aren't terribly great. It's likely that his cap hit will be a detriment and will make icing a competitive team that much more difficult. That's a bad thing.


Last edited by Beef Invictus: 01-12-2012 at 10:59 PM.
Beef Invictus is online now  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:03 PM
  #61
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
"It is a hypothetical, so anything is possible. Beef is saying winning a Cup doesn't make a guy worth his contract. I'm saying it does. So I'm just curious what Beef's thoughts would be if Bryz won the Cup this year, then we sucked for 9 years. If he would rather have that, or just a different goalie with a shot at winning. Not really an outrageous hypothetical."

Sorry. Quote is broken at the moment.

That would be terrible. I'd hate sucking for 9 years. I'd happily take a different, cheaper goalie who would allow for greater depth and more shots at winning a Cup than a one and done deal where we're miserable for 9 years and caught with a cap anchor that prevents them from adequately improving. That's a no-brainer.
Save yourself some grief before your head explodes. Seriously, this is the most insane argument I've ever seen on these boards and that says a lot!

MsWoof is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:04 PM
  #62
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Yeah I noticed the broken quotes too. Damn Habs fans...

I don't see why what happened after the year has anything to do with what happened while he was on the team. He played for two years. They made the playoffs both years, won the Cup one year. I am not in anyway saying it was because of him they did this, but he was on the team, he contributed, he earned his pay, and was worth it. What happened after that is irrelevant. He had a big cap hit and there were other priorities. Moving forward, he wasn't working out. That doesn't mean he didn't earn his contract the two years before that. Players get waived all the time. It doesn't mean they aren't or didn't earn their contracts.

Also, the hypothetical isn't ridiculous. I was making as extreme as possible (1 Cup in exchange for 8 crappy years) to prove a point. If it was one Cup + years of competing, which is more likely IMO, it would seem like I wasn't giving you a fair shot to choose something opposite of my position. I think it is clear that we just differ in opinion on this, as has been pointed out before. I've never seen the Flyers win a Cup. I would trade a generation of failure for one Cup instead of a generation of competing for the CUp with no guarantees. That's just me. If they win the Cup this year and have to blow up the team for cap reasons or something else, I won't complain one bit.

Hell look at the Phillies, they won in 2008 and I cannot wait until they start sucking again. 2008 was awesome and going to the WS was one of the coolest things I have ever witnessed, but I enjoyed baseball a lot more when they sucked. Went to more games. Had better baseball discussions with actual fans. Different situation that hockey, but whatever. I'm outta here for the night. I think we can both agree that this argument is heading in the same direction it always does so let's just cut our losses now and end it.

EDIT: When I say a guaranteed Cup I am not saying that Bryz is guaranteed to win a Cup for the Flyers. What I am saying is would you rather win a Cup and suck for 8 years or have 9 years of competitive hockey. That is not a ridiculous hypothetical.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:08 PM
  #63
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
FAT SLOB
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 44,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Hell look at the Phillies, they won in 2008 and I cannot wait until they start sucking again. 2008 was awesome and going to the WS was one of the coolest things I have ever witnessed, but I enjoyed baseball a lot more when they sucked.
(goddamned Montreal.)

This comment makes it clear that our views are 150% incompatible. Also, that you might be a moon-person.

Beef Invictus is online now  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:14 PM
  #64
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Ha, that's just for the Phillies though. I wouldn't actually wish that on the Flyers (though I would trade a Cup for it )

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:23 PM
  #65
WeekendAtBernies
Registered User
 
WeekendAtBernies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I say this all the time and everyone hates when I say it, but the goal of hockey is to win the Cup, not have the best contracts. You win the Cup, there is nothing more. End of story.
By your logic, if we traded Briere to Montreal for Gomez and then scratched Gomez for every single game from here till the end of the cup finals and won it all, that would be an excellent trade for us and Gomez would be worth his contract.

By your logic, if Bryz is benched and never touches the ice for the Flyers in the playoffs and Bob wins us the cup with 16 consecutive shutouts, then Bryzgalov was worth his contract and it was an excellent decision to sign him, because if we hadn't signed him, then we would have used that cap space elsewhere on a player who could've ruined the team chemistry.

Why ever try and judge anything?!? All that matters is hindsight. If you light a match near a fart, it's not a bad idea unless you actually end up burning your ass.

If you smash your head repeatedly into a brick wall, it's only a bad idea if you end up injured.

If you walk into oncoming traffic on I-95, it's only a bad idea if you end up getting hit.


Your logic is ridiculous.

Why don't you let me manage your retirement portfolio? I'll dump all your savings into a single tech growth stock (incredibly risky strategy). If it works out for you immediately and you make a buttload of money, then I get a ton of commission and we're both happy. If it doesn't work out immediately and you lose half your retirement account, I'll tell you to be more patient... you can't judge these kinds of things after 6 months and we'll re-evaluate it 10 years down the line.


Send me a PM and we can get started on this plan. I think it will work out excellently for all involved. We can even start a thread to track how well your account is doing...

WeekendAtBernies is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:49 PM
  #66
Pandl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
It's better to be prepared beforehand. Pissing money away into bad contracts is a bad way to be prepared.

How could having one extra decent defensemen or forward possibly ruin chemistry?

