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

Do Habs fans think that Bergevin is going to ice this roster ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-02-2013, 12:44 PM
  #26
CaptainBenn
King Thranduil swag
 
CaptainBenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 4,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elsubz View Post
He lucked out last year with BGally having a calder worthy year and AGally being able to keep up numbers in the NHL. He really hasn't made any moves to really improve our roster.
This. Would have been an awful season without the rookies. Passive GM is passive.

CaptainBenn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 12:45 PM
  #27
Beaker
In My Lab Goggles
 
Beaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In The Lab.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,524
vCash: 500
Make playoffs year before?

We can't possibly ice this team.

Beaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 12:54 PM
  #28
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 12,507
vCash: 500
we overachieved.

yes, we will go in with that roster

no, i don't care and im ok with that

2 words: long term.

the end

the bottom line is when ONE ****ING defensemen goes down and your whole team goes down, your team still has massive issues from the previous year and you're still rebuilding/re-tooling.re-whateverthe**** and you have to deal with it.

the worst part is that if MB had gone out and signed clarkson or whatever, or do all the changes he would have to do to make this team more cup-ready team NOW (besides the fact that we dont have ANYTHING to give to ANYONE to get ANYTHING, but i digress), this board would be filled with little girly whines so **** off.

ask yourself this: what if we don't make the playoff this year? are the 'get contending now' team gonna stand up and get what they deserve?

two years ago: we suck trade everyone, rebuild from scratch, **** the world
this year: woo! we rule, we can finally contend, get stuff

somebody explains to me why this off-season is the worst ever on this ****ing website? heightened expectations? cocaine instead of fluoride in the water?

can we have a house rule where whenever you say: "we should have gotten bigger", you say what trade you would have done to get bigger, then we all get to comment on how ******** that proposal is. it would make this entire board more intellismart like...

MasterDecoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:00 PM
  #29
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,218
vCash: 500
I really can't see us going into the season without making any moves.

We still have $3.5 M in the bank and need another defensemen and depth forward.

With teams over the cap, unsigned UFA/RFA's etc I think there will be movement come end of August/beginning of September or during training camp. If not, I'd be really surprised.

shutehinside is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:03 PM
  #30
BigDaddyLurch
#FireDaSystem
 
BigDaddyLurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Exiled from Reality
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shutehinside View Post
I really can't see us going into the season without making any moves.

We still have $3.5 M in the bank and need another defensemen and depth forward.

With teams over the cap, unsigned UFA/RFA's etc I think there will be movement come end of August/beginning of September or during training camp. If not, I'd be really surprised.
LA is a good place to start looking, if I'm Bergevin; they need to trim personnel on both F & D, making young guys like Clifford (I know, he just signed, but still...), King, Ellerby and Martinez available for a half-decent price...

BigDaddyLurch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:10 PM
  #31
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elsubz View Post
He lucked out last year with BGally having a calder worthy season and AGally being able to keep up numbers in the NHL. He really hasn't made any moves to really improve our roster.
Let's just ignore the probability that these two kids are going to be better this year along with Tinordi and Eller. Perhaps the team is able to stay much healthier this season. There is also the fact that Price was bad last year....what if he turns it around?

People on these boards never learn and make the same mistakes EVERY year. Improvement usually is the product of internal progression and external additions are usually very overrated.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:12 PM
  #32
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLurch View Post
LA is a good place to start looking, if I'm Bergevin; they need to trim personnel on both F & D, making young guys like Clifford (I know, he just signed, but still...), King, Ellerby and Martinez available for a half-decent price...
I definitely had Clifford and Coborne on my mind when I wrote that post. There's going to be other teams and players available and we have dough to blow. That's why I think there's a good chance we end up pulling a trade or two.

Something else, but if Eller has a terrific camp, he might make DD obsolete sinner than expected. He could be a good piece for some team looking for a 2nd line centre while trying to she'd salary. One of many potential moves available out there.

shutehinside is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:13 PM
  #33
StellerEller
Registered User
 
StellerEller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,243
vCash: 351
Remember that last seasons success was a surprise. As much as im sure hes at least tried to shore up the roster, we cant expect the team to swing for the fences every year. Well likely take a bigger step next year with capspace being freed up and another year of experience for our young guys. Even if we dont make a major deal or signing, shedding some spare parts and having our young players grow (in addition to new rookies) our teams future will look much brighter.

