HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Tor - Phi

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-01-2012, 08:52 AM
  #51
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
 
HockeyGuruPitka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo Mad Bro View Post
1. I never said that Gardiner was awful defensively. I have said that it has been his biggest weakness since he was drafted, and continues to be so. Even Leafs fans in the "Jake Gardiner's upside" thread this past summer (link: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1241193) questioned his defensive play, and that is the main reason why he most likely will not become a #1D. I stated earlier ITT that he has #2/2nd pairing potential. Offensively talented puck mover who can QB the PP, but doesn't the defensive play to be a #1 like Weber, Pietrangelo, etc.

2. Sean Couturier has been, and continues to be, the much more heralded player. He is undoubtedly the more valuable player at this point in time, and it's not really all that close. Go make a poll

3. Leafs homers make me LOL.
2nd pairing pottential? How is that his "pottential"? He was 3rd in every time on ice category last season.. that would mean he was a 2nd pairing dman as a rookie, meaning he already reached that pottential. Pottential would be achieving more then what he already has.

I dont know why im arguing when your argument is "go make a poll". Should have read your entire post before replying to a 15 y/o

HockeyGuruPitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 09:57 AM
  #52
RJ8812
Gunner Stahl #9
 
RJ8812's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,997
vCash: 769
Gardiner sounds like he's the next Matt Carle. No friggin thanks!

We'll hold onto Couturier and his "2nd line potential"

RJ8812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 09:59 AM
  #53
RJ8812
Gunner Stahl #9
 
RJ8812's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,997
vCash: 769
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuruPitka View Post
2nd pairing pottential? How is that his "pottential"? He was 3rd in every time on ice category last season.. that would mean he was a 2nd pairing dman as a rookie, meaning he already reached that pottential. Pottential would be achieving more then what he already has.

I dont know why im arguing when your argument is "go make a poll". Should have read your entire post before replying to a 15 y/o
being third in ice-time on the Leafs terrible blueline doesnt mean squat.

RJ8812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:02 AM
  #54
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
 
HockeyGuruPitka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
being third in ice-time on the Leafs terrible blueline doesnt mean squat.
Blue line wasnt that bad. He was a -2 on a team that had a horrific overal plus minus. Not bad if you ask me.

HockeyGuruPitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:04 AM
  #55
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
 
HockeyGuruPitka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
being third in ice-time on the Leafs terrible blueline doesnt mean squat.
So i guess your perception of Toronto's entire D core makes gardiners top 3 accomplishment as a rookie in the NHL moot?

He was our 2nd most productive defenseman. Best plus minus defenseman amongst the top 4. Lone bright spot on the leafs last year.

HockeyGuruPitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:17 AM
  #56
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,361
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo Mad Bro View Post
1. I never said that Gardiner was awful defensively. I have said that it has been his biggest weakness since he was drafted, and continues to be so. Even Leafs fans in the "Jake Gardiner's upside" thread this past summer (link: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1241193) questioned his defensive play, and that is the main reason why he most likely will not become a #1D. I stated earlier ITT that he has #2/2nd pairing potential. Offensively talented puck mover who can QB the PP, but doesn't the defensive play to be a #1 like Weber, Pietrangelo, etc.

2. Sean Couturier has been, and continues to be, the much more heralded player. He is undoubtedly the more valuable player at this point in time, and it's not really all that close. Go make a poll

3. Leafs homers make me LOL.
One was named to the All rookie team... Obviously hes not well rounded he only had to beat out all other rookies in his position. Give me a ****ing break, this is Schenn-JVR all over again and we all know who was right in that debate. I sware flyers fans are the worst to deal with always have to be superior...

The Podium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:26 AM
  #57
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuruPitka View Post
So i guess your perception of Toronto's entire D core makes gardiners top 3 accomplishment as a rookie in the NHL moot?

