HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

How much trust do you have in Ian Cole?

View Poll Results: How much trust do you have in Ian Cole?
Trust Cole on 1st pairing 11 15.07%
Trust Cole on 2nd pairing 24 32.88%
Trust Cole on 3rd pairing 32 43.84%
Trust Cole as the 7th d-man 6 8.22%
Trust Cole only as minor league depth 0 0%
Voters: 73. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-31-2012, 07:56 AM
  #101
ManyIdeas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 1152
The only option for cole at this point is to play him full time or trade him. Sitting in the press box, playing ~25 nhl games a year and random ahl games can't really be that helpful to him now

ManyIdeas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 11:25 AM
  #102
STL fan in IA
Registered User
 
STL fan in IA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by execwrite View Post
By letting Cola walk and not bringing in someone else, the Blues seem to be saying they disagree with you.

A little harsh to say he may never be a top pair d-man at this stage. He's got the potential - that's the only conclusion I draw at this point.
Given that both Army and Hitch have talked of pairing Petro with Shatty with Petro on the left as well as continuous reports of Army continuing to find a partner for Petro via trade, the Blues seem to be saying that they disagree with YOU.

What makes you think Cole has 1st pairing potential? No scout or member of mgmt has ever graded his potential to be that high. If he actually reaches that level, he'll be vastly overstepping what scouts say his potential is.

STL fan in IA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 11:28 AM
  #103
STL fan in IA
Registered User
 
STL fan in IA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManyIdeas View Post
The only option for cole at this point is to play him full time or trade him. Sitting in the press box, playing ~25 nhl games a year and random ahl games can't really be that helpful to him now
Nobody's really advocating that. Some just think Cole is ready for 1st pairing duty while many others feel he should be eased into full-time duty with spotted minutes on the 3rd pairing.

STL fan in IA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 12:43 PM
  #104
EastonBlues22
Global Moderator
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,194
vCash: 500
I'm taking everything that's been said about likely defensive pairings by Hitch, Armstrong, etc. with a pretty large grain of salt. No coach is going to put pressure on a rookie by coming out and saying he's being penciled in to the top defensive pairing before camp even begins. They're going to talk about easing him in by putting him in the most favorable circumstances possible, regardless of what their hopes/plans might be for him.

For that matter, it also doesn't make much sense to pair by far your two best puck-movers together at ES when transition play is such a huge part of the team's system. It seems pretty unlikely that the Blues would be comfortable relying on some combination of Jackman, Polak, Russell, and Cole to key their transition for half a game or more, every game.

Assuming no roster changes, I think Cole will probably be on the third pairing when camp starts. IMO, where he is when the season starts is going to depend on how things go in camp. Barring a spectacular camp, I doubt Cole will be on the top pairing at that time, but I think we'll probably see it at least given a look at some point this season. I also doubt that we'll see Shattenkirk on the top pairing once the season starts, for what it's worth.

EastonBlues22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 12:48 PM
  #105
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Where have these comments about Petro moving to the left to pair with Shattenkirk 5x5 been? I might've missed them. I guess you'd have to elevate Russell-Polak and play Jackman with Cole on Cole's off side in that event.

I have seen a variety of comments about what might or could happen. I've seen comments about bringing in another top 4 defenseman via trade. I've heard Armstrong emphasize Cole's readiness, I've heard Petro moving to the left but not pairing with Shattenkirk, there's been a bit of everything. Really difficult to conclude anything right now. I don't think it's fair to say if Cole played with Pietrangelo it's "vastly overachieving." He was always projected as a top-four d-man, and once you're in the top four, you mix and match partners. It's probably fair to say he was never expected to be a top pairing anchor, the kind he'd be a top pair no matter what team he was on, but it's not "vast overachievement" to go from top four to top pair IMO. In HF terms he's what you'd probably call a 7.25B.

I agree that at Cole's current experience level (52 games and 2 playoff games) you can't count on him to be the top-four/top-pair guy to get you past the second round. I think we can all agree with that. We all want to get past the second round, therefore we're all interested in the Blues making sure they have the right personnel back there to make that playoff advancement happen. However, even if Cole winds up being used as a trade chip, he can gain value in that potential trade by playing more regular minutes on the blue line during the season. Or he can take a development leap. Guys do surprise, you know. Shea Weber was a third round pick. Jason Garrison wasn't drafted. Defensemen take time. What's Cole? 23? 24? I just think this debate is all speculative at this point. We might have something legit, we might not. But either way, we all kind of agree that the front office is totally aware of needing to improve the team in this area to make the next step, it's a solid GM we have, so why worry too much? Let it unfold.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 12:53 PM
  #106
ManyIdeas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 1152
Quote:
Originally Posted by STL fan in IA View Post
Nobody's really advocating that. Some just think Cole is ready for 1st pairing duty while many others feel he should be eased into full-time duty with spotted minutes on the 3rd pairing.
Fair enough. I personally just want the seaaon to start so we don't have to argue on potential lines and pairings.

