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

Lapresse article - Ribeiro power skating/Bulin and Aucoin almost Habs last season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2006, 03:34 PM
  #76
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabutie View Post
What can we do about it? We can't magicaly ship him out, that's Gaineys job. I don't get how you guys can continually rag on him and hope for the worst, it annoys the **** out of me.
There is a difference between hoping for the worst and knowing that a player will never help you win a cup. I wish he was a more effective player. But he is not. Reality is what it is and if you want to win, you have to deal with it. Look at the comparables on cup winning teams, Shabutie. It doesn;t have to be more complicated than that.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 03:58 PM
  #77
Squeaky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
There is a difference between hoping for the worst and knowing that a player will never help you win a cup. I wish he was a more effective player. But he is not. Reality is what it is and if you want to win, you have to deal with it. Look at the comparables on cup winning teams, Shabutie. It doesn;t have to be more complicated than that.
Lots of teams have won cups with one-dimensional, so-so players. The Canes had Whitney last year, and he did no harm. Tampa had a couple of guys like that too, when they won. Ribeiro can be a pretty useful player, provided he is used properly. He's still quite effective on the PP, for example.

Squeaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 04:03 PM
  #78
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
Lots of teams have won cups with one-dimensional, so-so players. The Canes had Whitney last year, and he did no harm. Tampa had a couple of guys like that too, when they won. Ribeiro can be a pretty useful player, provided he is used properly. He's still quite effective on the PP, for example.
I responded to that already.

1) Whitney is reliable player and a veteran who brings lots of experience with him. He is not one dimensional. More importantly, he is not a centre.

2) Comparables means you have to look at centres on the first two lines (ie. Lecavalier, Brind'Amour etc.)

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 08:10 PM
  #79
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I have enough experience playing and watching this game to know that teams with soft, one-dimensional and ineffective players like Ribeiro do not win the Stanley Cup.
It's funny, last time the Habs won the Cup, Stephan Lebeau was our second line centre. Oh I know, you'll want to argue about games he missed in the playoffs, or about Savard (who wasn't any better by those days), etc. I don't see how any of that is necessarily different than what may or may not befall Ribeiro at some point. He starts as our 2nd line center. Like Lebeau, he might move through a season with a lot of points. He may or may not keep his spot or get hurt, he may or may not be juggled around with somebody no more prolific than himself at times (e.g. Plekanec, Bonk) due to his obvious shortcomings. None of it means we can't win a Cup with him. It really all depends on the rest of the team too.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 08:13 PM
  #80
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I responded to that already.

1) Whitney is reliable player and a veteran who brings lots of experience with him. He is not one dimensional. More importantly, he is not a centre.

2) Comparables means you have to look at centres on the first two lines (ie. Lecavalier, Brind'Amour etc.)
I think that's a bit silly. Why should we compare Ribeiro to Lecavalier or Brind'Amour? It's Kovalev, seconded perhaps by Samsonov (if that does indeed turn out to be the line) who are paid to carry the mail on that line. If Ribeiro is there, it's as a complementary player, shortcomings noted, but not the main cog. Comparing him to the Whitneys of the world is entirely the correct way to look at it.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 08:35 PM
  #81
znk
Registered User
 
znk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
I think that's a bit silly. Why should we compare Ribeiro to Lecavalier or Brind'Amour? It's Kovalev, seconded perhaps by Samsonov (if that does indeed turn out to be the line) who are paid to carry the mail on that line. If Ribeiro is there, it's as a complementary player, shortcomings noted, but not the main cog. Comparing him to the Whitneys of the world is entirely the correct way to look at it.
If that is the case then (like I said in older threads) I think a guy like Higgins would be alot more suited to that role. Resposible defensivly, alot quicker, more intense, ready to drive the net without the puck to open up room for Samsonov and Kovalev to make some moves. In position to pickup rebounds, forchecking and diggin out the puck... etc...etc..

znk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 08:36 PM
  #82
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
It's funny, last time the Habs won the Cup, Stephan Lebeau was our second line centre. Oh I know, you'll want to argue about games he missed in the playoffs, or about Savard (who wasn't any better by those days), etc. I don't see how any of that is necessarily different than what may or may not befall Ribeiro at some point. He starts as our 2nd line center. Like Lebeau, he might move through a season with a lot of points. He may or may not keep his spot or get hurt, he may or may not be juggled around with somebody no more prolific than himself at times (e.g. Plekanec, Bonk) due to his obvious shortcomings. None of it means we can't win a Cup with him. It really all depends on the rest of the team too.