He was our 2nd most productive defenseman. Best plus minus defenseman amongst the top 4. Lone bright spot on the leafs last year.
I like Gardiner. But he's got a lot to prove at least on the defensive side of the puck. Two things:

1 - He was 21 last season. Couturier was 18
2 - His Corsi QoC was -0.243 and 56% of his starts were in the offensive zone. He wasn't used against the opponents top players. He played sheltered minutes (defensively). Couturier? Corsi QoC of 0.174 and only 40.3% of his starts were in the offensive zone. That shows a TON of trust in an 18 year old rookie.

Couturier IS currently valued more. Gardiner is also a valuable piece, was probably the best rookie defenceman last season. But I still put Couturier ahead.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:32 AM
  #58
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
 
HockeyGuruPitka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
I like Gardiner. But he's got a lot to prove at least on the defensive side of the puck. Two things:

1 - He was 21 last season. Couturier was 18
2 - His Corsi QoC was -0.243 and 56% of his starts were in the offensive zone. He wasn't used against the opponents top players. He played sheltered minutes (defensively). Couturier? Corsi QoC of 0.174 and only 40.3% of his starts were in the offensive zone. That shows a TON of trust in an 18 year old rookie.

Couturier IS currently valued more. Gardiner is also a valuable piece, was probably the best rookie defenceman last season. But I still put Couturier ahead.
Even with your stats, if you average the shifts / game and TOI per game. Gardiner still started an equal amount shifts in his defensive zone as Couturier. He just played more in the offensive zone... a lot more.

You have your oppinion. I have mine. Defense is the most difficult possition to play outside of goalie. You build your team from the net out. Its not often that a rookie Dman comes in and plays as well as gardiner did. Hes got a lot more to prove, however with some quality supporting players hes a piece im not willing to part with.

This doesnt mean i dont like Couturier or think hes a great player. Jake Gardiner is not replaceable. His mobility and patience with the puck is outstanding. YOu can never have enough Jake Gardiners. I drool thinking about our future PP combinations with Rielly in the cupboard.

HockeyGuruPitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:39 AM
  #59
FishManSam
Bobs Yummy Burgers!
 
FishManSam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: I Bet You Hate T.O
Country: Croatia
Posts: 4,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan8828 View Post
Who cares about scoring? A defenseman's job is to play defense. The Flyers don't need another Matt Carle.
Really? Gardiner is not bad defensively, he didn't play against the toughest competition, but he never once looked out of place or "stupid" in the D zone.

Believe it or not, Gardiner actually does have #1 D potential, I don't think he'll reach it, but the potential is quite obviously there, He is 6'2 and 175lbs, it's quite easy to say if he adds 25lbs onto his frame over 2-3 years, he'll be a pretty damn good dman.

FishManSam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:41 AM
  #60
handyj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
Gardiner sounds like he's the next Matt Carle. No friggin thanks!

We'll hold onto Couturier and his "2nd line potential"
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
being third in ice-time on the Leafs terrible blueline doesnt mean squat.
These two comments pretty much sum up the intellectual prowess of the Flyers' fans comments in this thread. Gardiner was third in ice time on D, played PP and PK, and had the best +/- of any of the Leafs' regular D-men AS A ROOKIE. But I guess he does suck and has #2 pairing upside and can't play defense .

This whole argument is moot anyways because I don't think the Leafs have any intentions of trading Gardiner, since him and Rielly are our future on the blueline. Not to mention if he was traded for a center that would leave a big hole on our D.

And FWIW (not too much), Gardiner is out-scoring Couturier and has a better +/- so far this season in the AHL. Is that also because he's playing tough minutes and has bad linemates and ran out of his favourite cereal at breakfast?

handyj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:42 AM
  #61
Inverted
Registered User
 
Inverted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 2,299
vCash: 500
Value might be there but this trade benefits neither team IMO

Couturier is not a 1C
Gardiner is not a 1st pairing D

Neither player is more valuable than the other, but of course the fans with homer glasses will always overvalue their teams prospects

Inverted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:44 AM
  #62
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisx101 View Post
One was named to the All rookie team... Obviously hes not well rounded he only had to beat out all other rookies in his position. Give me a ****ing break, this is Schenn-JVR all over again and we all know who was right in that debate. I sware flyers fans are the worst to deal with always have to be superior...
I remember both sides being pretty equally wrong in that, no?

