HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Luongo Thread: Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For (Mod Warning in OP)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-20-2012, 08:05 PM
  #901
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunshineRays View Post
Teams don't always make trades/acquisitions based on need. Did NYR really 'need' Nash? There were 19 other teams in the league who scored fewer goals than NYR last season. You'd think those teams would have a greater need for his services.

For whatever reason, Dreger says Florida is the frontrunner for Lu. Not sure if he's out to lunch or has an agenda. It's just strange to hear that bit of info.
Dreger still says this? I don't do twitter so if there is something new let me know.

Because other reporters feel it's a done deal to TO - John Shannon of sportsnet being one of them.

I just don't see a reason for Florida to move the assets, that's all.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:18 PM
  #902
SunshineRays
Registered User
 
SunshineRays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Dreger still says this? I don't do twitter so if there is something new let me know.

Because other reporters feel it's a done deal to TO - John Shannon of sportsnet being one of them.

I just don't see a reason for Florida to move the assets, that's all.

He said it a few weeks ago on an Insider Trading segment. I posted the link somewhere in this or previous Luongo thread. He said "Fla is still the front runner" edit: Oct 4 Inside trading

Lots of conflicting reports from different writers.


Last edited by SunshineRays: 11-20-2012 at 11:42 PM.
SunshineRays is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:46 PM
  #903
Orca Smash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Even when we had Ehrhoff (2011 playoffs) our offense was bad. It wasn't just the Boston series (although I don't think you could get worse than that pathetic showing). The Chicago and Nashville series were bad too.
I have to agree with y2k here, our secondary scoring has been killing us. Yes defense can always be better, but our defense is good. It could be better, and we could use a number 1, but before that I feel we desperately need a second line goal scorer. Nobody is getting us goals when it counts, this year post season, nobody on our second line was producing, they were not a threat at all.

Shut down the sedins and you have removed the majority of our goal scoring. As for kesler I just never see him doing a one man show like he did last year ever again. We desperately need a talented offensive player on our 2nd.

Orca Smash is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 03:06 AM
  #904
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,660
vCash: 500
^ And on the 3rd too.

vanuck is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 03:42 AM
  #905
Andy Dufresne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
You betcha, if you look at the entire team - the Sedin's scored, Kesler and Burrows scored, but the gap between their production and the next best forwards production in those playoffs was 10 point.

So we had 4 guys around 20 points in 25 games, then the next best forwards were around 9 or 10....

Shows me we greatly struggled with offensive/scoring depth.

Defense was fine....bieksa, ehrhoff and edler scored more than the remaining forwards.
Except you fail to mention that our 3rd line almost never got scored on. Lapierre was on the ice for 2 ES goals against through the first 3 rounds of the playoffs (Hansen 4, Torres 5). That's a mind blowing stat considering that line was used against every top 3 line the opponents iced, and almost never started in the offensive zone. They scored more than that themselves no matter how paltry their offensive production looks.

It's about out-scoring the opponent. Period. If you win 2-1 that's not better or worse than winning 5-4. Generally I hate the +- stat when it's used without context. The 5 man unit of Sedins/Burrows with Edler/Ehrhoff gave up an absurd number of goals at ES that nobody gave a **** about while we were on the run up to the finals. Maybe because they still looked like heroes in any fantasy hockey pool? I'm sure that doesn't apply to you, but there are some posters here who judge only by goals scored without applying any context to those stats.

I agree completely with the need to add somebody/anybody who can play with, and add to Kesler's line, but there's no need to rip what our 3rd line did during the cup run. It's no great feat that Ehrhoff outscored those guys when he was singularly responible for more goals against than all of them combined. Cups are won 5 on 5, so even if the reffing was complete *******, it still wasn't unexpected.

Andy Dufresne is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 03:46 AM
  #906
7thOverdrive
Registered User
 
7thOverdrive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Port Coquitlam
Country: Canada
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orca Smash View Post
I have to agree with y2k here, our secondary scoring has been killing us. Yes defense can always be better, but our defense is good. It could be better, and we could use a number 1, but before that I feel we desperately need a second line goal scorer. Nobody is getting us goals when it counts, this year post season, nobody on our second line was producing, they were not a threat at all.