I think he could potentially succeed in low(~18) first line minutes with petro, because lets be honest, colaiacovo existed last year. Whether or not he would learn better from that, or by playing third pairing minutes with russell while polak slides with pie will probably be seen soon enough.

ManyIdeas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 03:31 PM
  #107
STL fan in IA
Registered User
 
STL fan in IA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
Where have these comments about Petro moving to the left to pair with Shattenkirk 5x5 been? I might've missed them. I guess you'd have to elevate Russell-Polak and play Jackman with Cole on Cole's off side in that event.
JR. His chats, articles and twitter posts, quite a few with quotes directly from Army or Hitch.

Quote:
I don't think it's fair to say if Cole played with Pietrangelo it's "vastly overachieving."
That's not what I said. I said that he's never been projected as having 1st pairing potential abd I see no reason to think that he'll end up that good. ANYBODY can be placed on the 1st pairing but that doesn't make them 1st pairing caliber. Was Cola a #2 d-man simply because he was on the top pairing? No. Was Brewer a #1 d-man simply because he was the best the Blues had a few years ago? No. IMO, Cole would definitely be overachieving if he actually reached the caliber of a #2 d-man. Him simply being placed on the 1st pairing as a stop-gap move isn't the same thing.

Quote:
I agree that at Cole's current experience level (52 games and 2 playoff games) you can't count on him to be the top-four/top-pair guy to get you past the second round. I think we can all agree with that.
Actually, I get the impression that at least a couple people actually do think that. Given the poll results so far though, at least most seem to get it at least.

STL fan in IA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 05:22 PM
  #108
HooliganX2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,108
vCash: 772
People need to look at Cole's talent level and skill set. I personally think he has the best set of tools of any of our LH defenseman. I think Cole's biggest issue was lack of playing time to be consistent. I have been saying it since the season ended i just don't see a deal available that upgrades us more then Cole.

There is not a top pairing LH defenseman that is currently available for trade. So to get one would have to convince the team to trade him hence over pay to get them. Then after we over pay we may have just created another hole to fill on the team.

I've been saying it all along people say they want an upgrade but no one has actually mentioned a name of a player that is available and is a top pairing LH defenseman. Sure we could make a trade for a #3 or #4 guy but really why that's no solving our need.

BTW
Of Course I would rather have Suter, Edler, Staal ect to start the season but those options just are not available.


Last edited by HooliganX2: 07-31-2012 at 05:29 PM.
HooliganX2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 05:38 PM
  #109
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by STL fan in IA View Post
JR. His chats, articles and twitter posts, quite a few with quotes directly from Army or Hitch.



That's not what I said. I said that he's never been projected as having 1st pairing potential abd I see no reason to think that he'll end up that good. ANYBODY can be placed on the 1st pairing but that doesn't make them 1st pairing caliber. Was Cola a #2 d-man simply because he was on the top pairing? No. Was Brewer a #1 d-man simply because he was the best the Blues had a few years ago? No. IMO, Cole would definitely be overachieving if he actually reached the caliber of a #2 d-man. Him simply being placed on the 1st pairing as a stop-gap move isn't the same thing.



Actually, I get the impression that at least a couple people actually do think that. Given the poll results so far though, at least most seem to get it at least.
I haven't seen any of those quotes and I follow the chats, articles and tweets. Not saying they didn't happen but hearing reports of those comments comes as a surprise to me.

I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding throughout this whole thread. Honestly, who thinks anybody besides Pietrangelo (not even Shattenkirk) is a bonafide established top-pairing d-man after 52 games? This is really a debate point? There's a huge difference between ability to play with Pietrangelo 5x5 (yes, against opponents' top lines simply because Pietrangelo will be out there) and someone who independently can anchor a top pairing line on most or all teams in the NHL. Huge difference. I see some people saying they think he can handle being on a pair with Pietrangelo throughout the regular season. I don't see anyone saying Cole's the guy filling the hole that will bring the Blues the Cup. Maybe I'm missing those claims too.