Flyers fans (myself included) believed it would be Schenn + for JVR; Toronto fans insisted it woudl be JVR + for Schenn. Most of the time, the "plus" seemed to be a lower-level prospect or 2nd round pick--so if pressed, I think most of us probably would have admitted the straight-up value was close.

Perhaps the straight value of Gardiner and Couturier is similarly close, but unlike the JVR-Schenn deal, there's really no overriding reason to make the swap. For one thing, both Schenn and JVR needed new starts--I think everyone could agree on that--and given that I can't remember any speculation about Luke to Philly before the acquisition of Brayden, I suspect that the Flyers saw a strong (but largely immeasurable) intangible value in uniting the two brothers.

In contrast, there's really no pressing reason for either side to make this move. Couturier may or may not fit Toronto's long-terrm need for a 1C, and while Gardiner would certainly add some speed and puck-moving to the Flyers blue-line, he doesn't really project to the franchise-type 1D that the team needs. As mentioned several times, the Flyers depth at D is fine, and on the whole, their 1-5 isn't really weak at all, so much as it is bottom-heavy (Timonen, Coburn, Mezsaros*, Schenn, Grossmann). Their problem is the lack of a true #1, and Gardiner doesn't do much do address that.

I don't know if the value is off, but it just doesn't seem like a fit that makes a lot of sense for the Flyers.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 11-01-2012 at 10:49 AM.
Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:45 AM
  #63
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuruPitka View Post
Even with your stats, if you average the shifts / game and TOI per game. Gardiner still started an equal amount shifts in his defensive zone as Couturier. He just played more in the offensive zone... a lot more.
.... He's a defenceman... of course he played more minutes. There are four lines of forwards on a team and three pairs of D.

Unless he was a bottom pairing D, which he wasn't, you'd expect most top 4 D to get more minutes than most forwards.

And Philly had one of the deeper forward groups in the league, we had one of the thinner bluelines in the league.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:51 AM
  #64
handyj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by H0MER View Post
Value might be there but this trade benefits neither team IMO

Couturier is not a 1C
Gardiner is not a 1st pairing D

Neither player is more valuable than the other, but of course the fans with homer glasses will always overvalue their teams prospects
More or less this. Although I don't think we can say at this point in their careers that either Couturier or Gardiner aren't capable of being #1's as both seem to be pretty talented. Not to mention the term "#1" is somewhat relative to their team and situation and the talent around them.

Speaking from a TO fan's perspective (and maybe slightly homer) I think Gardiner has all the tools to be a top pairing D-man. He gets knocked for his defense and physicality but I think it's a bit unfair, and he has the chance to be a #1/2 in the mold of someone like Niedermayer or Zubov or the like were.

handyj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:52 AM
  #65
The Couturier Effect
Registered User
 
The Couturier Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FishManSam View Post
Really? Gardiner is not bad defensively, he didn't play against the toughest competition, but he never once looked out of place or "stupid" in the D zone. I wouldn't do Gardiner for Couturier straight up.

Believe it or not, Gardiner actually does have #1 D potential, I don't think he'll reach it, but the potential is quite obviously there, He is 6'2 and 175lbs, it's quite easy to say if he adds 25lbs onto his frame over 2-3 years, he'll be a pretty damn good dman.
I'm sure Gardiner does have #1 D potential, but right now that's all it is. He's just like Matt Carle right now, strong offensivly, weak on defense. So this doesn't meet the Flyers needs at all. IMO Couturier will only be moved in a package for a proven #1 d-man.