StellerEller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:15 PM
  #34
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,675
vCash: 152
I wouldn't be shocked at all if it stayed like this. Maybe training camp we'll see some changes because we'll identity a weakness or surplus but I think Bergevin won't force something for sake of making a trade. I think he's comfortable STARTING the year as is. I doubt we'll remain like this all year round though.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:15 PM
  #35
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
we overachieved.

yes, we will go in with that roster

no, i don't care and im ok with that

2 words: long term.

the end

the bottom line is when ONE ****ING defensemen goes down and your whole team goes down, your team still has massive issues from the previous year and you're still rebuilding/re-tooling.re-whateverthe**** and you have to deal with it.

the worst part is that if MB had gone out and signed clarkson or whatever, or do all the changes he would have to do to make this team more cup-ready team NOW (besides the fact that we dont have ANYTHING to give to ANYONE to get ANYTHING, but i digress), this board would be filled with little girly whines so **** off.

ask yourself this: what if we don't make the playoff this year? are the 'get contending now' team gonna stand up and get what they deserve?

two years ago: we suck trade everyone, rebuild from scratch, **** the world
this year: woo! we rule, we can finally contend, get stuff

somebody explains to me why this off-season is the worst ever on this ****ing website? heightened expectations? cocaine instead of fluoride in the water?

can we have a house rule where whenever you say: "we should have gotten bigger", you say what trade you would have done to get bigger, then we all get to comment on how ******** that proposal is. it would make this entire board more intellismart like...
Great post and I second the motion for your proposal!

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:16 PM
  #36
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Per other thread, you very much do sign him to play a "top-9" role. (Although I don't like top-6/top-9/whatever classification schemes... too limiting... too stereotypical... the 4th line doesn't have to be a mixed bag of goons, rookies, and square pegs).

If he isn't physically capable of holding that much ice time, well, that'll show itself. If he is, great, we need a gritty physical player who can chip in on whichever line you want to call 1st/2nd/3rd. Somebody else will then have to play harder to match him and try to get the icetime back. It's win-win.

But anyway, I feel like the ship has sailed and yes, this lineup we see today is basically what we'll have to start the season. There are a lot of leftover UFAs, though, who will be seeking tryouts, and we may have one or two of those in camp in September, then we'll just see what circumstances arise (how well they play, whether we get any camp injuries) as to whether we end up signing one in Campolian/Bergeronian fashion.
Agree with a lot of what your saying but we had 1 open spot with Ryder leaving in the top 9 and Briere was signed....what I'm trying to say is that if we do sign Morrow, one forward has to moved, DD, Gionta, etc to make room for Morrow, because you can't sign morrow and just trade Moen, and say you opened a spot for Morrow because he isn't a 4th liner, and neither are the other guys named earlier.

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:16 PM
  #37
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post

can we have a house rule where whenever you say: "we should have gotten bigger", you say what trade you would have done to get bigger, then we all get to comment on how ******** that proposal is. it would make this entire board more intellismart like...
We could have kicked the tires on Matt hendricks who went to nashville for reasonable money. We dont need anymore soft scorers, we have plenty and we were fourth in scoring last year. Everyone thinks we needed to get a sandpaper guy with offensive skills, we dont. I dont like the Clarkson deal and it was too rich, but if we need to get bigger, getting temporarily smaller is NOT the answer. With Briere we are smaller and softer, I would have much preferred going into next year with last seasons team + parros than last seasons team + briere + parros. last year with hendricks and parros, while not ideal, looks a whole hell of a lot better.

Can we also have a house rule for those defending our roster that when the GM says it is his plan to get bigger, but not only fails to do this but gets SMALLER than the appropriate response is not
" well its not a bad contract and its only two years" or that blind faith that MB is gonna pull a rabbit out of his hat and make give the team more jam, is not a great way to run a franchise ?

I've said if before, i'm down with the long term plan. If MB wants to make the team bigger and tougher through the draft, i'm willing to wait it out. But to make these short sighted deals that actually make it harder to acheive the goal ( and not ignoring the fact that shrimpy feels like a consolation prize for not getting Vinny) is tough to stomach

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:23 PM
  #38
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,675
vCash: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
We could have kicked the tires on Matt hendricks who went to nashville for reasonable money. We dont need anymore soft scorers, we have plenty and we were fourth in scoring last year. Everyone thinks we needed to get a sandpaper guy with offensive skills, we dont. I dont like the Clarkson deal and it was too rich, but if we need to get bigger, getting temporarily smaller is NOT the answer. With Briere we are smaller and softer, I would have much preferred going into next year with last seasons team + parros than last seasons team + briere + parros. last year with hendricks and parros, while not ideal, looks a whole hell of a lot better.