I agree it would be overachivement for Cole to become a top pairing dman, but that's well within the standard deviation of normal type overachievements. The fact is, defensemen often take awhile, then something clicks, and then they take a big step forward. How many current top pairing dmen around the league were already established as such at Cole's age? Some, but not all by any stretch. It could happen. It's optimistic but it could happen. If it DOES happen, those are the kinds of things teams who win championships tend to get from within that surprise, that overachievement when guys develop better than you hope. Now, if it doesn't happen, he's still likely to be a solid dman, and probably a "top-four" player in the NHL. Which is a valuable piece on any team, like a "top-six" forward. At this exact second, can anyone say with certainty what he is after 52 games in the NHL? Of course not, nobody can prove anything, folks can only speculate. If Cole is a bottom pairing dman then he we can say he "vastly underachieved." You don't spend an 18th overall pick on a 5-6 dman.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 07:40 PM
  #110
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
I haven't seen any of those quotes and I follow the chats, articles and tweets. Not saying they didn't happen but hearing reports of those comments comes as a surprise to me.

I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding throughout this whole thread. Honestly, who thinks anybody besides Pietrangelo (not even Shattenkirk) is a bonafide established top-pairing d-man after 52 games? This is really a debate point? There's a huge difference between ability to play with Pietrangelo 5x5 (yes, against opponents' top lines simply because Pietrangelo will be out there) and someone who independently can anchor a top pairing line on most or all teams in the NHL. Huge difference. I see some people saying they think he can handle being on a pair with Pietrangelo throughout the regular season. I don't see anyone saying Cole's the guy filling the hole that will bring the Blues the Cup. Maybe I'm missing those claims too.

I agree it would be overachivement for Cole to become a top pairing dman, but that's well within the standard deviation of normal type overachievements. The fact is, defensemen often take awhile, then something clicks, and then they take a big step forward. How many current top pairing dmen around the league were already established as such at Cole's age? Some, but not all by any stretch. It could happen. It's optimistic but it could happen. If it DOES happen, those are the kinds of things teams who win championships tend to get from within that surprise, that overachievement when guys develop better than you hope. Now, if it doesn't happen, he's still likely to be a solid dman, and probably a "top-four" player in the NHL. Which is a valuable piece on any team, like a "top-six" forward. At this exact second, can anyone say with certainty what he is after 52 games in the NHL? Of course not, nobody can prove anything, folks can only speculate. If Cole is a bottom pairing dman then he we can say he "vastly underachieved." You don't spend an 18th overall pick on a 5-6 dman.
I strongly agree with all of this except for the bolded statement at the end. Let's take a look at top 4 d-men drafted in the second half of the first round to the third round in the past decade.

2002: 1st: Babchuk, 2nd: Daley, Greene, Keith, Boychuk (including 8 busts or non-top-4 taken between 18 and 61, Boychuk, the last defenseman chosen in the second round).
2003: 1st: Burns, 2: Klein, Carle, Weber, 3: O'Byrne (18 vast underachievers in that range)
2004: 1st: Meszaros, Mike Green, 2: Goligoski, 3: Sekera, Edler (21 others)
2005: 2nd: Vlasic, 3rd: Letang (28 others)
2006: 2nd: Petry, McBain (I'm being forgiving with this one) (27 others)
2007: 2nd: Subban. This is Cole's draft year, I won't bother counting up all of the underachievers, but in following years, we have Del Zotto, Carlson, Hamonic, Faulk so far, and that's it.

Maybe 2002 to 2006 is a poor sample size, but you have 19 out of 119 defensemen in the first three rounds who have become top 4 defensemen, and only 3 first rounders out of 26 in the second half of the first round.

Going by those numbers, it's actually a bonus if Cole becomes a top-four guy, not an underachievement relative to his draft position if he does not.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:31 PM
  #111
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,892
vCash: 50
I would say based on our drafting track record of recent years, it would be an underachievement if Cole tops out as a bottom pairing. I guess that would fall more on our scouting department than Cole though since we grabbed Cole potentially much earlier than he would've gone.

Since 2005, I wouldn't say any of our 1st round picks busted. I don't think Johnson or Eller have lived up to expectations, but I wouldn't consider them busts either. Cole might be in that group, and he might not. With the standard we set with our 1st round picks, he could potentially join those 3 in the category of underachievers, but I don't think he will.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:50 PM
  #112
Blues88
Registered User
 
Blues88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
I feel bad for this kid. It's tough to get a decent read on him when he hardly plays.

I wouldn't be at all opposed to pushing him to second pairing duties and observe how he handles the minutes. I'd rather see Russel add a puck moving element to the bottom pairing than to see Cole toil there without much direction. He's physical enough to be a difference maker on D but like most prospects, he lacks poise and discipline.