Shut down the sedins and you have removed the majority of our goal scoring. As for kesler I just never see him doing a one man show like he did last year ever again. We desperately need a talented offensive player on our 2nd.
The second line really just needs a playmaker. Ideally, having Kassian on a line with Booth and Kesler would be dynamite. 3 players that play a power game, 2 shooters and 1 more of a playmaker.

But besides Kassian, there aren't that many viable playmakers that can fit into that role and that's really what Gillis should be looking for in a Luongo trade.

I know many of you hate the thought of getting Tim Connolly but if Gillis is trading with Burke, I'd assume Burke would want to send a cap dump over and the 'best' cap dump on Toronto would definitely be Tim Connolly. He only has 1 year left and he's an amazing albiet oft injured playmaker. Before last season, he was putting up pretty good numbers.

On that note, how do fans appeal to a trade like:
Connolly, Kadri, 1st round pick for Luongo?
Give or take some assets on both sides. Please don't **it on me, I just took a shower.

7thOverdrive is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 06:52 AM
  #907
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Well Gardiner looks pretty good down there, and the toronto media is hyping the hell out of Morgan Rielly.

Maybe with the rise of Rielly, Gardiner is now available.
No...the rise of Reilly means we have 2 solid young D men. Franson is unsigned...so we can't deal any defensemen.

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 07:45 AM
  #908
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
No...the rise of Reilly means we have 2 solid young D men. Franson is unsigned...so we can't deal any defensemen.
we can't deal any defensemen
we can't deal our 1st round pick
we can't deal any of our good prospects
we can't deal any of our top 6 talent

Now I know you're not directly saying these Liferleafer & that some of the "we can't" has been lightened up & are willing to in some capacity but I know that you know that you guys have to buck up to get Luongo because we aren't giving him away for nothing. Franson isn't signed? Sign him when the new CBA is in place & he will replace one of the other solid young d that you traded away to fill a position that has been in desperate need for years.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:05 AM
  #909
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
we can't deal any defensemen
we can't deal our 1st round pick
we can't deal any of our good prospects
we can't deal any of our top 6 talent

Now I know you're not directly saying these Liferleafer & that some of the "we can't" has been lightened up & are willing to in some capacity but I know that you know that you guys have to buck up to get Luongo because we aren't giving him away for nothing. Franson isn't signed? Sign him when the new CBA is in place & he will replace one of the other solid young d that you traded away to fill a position that has been in desperate need for years.
It is known here that Franson may not want to sign here. And it is also known that Gardiner was a nogo for Nash (early talks) and i can assure you he will be a nogo for Luongo. He is our best young NHL player, you don't deal those for older players. And even IF Franson signs, dealing Gardiner means we have to play Komi full time and have zero replacements with NHL experience..(except Ranger, not sure if his contract is 2way)

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:09 AM
  #910
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Also...i've only said 1 of the 3...

1.Top 6 forward...Lupul or Mac or Bozak.

2.1st...i have offered it.

3.Prospect...i have offered Kadri, Colborne, Ashton...etc

4.You've got me on "can't deal defensemen..." because we literally can't.

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:26 AM
  #911
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,046
vCash: 500
Defense is literally where the Leafs are strongest. Dealing from their makes the most sense. Dealing promising young centers when you still don't have a number 1 does not.

The only reason you think you can't trade those D is because the Kessel trade has scarred your collective fanbase. Giving up a top5 player or pick terrifies the bajeebus out of all of you, which is why whenever trades are discussed it's always a 2nd+garbage for an all-star.


Last edited by Wisp: 11-21-2012 at 08:35 AM.
Wisp is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:38 AM
  #912
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I never said any established player > any prospect. Not once. All I said is that I don't think Kadri's upside is any higher than Lupul's upside. Kadri has absolutely nothing on Lupul apart from "inexperience" that may help us teach him a defensive game.


All I said was that since Kadri's upside is no higher than Lupul's actual calibre right now, and therefore it makes no sense for a contending team to target a prospect who may develop into a player we could use instead of an actual player we could use.