The Couturier Effect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:55 AM
  #66
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,361
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
I remember both sides being pretty equally wrong in that, no?

Flyers fans (myself included) believed it would be Schenn + for JVR; Toronto fans insisted it woudl be JVR + for Schenn. Most of the time, the "plus" seemed to be a lower-level prospect or 2nd round pick--so if pressed, I think most of us probably would have admitted the straight-up value was close.

Perhaps the straight value of Gardiner and Couturier is similarly close, but unlike the JVR-Schenn deal, there's really no overriding reason to make the swap. For one thing, both Schenn and JVR needed new starts--I think everyone could agree on that--and given that I can't remember any speculation about Luke to Philly before the acquisition of Brayden, I suspect that the Flyers saw a strong (but largely immeasurable) intangible value in uniting the two brothers.

In contrast, there's really no pressing reason for either side to make this move. Couturier may or may not fit Toronto's long-terrm need for a 1C, and while Gardiner would certainly add some speed and puck-moving to the Flyers blue-line, he doesn't really project to the franchise-type 1D that the team needs. As mentioned several times, the Flyers depth at D is fine, and on the whole, their 1-5 isn't really weak at all, so much as it is bottom-heavy (Timonen, Coburn, Mezsaros*, Schenn, Grossmann). Their problem is the lack of a true #1, and Gardiner doesn't do much do address that.

I don't know if the value is off, but it just doesn't seem like a fit that makes a lot of sense for the Flyers.
The majority of Leaf fans said either one for one or Schenn + a 2nd, Flyers fans either said it won't happen, or had to be Schenn + 1st or top prospect. Short memory I see!

The Podium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 10:56 AM
  #67
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
 
HockeyGuruPitka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
.... He's a defenceman... of course he played more minutes. There are four lines of forwards on a team and three pairs of D.

Unless he was a bottom pairing D, which he wasn't, you'd expect most top 4 D to get more minutes than most forwards.

And Philly had one of the deeper forward groups in the league, we had one of the thinner bluelines in the league.
So then wouldnt the guy who logs more minutes and is generally a more important/ relied on piece more valuable? why would you trade a 22minute rookie dman for a 15 minute rookie forward? If logic serves correct, you dont trade from a possition of weakness.

HockeyGuruPitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:12 AM
  #68
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisx101 View Post
The majority of Leaf fans said either one for one or Schenn + a 2nd, Flyers fans either said it won't happen, or had to be Schenn + 1st or top prospect. Short memory I see!
I don't believe that is true at all, and I'm sorry to say that you're declaration to the contrary doesn't make it so.

You're right, of course, in saying that quite a few fans on both sides had no interest in the deal. Many Flyers fans were suspicious of Schenn, and saw little need after the acquisition of Grossmann. Just as many Toronto fans cast JVR as a bust, or pointed out that wing was not a pressing organizational need. Both positions made a lot of sense at the time--but the deal happened anyway.

I was referring only to those who saw some logic on a trade and didn't dismiss it from the start. From my "short" memory, I remember plenty of Leafs fans wanting JVR +, plenty of Flyers fans wanting Schenn +, and plenty of neutrals saying it was a square swap. I remember fairly clearly, because I was one of the few Flyers fans who saw value and logic in an even swap.

No one really thought it would happen after months of speculation passed, and at the end of the day, both of the two principle fan bases were largely wrong--in gauging the value or in claiming their own side's lack of interest.

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:18 AM
  #69
Sundinisagod
Weed
 
Sundinisagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 7,591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan8828 View Post
I'm sure Gardiner does have #1 D potential, but right now that's all it is. He's just like Matt Carle right now, strong offensivly, weak on defense. So this doesn't meet the Flyers needs at all. IMO Couturier will only be moved in a package for a proven #1 d-man.
If Gardiner is "just like Matt Carle now", then who is Coutourier like now?