I think if they don't resign Coliaccovo and don't get a top 4 LHD I'd rather see Cole up with Petro than anyone else. I don't want to see Coliaccovo back if he's playing top minutes, but I'm also not rigid. They have a group of forwards that, theoretically anyway, could allow them a healthy amount of experimentation early in the season on D.

Blues88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 10:13 PM
  #113
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrokh View Post
I strongly agree with all of this except for the bolded statement at the end. Let's take a look at top 4 d-men drafted in the second half of the first round to the third round in the past decade.

2002: 1st: Babchuk, 2nd: Daley, Greene, Keith, Boychuk (including 8 busts or non-top-4 taken between 18 and 61, Boychuk, the last defenseman chosen in the second round).
2003: 1st: Burns, 2: Klein, Carle, Weber, 3: O'Byrne (18 vast underachievers in that range)
2004: 1st: Meszaros, Mike Green, 2: Goligoski, 3: Sekera, Edler (21 others)
2005: 2nd: Vlasic, 3rd: Letang (28 others)
2006: 2nd: Petry, McBain (I'm being forgiving with this one) (27 others)
2007: 2nd: Subban. This is Cole's draft year, I won't bother counting up all of the underachievers, but in following years, we have Del Zotto, Carlson, Hamonic, Faulk so far, and that's it.

Maybe 2002 to 2006 is a poor sample size, but you have 19 out of 119 defensemen in the first three rounds who have become top 4 defensemen, and only 3 first rounders out of 26 in the second half of the first round.

Going by those numbers, it's actually a bonus if Cole becomes a top-four guy, not an underachievement relative to his draft position if he does not.
Point well-taken and I agree that looking at history is the right way to approach the test of my hypothesis, which may be faulty for the reasons you describe, but it's a little unfair to draw a line between 17 and 18 and then include everyone to pick 61 as representative of ~18th overall pick. If pick 50 busts as a top-four defenseman, why should that reflect on expectations for #18, you know what I'm saying? That sample size may still support your point, that's why I'm saying point well taken, but I'd be curious just for new information what picks in the 15-20 range have done, or you could look at what the average 7th overall defenseman selected in his draft year have done. Or 6th-8th overall dmen have done if you want to widen it.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 11:52 PM
  #114
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
Point well-taken and I agree that looking at history is the right way to approach the test of my hypothesis, which may be faulty for the reasons you describe, but it's a little unfair to draw a line between 17 and 18 and then include everyone to pick 61 as representative of ~18th overall pick. If pick 50 busts as a top-four defenseman, why should that reflect on expectations for #18, you know what I'm saying? That sample size may still support your point, that's why I'm saying point well taken, but I'd be curious just for new information what picks in the 15-20 range have done, or you could look at what the average 7th overall defenseman selected in his draft year have done. Or 6th-8th overall dmen have done if you want to widen it.
I actually took the second half, not just from 18, onward.

If we keep the 2002 to 2006 sample size, looking at the first half of the first round (the selections I omitted before), these are ALL of the defensemen taken and their position:
2002: Bouwmeester (3), Pitkanen (4), Whitney (5), Ballard (11), Eminger (12)
2003: Suter (7), Coburn (8), Phaneuf (9), Seabrook (14)
2004: Barker (3), Smid (9), Valabik (10), Thelen (12)
2005: J. Johnson (3), Lee (9), Bourdon (10), Staal (12), Pokuluk (14)
2006: E. Johnson (1) and that's it.

Ballard was once a top-4 guy for four years, but hasn't been for two straight seasons. If Cole did the same starting right now, I think we'd all be thrilled, so I'll gladly include Ballard as a legit top-4 guy. We'll throw out Bourdon and his selection for obvious reasons, so that's 12 out of 18 selections in the first half as opposed to 3 out of 26 in the second half. And those three were Burns at 20, Meszaros at 23, and Green at 29. Pretty huge drop-off in the second half, and with those selections, you can see that I'm not cherry-picking my cut-off.

It's pretty easy to look this stuff up, so if you want to do some deeper evaluation with more years and examining expected pick value using players of other positions drafted, you certainly can; but I'm pretty confident that you'll see that second-half drop-off pretty consistently even if you double the sample size (although, it's hard to do because scouting has improved a lot just since the late 90's).
The hit-rate in the top 10 for defensemen is dramatically better; and if you're just going by draft position expectations, if Cole is able to perform for more than a couple years at top-4 level on a good team, the Blues get a huge pat on the back - and if he only pans out as a bottom-pairing guy, they should still be happy.