Nope. You asked me to list _any_ established C/W/Ds that were offered at the time for Hodgson. I said this was a poor argument, and proved why with the Kostitsyn example. If you weren't trying to imply that, then you should not have worded your argument the way that you had



Even if Kadri's upside is no higher than Lupul's right now, you are making a leap/mistake by suggesting Lupul is more useful, even now. Primarily due to the drastic variation in his career. For instance, say Lupul is acquired and he repeats his putrid showings on ANA, EDM and PHI? Well then now you've just traded for an experienced "flop" while getting little additional future hope/value out of the rest of the deal (due to Lupul's own value being high to TO).



It's all about projection. If VAN feels that a mature prospect like Kadri can contribute now _and_ keep developing, or if they feel that Lupul is currently in the optimal environment (feeding off Kessel), then Kadri absolutely makes more sense. Granted, normally I would agree that an established asset would seem to help a contending team more. However, with Lupul's helter skelter career and sordid injury history, to me he is just as much of a risk. Just as much of a wildcard. Simply put, this is as good as it gets for Lupul IMO, and I think bringing him here will only hurt him and the team.




Quote:
Everytime I've seen his position listed it's been as C/LW, such as herehttp://games.espn.go.com/fhl/tools/p...s?proTeamId=21

or herehttp://leafs4life.net/leaf_prospects.html

etc.


I've seen him listed as a C only on AHL.com, doesn't mean much. Watch his clip below and the corresponding markers.



Quote:
You said we had no more holes on our roster that needed filling, so we may as well get as much value as possible. It shouldn't matter how well the value fits our needs, as long as it's there, right?


Yes I did, what has more value? 5 1sts or 10 2nds? To me, it's the 5 1sts. Were you trying to equate Kadri to the 10 2nds? If you were, the gap between a 1st and a 2nd is statistically significant, much more meaningful than the gap between Kadri and Lupul. (although this is completely pie in the sky stuff) Again, Lupul ranges from PPG 1st liner with issues to salary dump. So you would have to _fix_ his value first to create a sound argument = good luck. What calibre of player is he really (on his own)?



Quote:
I do like Kadri. You can tell by the fact that I think his upside is a PPG forward with a questionable defensive game. That doesn't mean he's a lock to reach it anytime soon, if ever.


I'm assuming you meant Kadri plays RW, although I have never seen that, but Lupul has played RW at the NHL level to. I don't see any advantage Kadri has at RW over Lupul.


Kadri's inherent advantage offensively is on his off-wing, just like it is for Lupul. NK is a left-shot, so his off-wing is the RW. Lupul is a right-shot, so his off-wing is the LW. Understand?


Kadri is capable at all 3 forward positions. He has played all 3. Instead of listing line-ups, I just watched him on this clip


Here are the markers he is seen creating on his off-wing (RW): 30 seconds, 40, 1:23, 2:40, 2:56, 3:00 (repeated over and over), 5:10, 5:40 and 5:50. You were saying?


Lastly, I never claimed Kadri was a lock to be a PPG forward in the NHL, but then I don't think Lupul is a lock to repeat it. That was more my point.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:41 AM
  #913
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
Defense is literally where the Leafs are strongest. Dealing from their makes the most sense. Dealing promising young centers when you still don't have a number 1 does not.

The only reason you think you can't trade those D is because the Kessel trade has scarred your collective fanbase. Giving up a top5 player or pick terrifies the bajeebus out of all of you, which is why whenever trades are discussed it's always a 2nd+garbage for an all-star.
Lol...

Phaneuf/Gunnar
Gardiner/Liles
Komi (ugh)/Franson??/???

If you remove Gardiner...please tell me were the strength is. Reilly is 18 years old, Holzer/Blacker have proven nothing in the NHL...Finn is a long way off. The Kessel trade doesn't have anything to do with the Luongo offerings...we dealt youth for youth(and a dam good one) not a 33 year old vet.

So....going by yhe youth for youth...you want Gardiner...put Schnieder on the table and we tweak from there.

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:11 AM
  #914
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,046
vCash: 500
You want Schneider, start adding names like Kessel instead of just Gardiner/Reilly. I'm dead serious.

Wisp is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:41 AM
  #915
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
You want Schneider, start adding names like Kessel instead of just Gardiner/Reilly. I'm dead serious.
Again...lol.