Can we also have a house rule for those defending our roster that when the GM says it is his plan to get bigger, but not only fails to do this but gets SMALLER than the appropriate response is not
" well its not a bad contract and its only two years" or that blind faith that MB is gonna pull a rabbit out of his hat and make give the team more jam, is not a great way to run a franchise ?

I've said if before, i'm down with the long term plan. If MB wants to make the team bigger and tougher through the draft, i'm willing to wait it out. But to make these short sighted deals that actually make it harder to acheive the goal ( and not ignoring the fact that shrimpy feels like a consolation prize for not getting Vinny) is tough to stomach
Hendricks? Nothing against the guy but what's that gonna do?

Besides, we DO need a player who can be physical on top 6. Having a physical player who plays 10 min a game does very little.

The reason Subban agitates so well is because of his talent level. He's in everyone's face, hitting, scoring, deking and so on. If he were a scrub who smiled people wouldn't care.

Physicality alone is a waste of time, i'm not saying Hendricks is useless. I just feel we already have prust, moen, white, parros who fill that role and perhaps even better than he would.

Guys like Clarkson ARE the answer but not at the price/term given. They need to come from within.

Getting briere doesn't make us worse. Let's be honest here. He's an asset, you can bench him, change his line or do whatever. It doesn't matter, plus injuries happen. Adding proven talent is NEVER a bad thing if you can afford it and it doesn't handicap your future. I don't even care for Briere but with the top 6 forward depth we have it's easy to justify him playing less or properly distributing our talent to maximize their use by putting them in roles they will succeed.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:40 PM
  #39
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 12,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
We could have kicked the tires on Matt hendricks who went to nashville for reasonable money. We dont need anymore soft scorers, we have plenty and we were fourth in scoring last year. Everyone thinks we needed to get a sandpaper guy with offensive skills, we dont. I dont like the Clarkson deal and it was too rich, but if we need to get bigger, getting temporarily smaller is NOT the answer. With Briere we are smaller and softer, I would have much preferred going into next year with last seasons team + parros than last seasons team + briere + parros. last year with hendricks and parros, while not ideal, looks a whole hell of a lot better.

Can we also have a house rule for those defending our roster that when the GM says it is his plan to get bigger, but not only fails to do this but gets SMALLER than the appropriate response is not
" well its not a bad contract and its only two years" or that blind faith that MB is gonna pull a rabbit out of his hat and make give the team more jam, is not a great way to run a franchise ?

I've said if before, i'm down with the long term plan. If MB wants to make the team bigger and tougher through the draft, i'm willing to wait it out. But to make these short sighted deals that actually make it harder to acheive the goal ( and not ignoring the fact that shrimpy feels like a consolation prize for not getting Vinny) is tough to stomach
FA's can go wherever they want. it may sound like a cop-out but we are in a peculiar market, market-wise and tax-wise, and we are not privy to every negotiations but consider this: the only time we loaded up on quality UFAs, we ended up overpaying on all of them and rather ironically, all of the same poster that want to get all of those UFAs out, also want to get all the UFAs that were out... life's funny that way.

anyways i don't like hendricks much but i understand what you're saying. i guess bergy chose parros over hendricks - not that it has much effect on the roster either way but w/e

anyway, i like your post

the only thing that bothers me is that bergevin is trying to get the best of both world: rebuild while contending. i don't think it can work, but im willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. signing danny b is a rebuild while contending move, signing some random 6'+ dude that can barely play the game for the third line is a flat-out rebuild move.

furthermore: what LL said.

MasterDecoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:48 PM
  #40
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Hendricks? Nothing against the guy but what's that gonna do?
we will have one more forward who wont have to worry about the " you have to be this tall to ride" signs.

I have no illusions what hendricks can bring, but what he does bring is something we absolutely needed. What does shrimpy bring but another one small soft one dimensional player ? We are already filthy with players like that.