I did specify somewhere back there to search the last 10 years because the game has changed since 1993. The most radical changes took place in and after 1995, when the Devils won their first cup and demonstrated the potential of defensive hockey. Although the new NHL is not 1995 either, I think it's safe to say that every team including Carolina had top-two centreswho were much more effective than Ribeiro. Again, just look at some of those names!


As an aside, would you take Lebeau (in 1993 form) on the Habs this season? I wouldn't. Not a chance. Anyway, as you will note Lebeau failed to compete in the NHL after 1993. That's why he ultimately went to play in Europe...along with Dipietro and other notables from our team that year. As good as they were in 1993, they couldn't compete in the faster, more physical NHL.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 08:40 PM
  #83
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
I think that's a bit silly. Why should we compare Ribeiro to Lecavalier or Brind'Amour? It's Kovalev, seconded perhaps by Samsonov (if that does indeed turn out to be the line) who are paid to carry the mail on that line. If Ribeiro is there, it's as a complementary player, shortcomings noted, but not the main cog. Comparing him to the Whitneys of the world is entirely the correct way to look at it.

Not at all. Centre is a unique and crucial position, as you will no doubt notice when you see who the top two centres of each cup winning team over the last 10 years have been. That is the core of your team outside of the crease area. Centres are the focal points of most set plays, the face-off guy, the backchecker (in theory and not always in practice). The centre is the most crucial player position. You must compare centres to other centres.

Apples to apples. It's the same reason you don't compare Jose Theodore to Eric Staal.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 09:08 PM
  #84
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by znk View Post
If that is the case
What other case could there be? Do you think Gainey would look at a Samsonov-Ribeiro-Kovalev line and think that Ribeiro is the heavyweight star there?
Quote:
then (like I said in older threads) I think a guy like Higgins would be alot more suited to that role. Resposible defensivly, alot quicker, more intense, ready to drive the net without the puck to open up room for Samsonov and Kovalev to make some moves. In position to pickup rebounds, forchecking and diggin out the puck... etc...etc..
Well, sure, that's fine with me too. Or put Plekanec there, some of the same attributes attributed to Higgins. Either way. It doesn't mean we have to have Lecavalier or Brind'Amour there.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 09:22 PM
  #85
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I did specify somewhere back there to search the last 10 years because the game has changed since 1993. The most radical changes took place in and after 1995, when the Devils won their first cup and demonstrated the potential of defensive hockey. Although the new NHL is not 1995 either, I think it's safe to say that every team including Carolina had top-two centreswho were much more effective than Ribeiro. Again, just look at some of those names!
Care to save me the trouble and list them?

And if the NHL changed circa 1995, is it not in the process of changing back? Are the Bruins utter morons for paying Marc Savard $5M? (Ok, don't answer that one! ). Are you saying you want to model a team on a defensive era when the league is making every attempt (quite visibly and quite successfully) to shift the game back to the preceding era, when players like Lebeau could indeed be successful 2nd line centres on Cup-winning teams? Don't we want to be progressive in building our team? (Or at least, open-minded about the potential for a player like Lebeau/Ribeiro to fit into the equation somehow, lacking other alternatives).
Quote:
As an aside, would you take Lebeau (in 1993 form) on the Habs this season?
Yes, easily, without hesitation. Just as I will take Ribeiro. I don't like him, but then, I don't feel like I have to. He can do the job and put some points on the board, and I don't think we have a better alternative.
Quote:
I wouldn't. Not a chance. Anyway, as you will note Lebeau failed to compete in the NHL after 1993. That's why he ultimately went to play in Europe...along with Dipietro and other notables from our team that year. As good as they were in 1993, they couldn't compete in the faster, more physical NHL.
Lebeau's injuries certainly played a role in that. But nevertheless, the NHL is changing. I could imagine Ribeiro breaking out. I wouldn't say I expect it, of course, but players like that do have a place in the NHL today. Living by the standards of the late 90's doesn't seem like a good way to try to build a Cup winner, IMO. But then, as you say, there are weak links on every team, even Cup winners. If Ribeiro is our weakest link, then so be it. It's not a fantasy league, and unfortunately we can't pick and choose every component of the team to meet an idealized blueprint. He can serve a purpose and play a role on a team, any team, from cellar dweller to Cup champion. There are 19 other players in the lineup which can help to make up for his shortcomings, just as there are other players in the lineup who can benefit from his strengths. It's a team game, and he's just one player.