So, our young D-man who lead alot of rookie d stats and played in 74 games last season needs to be added to to get a 33 year old goalie....your young goalie who has played in 68 games warrants a 24 year old PPG forward plus?...alrighty.

Why don't you offer Schnieder to Chicago for Hossa? Same sort of thing...right? Your best young NHL player for an elite proven older vet on a big contract, of course you will have to add as a proven elite player is worth more than a relatively unproven young player....sound enticing?


Last edited by Liferleafer: 11-21-2012 at 09:47 AM.
Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:44 AM
  #916
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Again...lol.

Hey LL, in your opinion, what position does Kadri excel most playing? C/LW/RW?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:50 AM
  #917
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Hey LL, in your opinion, what position does Kadri excel most playing? C/LW/RW?
I like him better on the wing, he is a natural center but lacks the size to be impact. He can play either wing with about the same result but has played mostly LW. Even though his points this year don't show it (2G 12A) he is more of a shoot first guy, not exactly ideal for a center.

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:57 AM
  #918
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I like him better on the wing, he is a natural center but lacks the size to be impact. He can play either wing with about the same result but has played mostly LW. Even though his points this year don't show it (2G 12A) he is more of a shoot first guy, not exactly ideal for a center.


While I agree that he can play either wing well, I wonder why that if he is a shoot-first player that he is played more by Eakins on his LW, which kind of forces him to pass into the middle of the ice or take an odd angled shot? Makes more sense for him to have the offensive zone open up more by playing his off-wing.



He is an offensive player. Give him the best opportunity to create offense by putting him on his off-wing permanently.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:01 AM
  #919
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
While I agree that he can play either wing well, I wonder why that if he is a shoot-first player that he is played more by Eakins on his LW, which kind of forces him to pass into the middle of the ice or take an odd angled shot? Makes more sense for him to have the offensive zone open up more by playing his off-wing.



He is an offensive player. Give him the best opportunity to create offense by putting him on his off-wing permanently.
Agreed, he has spent the majority of his time on LW, i think Eakins is experimenting with him on his off wing with Colborne at C....seems to be working ok.

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:08 AM
  #920
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Agreed, he has spent the majority of his time on LW, i think Eakins is experimenting with him on his off wing with Colborne at C....seems to be working ok.


I thought so. In the game vs. the rampage, where he broke out, he was on the RW.


His total of 2 goals/12 assists, for a shooter, suggests that he has had to unnecessarily adjust his game to become more of a passer.


It's the defensive end. A lot easier for him to play his natural wing on the defensive side of the puck... and I think it's a mistake.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:32 AM
  #921
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I thought so. In the game vs. the rampage, where he broke out, he was on the RW.


His total of 2 goals/12 assists, for a shooter, suggests that he has had to unnecessarily adjust his game to become more of a passer.


It's the defensive end. A lot easier for him to play his natural wing on the defensive side of the puck... and I think it's a mistake.
I think, at least offensively, he sees the game better from his off wing. I also like the one timer on the PP from there. I'll say again, since his benching, he seems to be buying in....playing better D and more of a "team" guy.

Liferleafer is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:37 AM
  #922
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,222
vCash: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Nope. You asked me to list _any_ established C/W/Ds that were offered at the time for Hodgson. I said this was a poor argument, and proved why with the Kostitsyn example. If you weren't trying to imply that, then you should not have worded your argument the way that you had
Kostitsyn is not a player that we need. Gillis is trying to add a player with an intimidation factor that can play in a top-6 role. As no one was offering one for Hodgson, he took the next best thing and took a prospect who projects like that. If Gillis traded Hodgson for a Kostitsyn-like forward you might have a point. But he didn't

Also, much as I hate to say it, but Gillis has a thing about avoiding Russian players.

Quote:
Even if Kadri's upside is no higher than Lupul's right now, you are making a leap/mistake by suggesting Lupul is more useful, even now. Primarily due to the drastic variation in his career. For instance, say Lupul is acquired and he repeats his putrid showings on ANA, EDM and PHI? Well then now you've just traded for an experienced "flop" while getting little additional future hope/value out of the rest of the deal (due to Lupul's own value being high to TO).
Yeah, and Kadri could bust. You either think they will perform or they won't. I don't see why Lupul flopping is any more likely than Kadri busting, I think both are fairly unlikely.