He fought 7 times last year ( including against prust, not to brandon) taking on guys like Horton and mcQuaid. Hes a guy good for about 5-10 scraps a year and about 100 PIM and did I mention that hes 6 even 210 and somewhat surprisingly a pretty god guy in shootouts ?

What's not to like ?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:54 PM
  #41
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,675
vCash: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
we will have one more forward who wont have to worry about the " you have to be this tall to ride" signs.

I have no illusions what hendricks can bring, but what he does bring is something we absolutely needed. What does shrimpy bring but another one small soft one dimensional player ? We are already filthy with players like that.

He fought 7 times last year ( including against prust, not to brandon) taking on guys like Horton and mcQuaid. Hes a guy good for about 5-10 scraps a year and about 100 PIM and did I mention that hes 6 even 210 and somewhat surprisingly a pretty god guy in shootouts ?

What's not to like ?
Who do you bench for Hendricks?

Pacioretty-DD-Gallagher
Bourque-Plekanec-Gionta
Galchenyuk-Eller-Briere
Prust-White-Moen
Parros

Remove DD, Briere or Gionta if you want. Already parros is 13th forward. It will still end up parros vs Hendricks and only 1 will play.

Also based on those 3 I mentioned, you'll be removing 40+ points or so as well.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:58 PM
  #42
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
FA's can go wherever they want. it may sound like a cop-out but we are in a peculiar market, market-wise and tax-wise, and we are not privy to every negotiations but consider this: the only time we loaded up on quality UFAs, we ended up overpaying on all of them and rather ironically, all of the same poster that want to get all of those UFAs out, also want to get all the UFAs that were out... life's funny that way.

anyways i don't like hendricks much but i understand what you're saying. i guess bergy chose parros over hendricks - not that it has much effect on the roster either way but w/e

anyway, i like your post

the only thing that bothers me is that bergevin is trying to get the best of both world: rebuild while contending. i don't think it can work, but im willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. signing danny b is a rebuild while contending move, signing some random 6'+ dude that can barely play the game for the third line is a flat-out rebuild move.

furthermore: what LL said.

There is a world of difference between parros and hendricks, if anything hendricks would be like prust-lite, as good as prust defensively, not as good as prust offensively and better than prust in shootouts. Close in fighting ability.

We could have got Hendricks for four years for what we are paying shrimpy for 2. And although its true ufas can sign anywhere, we know what he did sign for in nashville and we could have accomodated it if we werent so set on signing briere because we we left at the altar by vinny.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:58 PM
  #43
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habs03 View Post
He still shows he is capable of playing in a top 9 role, so why he, or eve mangement even bother spend the money that is needed to sign him to play the 4th line?
Where did I say that he couldn't play top 9? Have I even insinuated that he'd be a 4th liner?

I actually think the opposite. I think that at this point in his career, Morrow would be an excellent 3rd line winger (especially the way Therrien rotates his lines) who can fill in from time to time on the first or second line and be effective, and that he and Prust could do that. That's what I've been saying.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 01:58 PM
  #44
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Hendricks? Nothing against the guy but what's that gonna do?

Besides, we DO need a player who can be physical on top 6. Having a physical player who plays 10 min a game does very little.

The reason Subban agitates so well is because of his talent level. He's in everyone's face, hitting, scoring, deking and so on. If he were a scrub who smiled people wouldn't care.

Physicality alone is a waste of time, i'm not saying Hendricks is useless. I just feel we already have prust, moen, white, parros who fill that role and perhaps even better than he would.

Guys like Clarkson ARE the answer but not at the price/term given. They need to come from within.

Getting briere doesn't make us worse. Let's be honest here. He's an asset, you can bench him, change his line or do whatever. It doesn't matter, plus injuries happen. Adding proven talent is NEVER a bad thing if you can afford it and it doesn't handicap your future. I don't even care for Briere but with the top 6 forward depth we have it's easy to justify him playing less or properly distributing our talent to maximize their use by putting them in roles they will succeed.

Agree with you saying we need grit and size on the top lines, our 4 th line has more of an indinity under Bergevin, Prust Moen White Parros, way better than when we had Pyatt, Metro, Darche on the 4th line.

But disagree with Briere, he brings nothing that the team is lacking, he is an soft undersized offensive player, something we have too much off.

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 02:02 PM
  #45
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Who do you bench for Hendricks?