And now I've seen it all. I've defended Jose Theodore, Mike Ribeiro, Radek Bonk, Niklas Sundstrom, and even in a way Pierre Dagenais all in the span of one calendar year. Surely the apocalypse will follow.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2006, 11:42 PM
  #86
MEGALINSKY
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Park Ji-Sung MANIA!
Country: Canada
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
While both sides seem to present some valid points, I would just like to point out that I would be over the moon if Ribs was able to put up 90 points this season. Just having those 40 points more than last season floating around means that Kovy and Sammy both had great years (if they indeed play on the same line), and this is just our SECOND line I'm fantasizing about.

MEGALINSKY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 07:12 AM
  #87
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
Not at all. Centre is a unique and crucial position, as you will no doubt notice when you see who the top two centres of each cup winning team over the last 10 years have been. That is the core of your team outside of the crease area. Centres are the focal points of most set plays, the face-off guy, the backchecker (in theory and not always in practice). The centre is the most crucial player position. You must compare centres to other centres.

Apples to apples. It's the same reason you don't compare Jose Theodore to Eric Staal.
Okay, well you've at least identified to me the glaring flaw in your argument, so I doubt there is much of a way forward from there. If you wish to continue comparing Ribeiro to Lecavalier and Brind'Amour types, then I guess you'll just have to live with the consequences, the ensuing frustration, suffering, and misery that you will endure in the Habs' Ribeiroful world. Meanwhile, I, Ribeiro-hating Ribeiro-basher that I am, will have to continue to at least be happy with the lesser evil, relish the satisfaction that at least we aren't saddled with an albatrossic Arnott type and can instead "enjoy" the unizonal contributions of Ribeiro and Samsonov in his stead.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 09:19 AM
  #88
Squeaky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
I responded to that already.

1) Whitney is reliable player and a veteran who brings lots of experience with him. He is not one dimensional. More importantly, he is not a centre.

2) Comparables means you have to look at centres on the first two lines (ie. Lecavalier, Brind'Amour etc.)
Those are valid arguments for needing a solid top-2 center. Those are not, however, valid arguments for getting rid of Ribeiro. Ribeiro, if used in a way simillar to a guy like Whitney, could be a very effective player for the habs. If used in a way simillar to a guy like Lecavallier, he's simply being mis-used.

Squeaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 09:28 AM
  #89
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Okay, well you've at least identified to me the glaring flaw in your argument, so I doubt there is much of a way forward from there. If you wish to continue comparing Ribeiro to Lecavalier and Brind'Amour types, then I guess you'll just have to live with the consequences, the ensuing frustration, suffering, and misery that you will endure in the Habs' Ribeiroful world. Meanwhile, I, Ribeiro-hating Ribeiro-basher that I am, will have to continue to at least be happy with the lesser evil, relish the satisfaction that at least we aren't saddled with an albatrossic Arnott type and can instead "enjoy" the unizonal contributions of Ribeiro and Samsonov in his stead.

You are only proving my point. Ribeiro does not compare to those players. But our second line centre must be able to face-off against those players if we are to win. Therefore, if we want to win Ribeiro is not suited to play on our second line. Simple logic.

What glaring flaw are you talking about? That I am comparing our supposed #2 centre to other (winning) #2 centres while you find it convenient to compare Ribeiro to role players playing at the 3rd-4th line wing positions???? That, sir, is a glaring problem. I am showing you what it takes in the #2 centre positions to win. You want Ribeiro to play on the second line, yet you want to compare him to 4th line role players to show that he is viable. That is obviously out of convenience amd makes no sense at all.

Are the Bruins dumb to sign Savard? I think so. Savard has had one good season and it's no surprise that it was along-side Kovalchuk. I think you will find both the Bruins and Savard disappointing this season. He is a another skilled but soft player who doesn't make the necessary sacrifices to play a completel game. Even if he works out for the Bruins, we do not need that type of player on our team. We already have too many of them. See, depending on what different teams needs, the same player may have a different values. While we need offense, we more desperately need a better #2 centre.