Quote:

It's all about projection. If VAN feels that a mature prospect like Kadri can contribute now _and_ keep developing, or if they feel that Lupul is currently in the optimal environment (feeding off Kessel), then Kadri absolutely makes more sense. Granted, normally I would agree that an established asset would seem to help a contending team more. However, with Lupul's helter skelter career and sordid injury history, to me he is just as much of a risk. Just as much of a wildcard. Simply put, this is as good as it gets for Lupul IMO, and I think bringing him here will only hurt him and the team.

Well I disagree. I'm not going to assume a player is going to get injured and not trade for him because of that. And the "feeding of Kessel" argument works both ways. He also played with Bozak. Imagine if he got to play with a legitimate centre?



Quote:
I've seen him listed as a C only on AHL.com, doesn't mean much. Watch his clip below and the corresponding markers.
It's possible he's played his off-wing with some success in the past, but I really don't see it as being any significant advantage over Lupul who has done so at the NHL level as well.


Quote:

Yes I did, what has more value? 5 1sts or 10 2nds? To me, it's the 5 1sts. Were you trying to equate Kadri to the 10 2nds? If you were, the gap between a 1st and a 2nd is statistically significant, much more meaningful than the gap between Kadri and Lupul. (although this is completely pie in the sky stuff) Again, Lupul ranges from PPG 1st liner with issues to salary dump. So you would have to _fix_ his value first to create a sound argument = good luck. What calibre of player is he really (on his own)?
Of course 5 1sts is more valuable. But that wasn't what I asked. 10 2nds is probably more than fair "value" for Luongo, it simply doesn't address our needs as well, as even if we do end up getting 2 or 3 impact players it won't be that beneficial to us, as it doesn't meet our needs as well as a return of even, say, 3 1sts. And 3 1sts doesn't meet our needs as a return like Phil Kessel.

Just because the value might be there doesn't mean you should pull the trigger.




Quote:
Kadri's inherent advantage offensively is on his off-wing, just like it is for Lupul. NK is a left-shot, so his off-wing is the RW. Lupul is a right-shot, so his off-wing is the LW. Understand?




Kadri is capable at all 3 forward positions. He has played all 3. Instead of listing line-ups, I just watched him on this clip


Here are the markers he is seen creating on his off-wing (RW): 30 seconds, 40, 1:23, 2:40, 2:56, 3:00 (repeated over and over), 5:10, 5:40 and 5:50. You were saying?


Lastly, I never claimed Kadri was a lock to be a PPG forward in the NHL, but then I don't think Lupul is a lock to repeat it. That was more my point.
Fair enough, although I still don't see that as any advantage over Lupul. Both can play either wing. And I have no idea where you got this idea that offensive players automatically work better on their off-wing. Daniel Sedin shoots left, plays left. Corey Perry shoots right, plays right. It's completely a matter of preference to the player.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:40 AM
  #923
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I think, at least offensively, he sees the game better from his off wing. I also like the one timer on the PP from there. I'll say again, since his benching, he seems to be buying in....playing better D and more of a "team" guy.


Agreed. In fact, I have always seen it this way for Kadri. Put him on the off-wing permanently and let him work. He seems more dangerous there because he can shoot better from that side.


I like his versatility. I'm still not sure if he secures a spot this year in the NHL, but he's definitely ramped up his game.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:55 AM
  #924
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,304
vCash: 500
Regardless of their talent, do Kadri and/or Lupul seem like the kind of people that Gillis would bring here? Those players look much more like the problem in Toronto then the solution here.

Scurr is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 10:58 AM
  #925
Liferleafer
RIP Pat
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Regardless of their talent, do Kadri and/or Lupul seem like the kind of people that Gillis would bring here? Those players look much more like the problem in Toronto then the solution here.
66 games....67 points and +1 on a defensively crap team and a guy who pubicly thanked BB for the opportunity...yup, real problem for us.

Liferleafer is online now  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:20 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.