Pacioretty-DD-Gallagher
Bourque-Plekanec-Gionta
Galchenyuk-Eller-Briere
Prust-White-Moen
Parros

Remove DD, Briere or Gionta if you want. Already parros is 13th forward. It will still end up parros vs Hendricks and only 1 will play.

Also based on those 3 I mentioned, you'll be removing 40+ points or so as well.
we arent hurting for points, and hendricks >>>> moen becuase he will at least fight. And when we were getting out hat handed to us by the GD ottawa senators, i dont remember anyone thinking " if only we had an another soft small one dimensional scorer to pot 40 meaningless points " that things would have been different.

Hendricks plays center, more importantly he plays with Jam.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 02:02 PM
  #46
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Where did I say that he couldn't play top 9? Have I even insinuated that he'd be a 4th liner?

I actually think the opposite. I think that at this point in his career, Morrow would be an excellent 3rd line winger (especially the way Therrien rotates his lines) who can fill in from time to time on the first or second line and be effective, and that he and Prust could do that. That's what I've been saying.
Sorry if I misunderstood, but what Im saying, is to get Morrow, one of the top 9 forwards have to be moved to make room for him, you can't say your going to trade Moen to sign Morrow because Morrow and none of the other top 9 forward, patches, DD gallys Bourque Gionta plek,Briere are going to play the 4th line.

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 02:03 PM
  #47
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,675
vCash: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by habs03 View Post
Agree with you saying we need grit and size on the top lines, our 4 th line has more of an indinity under Bergevin, Prust Moen White Parros, way better than when we had Pyatt, Metro, Darche on the 4th line.

But disagree with Briere, he brings nothing that the team is lacking, he is an soft undersized offensive player, something we have too much off.
I agree on first count but disagree on 2nd. Depth is never bad. If Briere was on 1 year term I would've been happy with the deal. Now, I'm kind of "wait and see". I'm patient about it. I understand people's concerns but I want to be fair too. Let's give Briere a chance.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 02:08 PM
  #48
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,675
vCash: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
we arent hurting for points, and hendricks >>>> moen becuase he will at least fight. And when we were getting out hat handed to us by the GD ottawa senators, i dont remember anyone thinking " if only we had an another soft small one dimensional scorer to pot 40 meaningless points " that things would have been different.

Hendricks plays center, more importantly he plays with Jam.
We made a lot of goals in a shortended season. In a full season, who knows if we'll maintain it. We ended our regular season in terrible fashion and our playoffs resulted in lack of offense and breakdowns defensively. Improve our D? sure. But back up offensive ability isn't something we don't need. We got by for half a season, not a full one.

We got our ass handed to us by Ottawa because we couldn't score. At end of the day, people won't mind jumping others or doing whatever because they are in the lead and can afford a penalty.

FWIW, during that brawl, it wasn't DD, gionta and small guys on the ice.

White, Tinordi, Boullion(small but strong fighter for his size), Moen, Armstrong(not tough but has fought).

End of the day, 4 of those guys aren't shy to fighting and we lost the fights. That simple. Hendricks would've done what exactly?

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 02:10 PM
  #49
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
I agree on first count but disagree on 2nd. Depth is never bad. If Briere was on 1 year term I would've been happy with the deal. Now, I'm kind of "wait and see". I'm patient about it. I understand people's concerns but I want to be fair too. Let's give Briere a chance.
give him a chance to do what ? Grow 8 inches ? I'm not knocking Briere, he might have something left in the tank but what he brings WE DONT NEED and importantly what we NEED he CANNOT bring.

if on the path towards what the teams has said it will do, standing pat is a hell of a lot better than moving backwards. Saying that we are not hobbled long term by a bad move is not a virtue in my books. its far better to simply not make the bad move in the first place.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2013, 02:12 PM
  #50
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
I agree on first count but disagree on 2nd. Depth is never bad. If Briere was on 1 year term I would've been happy with the deal. Now, I'm kind of "wait and see". I'm patient about it. I understand people's concerns but I want to be fair too. Let's give Briere a chance.
I actually think Briere is a good player and will put up good numbers, even tho I hate the guy, but I just don't think he is what the team needs, I mean you can't seriously think of going anywhere in the playoffs with 4 of your top 9 forwards being small, and not plek small at 5'11, this is midget small at 5'7 5'8. To go with an undersized Dcore as well

habs03 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 08:52 PM.

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.