Last edited by Catch-22: 09-01-2006 at 09:48 AM.
Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 09:28 AM
  #90
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
Those are valid arguments for needing a solid top-2 center. Those are not, however, valid arguments for getting rid of Ribeiro. Ribeiro, if used in a way simillar to a guy like Whitney, could be a very effective player for the habs. If used in a way simillar to a guy like Lecavallier, he's simply being mis-used.

So you're saying put Ribeiro at the 3rd-line wing position?


Last edited by Catch-22: 09-01-2006 at 09:40 AM.
Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 09:35 AM
  #91
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Care to save me the trouble and list them?

And if the NHL changed circa 1995, is it not in the process of changing back? Are the Bruins utter morons for paying Marc Savard $5M? (Ok, don't answer that one! ). Are you saying you want to model a team on a defensive era when the league is making every attempt (quite visibly and quite successfully) to shift the game back to the preceding era, when players like Lebeau could indeed be successful 2nd line centres on Cup-winning teams? Don't we want to be progressive in building our team? (Or at least, open-minded about the potential for a player like Lebeau/Ribeiro to fit into the equation somehow, lacking other alternatives).
Yes, easily, without hesitation. Just as I will take Ribeiro. I don't like him, but then, I don't feel like I have to. He can do the job and put some points on the board, and I don't think we have a better alternative.
Lebeau's injuries certainly played a role in that. But nevertheless, the NHL is changing. I could imagine Ribeiro breaking out. I wouldn't say I expect it, of course, but players like that do have a place in the NHL today. Living by the standards of the late 90's doesn't seem like a good way to try to build a Cup winner, IMO. But then, as you say, there are weak links on every team, even Cup winners. If Ribeiro is our weakest link, then so be it. It's not a fantasy league, and unfortunately we can't pick and choose every component of the team to meet an idealized blueprint. He can serve a purpose and play a role on a team, any team, from cellar dweller to Cup champion. There are 19 other players in the lineup which can help to make up for his shortcomings, just as there are other players in the lineup who can benefit from his strengths. It's a team game, and he's just one player.

And now I've seen it all. I've defended Jose Theodore, Mike Ribeiro, Radek Bonk, Niklas Sundstrom, and even in a way Pierre Dagenais all in the span of one calendar year. Surely the apocalypse will follow.


That last paragraph pretty much says it all.

I will say it again and disagree if you will. Centre is the most important position outside the crease. You need a good quality core group of centres to win. Ribeiro does not fit the profile and he MUST go. End of story. We will need a better #2 centre to improve our record on the road and compete for home ice in the playoffs. That will not happen until Mike Ribeiro is gone.

Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 10:09 AM
  #92
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
You are only proving my point. Ribeiro does not compare to those players. But our second line centre must be able to face-off against those players if we are to win. Therefore, if we want to win Ribeiro is not suited to play on our second line. Simple logic.
Ok, humour me then, why does our 2nd line centre have to face-off against the 2nd line centre on Carolina or Tampa Bay? If there is such a mismatch, are you saying that Carbo is a moron?
Quote:
What glaring flaw are you talking about?
The one where you insist on comparing one of our middling complementary role players to some of the bigger name higher-salaried players on other teams. Players like Lecavalier should be compared to our Koivu/Kovalev types. It's just silly to compare a uni-dimensional $1.9M player to big $4-7M stars on other teams. A good team needs good players. In all positions. 2nd line centre is not the be-all and end-all for team success.
Quote:
That I am comparing our supposed #2 centre to other (winning) #2 centres while you find it convenient to compare Ribeiro to role players playing at the 3rd-4th line wing positions????
Bingo. Compare him to 1st and 2nd line wingers, or 1st or 2nd line centers or 3rd or 4th line role players, as you like, so long as they are in the same general pecking order on the team. It's not absolute. Whitney, Recchi, Stillman, Fedotenko, Modin, Prospal, choose them as you like, those are the players that you ought to compare Ribeiro to IMO. He may still come up short against some of them too. And why not? We didn't win any Cups after all. Similarly, perhaps our Koivu/Kovalev types at the top of the pecking order don't compare to Lecavalier or Richards either, and so on and so on.
Quote:
That, sir, is a glaring problem. I am showing you what it takes in the #2 centre positions to win. You want Ribeiro to play on the second line, yet you want to compare him to 4th line role players to show that he is viable. That is obviously out of convenience amd makes no sense at all.
Incidentally, I don't care whether Ribeiro plays on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th line, or how one chooses to rank them. I don't want him to play with Kovalev and Samsonov. I don't want him not to either. I want to see how it works. They might click and be our 1st line. They might never play together. It's impossible to say at this point for sure. I can see Plekanec or yes, even Bonk, or Higgins or Johnson or any other number of combinations being tried with varying degrees of success. Going by the last couple of seasons, Ribeiro was moderately successful in the role, however. Not a liability, at any rate, so I don't see any harm in pencilling him in there again until we have more empirical evidence to go by.
Quote:
See, depending on what different teams needs, the same player may have a different values. While we need offense, we more desperately need a better #2 centre.
Woah. So are you saying that if we had a better team, we wouldn't need a better #2 centre?