Sundinisagod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:24 AM
  #70
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan8828 View Post
I'm sure Gardiner does have #1 D potential, but right now that's all it is. He's just like Matt Carle right now, strong offensivly, weak on defense. So this doesn't meet the Flyers needs at all. IMO Couturier will only be moved in a package for a proven #1 d-man.
That doesn't seem like a very accurate description of Carle's game to me.

Carle was never offensive enough to be a true offensive defenseman. (I truly believe that there are posters here who could match his wrist shot). However he was a reliable positional defender (if turnover prone). He was never physically imposing, but his defensive play was never really the weakest part of his game--his decision-making was.

That said, I'm not sure Carle is the best measure of the kind of player Gardiner projects to be, right?

Jack de la Hoya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:25 AM
  #71
Sundinisagod
Weed
 
Sundinisagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 7,591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJ8812 View Post
Gardiner sounds like he's the next Matt Carle. No friggin thanks!

We'll hold onto Couturier and his "2nd line potential"


So what you're saying is you haven't watched him play you're just going by what the experts here at HF say??? Brilliant insight...

Sundinisagod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:29 AM
  #72
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post

That said, I'm not sure Carle is the best measure of the kind of player Gardiner projects to be, right?
Kaberle pre-injury is fairly similar in playing style to Gardiner.

That's not to say Gardiner will be quite as gifted offensively (Kaberle hit 67 points one season) nor that he's never going to be better than Kaberle was defensively (about average), just that at this moment, given the information we have, that's a reasonably close projection.

Smooth skating savvy D with good puck skills and an ability to read plays who isn't overly physical.

416Leafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:35 AM
  #73
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
 
HockeyGuruPitka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
Kaberle pre-injury is fairly similar in playing style to Gardiner.

That's not to say Gardiner will be quite as gifted offensively (Kaberle hit 67 points one season) nor that he's never going to be better than Kaberle was defensively (about average), just that at this moment, given the information we have, that's a reasonably close projection.

Smooth skating savvy D with good puck skills and an ability to read plays who isn't overly physical.
Agreed. However i feel Gardiner is a better rusher, better puck handler in tight, better shooter.

HockeyGuruPitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:51 AM
  #74
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,361
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
I don't believe that is true at all, and I'm sorry to say that you're declaration to the contrary doesn't make it so.

You're right, of course, in saying that quite a few fans on both sides had no interest in the deal. Many Flyers fans were suspicious of Schenn, and saw little need after the acquisition of Grossmann. Just as many Toronto fans cast JVR as a bust, or pointed out that wing was not a pressing organizational need. Both positions made a lot of sense at the time--but the deal happened anyway.

I was referring only to those who saw some logic on a trade and didn't dismiss it from the start. From my "short" memory, I remember plenty of Leafs fans wanting JVR +, plenty of Flyers fans wanting Schenn +, and plenty of neutrals saying it was a square swap. I remember fairly clearly, because I was one of the few Flyers fans who saw value and logic in an even swap.

No one really thought it would happen after months of speculation passed, and at the end of the day, both of the two principle fan bases were largely wrong--in gauging the value or in claiming their own side's lack of interest.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1080299

I can't find a trade board thread on it but here is one of the many on the flyers board....

The Podium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:53 AM
  #75
The Podium
Formerly chrisx101
 
The Podium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,361
vCash: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
That doesn't seem like a very accurate description of Carle's game to me.

Carle was never offensive enough to be a true offensive defenseman. (I truly believe that there are posters here who could match his wrist shot). However he was a reliable positional defender (if turnover prone). He was never physically imposing, but his defensive play was never really the weakest part of his game--his decision-making was.

That said, I'm not sure Carle is the best measure of the kind of player Gardiner projects to be, right?
Picture scott niedermayer but not HOF worthy... That is what his play reminds the fans, and some experts, of.

The Podium 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 05:57 PM.

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.