Regarding this whole discussion in general, boy can you ever tell it's summer. The Blues just had a killer rippin' good year, went from missing the playoffs to taking a very rough division and making it to the second round, where they lost to the Cup champs. Cole isn't very experienced, but even at his inconsistent performance level, the Blues don't lose going from Colaiacovo to Cole. If Cole becomes noticeably more consistent, he's an upgrade on Colaiacovo.

Is that perfect for the Blues? Hell no. But no team in the league has a perfect situation. Anyone who thinks the Blues are sitting on their hands needs their head checked. I've seen a few people argue that it's a massive issue to get their playoff D set before the season starts and that's impressively alarmist.
The Blues have assets and with Cole, Schwartz, Tarasenko, healthy Perron, another year from Elliott and Stewart, there's so much to measure that my guess is that it's best to test the temperature of the team and the league before getting desperate. Maybe I like risks, but I want to see what Cole can do. Does that mean I want him thrown in on the first pairing and tell him sink or swim? No, but it's best to see what he can do with a regular shift and a regular partner. He won't grow and they won't be able to evaluate him if that doesn't happen. Going through the rebuild wasn't ideal, either, but it was necessary. The market is what it is and even though I'd love to see them get a top-pairing guy, it's unarguably important that we see what Cole can do - because we haven't, yet.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-01-2012, 02:13 AM
  #115
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,635
vCash: 500
Correction: Greene really isn't a top-4 guy. I don't think I missed or misjudged anybody else, though. Close enough.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-29-2012, 02:40 PM
  #116
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
(Posted Saturday afternoon)

Quote:
Dave Eminian ‏@icetimecleve Rivermen D-man Ian Cole caught up in lockout: "This is supposed to be a make-or-break year for me in my NHL career ..." More to come

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-29-2012, 05:26 PM
  #117
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,629
vCash: 500
The lockout certainly must be frustrating for players like Ian Cole. With the Blues unable to acquire a minute-eating top pairing defenseman, Cole is seemingly in an ideal position to prove himself as a player. It would be a shame if a lockout squandered that opportunity.

The Grouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 02:09 AM
  #118
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,363
vCash: 500
Even if the lockout takes the whole season Cole will get his chance when we get back to playing. I really don't see any top pairing D becoming available without giving up pieces we don't want to. Army tried to do it with picks and prospects but that didn't work so I think Cole gets his chance.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 11:43 AM
  #119
OpenIceHit42
Registered User
 
OpenIceHit42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: STL
Posts: 697
vCash: 500
Trust in Cole?

Put it this way, I'm more comfortable with Woywitka on a nightly basis then Ian Cole.

OpenIceHit42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 01:24 PM
  #120
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,207
vCash: 714
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenIceHit42 View Post
Trust in Cole?

Put it this way, I'm more comfortable with Woywitka on a nightly basis then Ian Cole.
Well, that makes one of us.

2 Minute Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 02:11 PM
  #121
CarvinSigX
Registered User
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Illinois
Country: United States
Posts: 7,929
vCash: 2616
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenIceHit42 View Post
Trust in Cole?

Put it this way, I'm more comfortable with Woywitka on a nightly basis then Ian Cole.
Just a demeaning statement with no explanation? Weak.

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 07:20 PM
  #122
SirPaste
Registered User
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 6,729
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenIceHit42 View Post
Trust in Cole?

Put it this way, I'm more comfortable with Woywitka on a nightly basis then Ian Cole.

you have to be kidding

SirPaste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 10:11 PM
  #123
Robb_K
Registered User
 
Robb_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NordHolandNethrlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenIceHit42 View Post
Trust in Cole?

Put it this way, I'm more comfortable with Woywitka on a nightly basis then Ian Cole.
Cole just needs some playing time with his new shiftmate. He'll be fine. He makes some rookie mistakes at times. He hasn't consistently been the most physically-punishing defenceman to opponents in The NHL, but he's surely been more effective in that area than Woywitka. Woywitka is not going to get significantly better with more play. Cole WILL. There is NO reason that I can see, to play Woywitka above Cole (unless Cole shows in practice or whatever short exhibition season will occur, that he can't play, for whatever reason).

Robb_K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 10:50 PM
  #124
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,892
vCash: 50
I trust Colaiacovo more than Woywitka...guess that's another discussion though

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-30-2012, 11:19 PM
  #125
randysavage
Registered User
 
randysavage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 95
vCash: 500
I trust Cole more than I trust Colaiacovo.

randysavage is offline   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 04:50 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.