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 10:14 AM
  #93
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,264
vCash: 500
I am bemused by the renewed extravagant claims for Ribeiro. Will his admirers please explain to me how he will rack up more than one point a game? Will it be his 30 goals and 60 assists or his 20 goals and 65 assists?

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 10:28 AM
  #94
Montrealer
Registered User
 
Montrealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chambly QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
I am bemused by the renewed extravagant claims for Ribeiro. Will his admirers please explain to me how he will rack up more than one point a game? Will it be his 30 goals and 60 assists or his 20 goals and 65 assists?
Ridiculous.

All I've ever seen anyone here say is that he might have a good season, and he might not. I'm of the OPINION he will have a solid season of 70 points and I'm HOPING for more.

This gets me branded as a stupid idiot who has no idea what hockey is and should be slammed over and over again for being a Ribeiro ***-kisser.

Meanwhile, the "fair and balanced" viewpoints of Ribeiro haters is that he's the worst player who's been in the league ever.

For the love of everything good and normal in the world, can you just let the freaking people who run the team have a chance to see if Ribeiro might actually help the team and perform well? If he doesn't, fine, I'll be the first to say he needs to go, but damn it, just see what happens!

Chrissakes, between Eklund and Ribeiro I think some of you need to take anger management classes.

Montrealer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 10:30 AM
  #95
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
I think that's a bit silly. Why should we compare Ribeiro to Lecavalier or Brind'Amour? It's Kovalev, seconded perhaps by Samsonov (if that does indeed turn out to be the line) who are paid to carry the mail on that line. If Ribeiro is there, it's as a complementary player, shortcomings noted, but not the main cog. Comparing him to the Whitneys of the world is entirely the correct way to look at it.
well said Blind Guardian . The role of Ribeiro isn't that important .

goalchenyuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 10:34 AM
  #96
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
That last paragraph pretty much says it all.

I will say it again and disagree if you will. Centre is the most important position outside the crease. You need a good quality core group of centres to win. Ribeiro does not fit the profile and he MUST go. End of story. We will need a better #2 centre to improve our record on the road and compete for home ice in the playoffs. That will not happen until Mike Ribeiro is gone.
And who are those or this fantastic second line centers that could be " the One " , and that doesn't cost more than Ribeiro . Please name me few players that are free , unexpensive and that want to play here .

I am waiting your answer .

goalchenyuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2006, 12:41 PM
  #97
Squeaky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
So you're saying put Ribeiro at the 3rd-line wing position?
I'd be far more tempted to put him as the third or fourth line center, then use him as a PP specialist. Comparing him to Whitney doesn't mean I think he should BE Whitney.

I hate that I have to clarify blatantly obvious things like that.

Squeaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2006, 06:02 AM
  #98
habslife
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Close to the Sens
Country: Canada
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catch-22 View Post
That I am comparing our supposed #2 centre to other (winning) #2 centres while you find it convenient to compare Ribeiro to role players playing at the 3rd-4th line wing positions???? That, sir, is a glaring problem. I am showing you what it takes in the #2 centre positions to win. You want Ribeiro to play on the second line, yet you want to compare him to 4th line role players to show that he is viable. That is obviously out of convenience amd makes no sense at all.
Now let's talk about our first line centre...!!!

habslife 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 07:35 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.