Edit: It's easy to say in hindsight "They clearly spent all their money as best as they could!" But I still fail to see how that's true. Clearly, the Hawks management agrees. They got rid of him at the first opportunity. I'm sure if you check threads in their forum from that year, you'd find the Hawks fans would have preferred to see Huet's money spent somewhere else to fill a need; you know, to give them the best chance of winning. Huet's contract did NOT help prepare them to win a Cup. They just happened to win in spite of that fact. That doesn't strike me as an ideal model for GMing; good GMs shouldn't have to hope a team bails out their mistakes and wins anyways.
Didn't you facepalm my thread Over/Under until Bobrovsky is starter?


Just wondering...

Pandl is offline  
Old
01-12-2012, 11:53 PM
  #67
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
FAT SLOB
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 44,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandl View Post
Didn't you facepalm my thread Over/Under until Bobrovsky is starter?


Just wondering...
I don't believe I did. I thought that signing an 31 year old goalie to a 9 year contract after the potential showed by Bob was a mistake.

Edit: Oh, I see it now. Hello Picard! I facepalmed not because I thought Bob would never take over, but because I didn't think that Bryz would be this bad this soon. It seemed like premature over-reaction so early into the season, since it was only October 26th at the time.

If you'd asked me if I thought Bob would definitely be starting in 2-3 years I would've agreed. This year...ugh. Unbelievable. It shouldn't be a question, yet it is.

Beef Invictus is online now  
Old
01-13-2012, 12:14 AM
  #68
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandlansd View Post
By your logic, if we traded Briere to Montreal for Gomez and then scratched Gomez for every single game from here till the end of the cup finals and won it all, that would be an excellent trade for us and Gomez would be worth his contract.

By your logic, if Bryz is benched and never touches the ice for the Flyers in the playoffs and Bob wins us the cup with 16 consecutive shutouts, then Bryzgalov was worth his contract and it was an excellent decision to sign him, because if we hadn't signed him, then we would have used that cap space elsewhere on a player who could've ruined the team chemistry.

Why ever try and judge anything?!? All that matters is hindsight. If you light a match near a fart, it's not a bad idea unless you actually end up burning your ass.
Pretty much. If you win a Cup, everyone earns their paycheck. Ok maybe a guy who never steps foot on the ice is a different story, but in a Bryzgalov/Huet situation, if the goal is to win a Cup, and they do it, they are worth it. I overstepped a little in earlier posts if I said that. But those who are playing, even if not up to your standards, are worth it if the team wins a Cup. Go into the older thread to read more about this. It was discussed by me and Beef ad nauseum.

Quote:
If you smash your head repeatedly into a brick wall, it's only a bad idea if you end up injured.

If you walk into oncoming traffic on I-95, it's only a bad idea if you end up getting hit.
Again, look at the earlier thread for plenty of these fun analogies. Quarters, concussions, companies, and plenty more if memory serves me correctly.

Quote:
Your logic is ridiculous.
Yes, saying a guy is worth it if the team wins the championship is absurd!

Quote:
Why don't you let me manage your retirement portfolio? I'll dump all your savings into a single tech growth stock (incredibly risky strategy). If it works out for you immediately and you make a buttload of money, then I get a ton of commission and we're both happy. If it doesn't work out immediately and you lose half your retirement account, I'll tell you to be more patient... you can't judge these kinds of things after 6 months and we'll re-evaluate it 10 years down the line.
That is not really the same situation. If you were managing my retirement portfolio (GM of the Flyers) and you could make me $1 million dollars in year one, or enough to live off of for the future (win a Stanley Cup), I would gladly take that in lieu of a chance to make that much with an equal chance of making nothing (making the playoffs/missing the playoffs). Hockey isn't like finances. If you make A billion dollars this year but lose two billion next year, you don't have that money you made. If you win a Cup this year but miss the playoffs the next year, you still have that Cup.

Now I am really done for the night.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 01:09 AM
  #69
Brozgalov
Registered User
 
Brozgalov's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bucks County, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 341
vCash: 500
Bryzgalov will be fine, everyone needs to ****ing relax.

Brozgalov is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 01:13 AM
  #70
dingbathero
No Jam? How about PB
 
dingbathero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjb5064 View Post
Bryzgalov will be fine, everyone needs to ****ing relax.
Do you know where you are? You aren't in Kansas anymore....



dingbathero is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 02:19 AM
  #71
Brozgalov
Registered User
 
Brozgalov's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bucks County, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dingbathero View Post
Do you know where you are? You aren't in Kansas anymore....


Yeah i know we need to talk about something but lets just relax a bit here.

Brozgalov is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 03:08 AM
  #72
Totally Radivojevic
Registered User
 
Totally Radivojevic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 974
vCash: 500
Merely a hypothetical, but...

At this point in time, is there a single team in the NHL who would take Bryzgalov in a trade if he waived his NMC? I don't know that there is. Not with that contract.

Totally Radivojevic is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 04:00 AM
  #73
StandingCow
Registered User
 
StandingCow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Yea, that's another part of the problem... we can't trade him (who would take him when he is playing this poorly?).

This organization seems to lack patience, which I can understand, Philly wants to win NOW, and won't accept being sub-par unlike some other cities. But, it also hurts us, in this case, as well as some of the other trades we have made where we got rid of somebody because they didn't pan out immediately.

StandingCow is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 06:45 AM
  #74
kimmofan44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: thorndale pa
Country: United States
Posts: 1,457
vCash: 500
can anyone else feel bryz's sphyncter shrink up everytime bob makes a big save??

kimmofan44 is offline  
Old
01-13-2012, 08:35 AM
  #75
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Long live to this thread!!

I wish this thread will last 9 years!

palindrom is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:29 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.