HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

PRE-SEASON--Toronto Maple Leafs @ St. Louis Blues -- 8:30pm EST, Oct. 1/08

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-01-2008, 04:10 PM
  #51
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Kulemin and Grabovski were doing a criss cross type of move last game and banged legs.

mooseOAK* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:10 PM
  #52
iPunch
50 Mission Cap
 
iPunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho99 View Post
Wouldn't be surprised if the Leafs gave Kulemin an AHL conditioning stint before he was brought back into the lineup...
Isnt he on a 1-way contract?

iPunch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:11 PM
  #53
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bad Guys View Post
Isnt he on a 1-way contract?
No, entry level contracts are two-way by rule.

mooseOAK* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:11 PM
  #54
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 60,474
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ugotmybeef View Post
Eaz must be watching the game backwards or some retarded maple beleaf game.
Eazy is not a big fan of any of Fletcher's additions and wants to see other former players instead getting opportunities.

The new players were brought in for the very reason though because the former group was already evaluated by the management team and ruled out early.

__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:16 PM
  #55
EazyB97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Eazy is not a big fan of any of Fletcher's additions and wants to see other former players instead getting opportunities.

The new players were brought in for the very reason though because the former group was already evaluated by the management team and ruled out early.
Not true at all. I've made a number of comments about Schenn this pre-season and how I think he should stick. Also think Hagman's been one of our best forwards this pre-season. Roger's is simply a weak hockey player. This is a player who couldn't crack the CHL and has huge holes in his game. He lacks physical talent and doesn't see the ice well. It's not a strong combo. I'm able to put my dislike of Fletcher aside and evaluate the players. I don't feel the need to force an agenda on others, I'll offer my opinion and debate, but I won't blindly make false claims like some others on here.

EazyB97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:18 PM
  #56
ugotmybeef*
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: LA BABY!!
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EazyB97 View Post
Not true at all. I've been very complimentary of Schenn this pre-season and think he should stick. Also think Hagman's been one of our best forwards this pre-season. Roger's is simply a weak hockey player. I'm able to put my dislike of Fletcher aside and evaluate the players. I don't feel the need to force an agenda on others, I'll offer my opinion and debate, but I won't blindly make false claims like some others on here.
That's funny I thought you were complaining about signing Hagman for 3 million dollars.

ugotmybeef* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:22 PM
  #57
EazyB97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ugotmybeef View Post
That's funny I thought you were complaining about signing Hagman for 3 million dollars.
It's a move I wouldn't have made, but one I did see potential in. That's the problem when you argue blindly against something. You think it's black and white. Alot of posters seem to get caught up in this. I wouldn't have signed Hagman for a few reasons. One was I worry about what he's proven so far. I see potential, but he's a veteran who had one good offensive year. That said, I like the way he plays and like how he's looked this pre-season. It seems like he'll help the team out. Do you see how that works? I would've taken the team in a different direction, but I don't hate Hagman as a player and won't dismiss him because I disagree with bringing him in.

EazyB97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:26 PM
  #58
ugotmybeef*
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: LA BABY!!
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EazyB97 View Post
It's a move I wouldn't have made, but one I did see potential in. That's the problem when you argue blindly against something. You think it's black and white. Alot of posters seem to get caught up in this. I wouldn't have signed Hagman for a few reasons. One was I worry about what he's proven so far. I see potential, but he's a veteran who had one good offensive year. That said, I like the way he plays and like how he's looked this pre-season. It seems like he'll help the team out. Do you see how that works? I would've taken the team in a different direction, but I don't hate Hagman as a player and won't dismiss him because I disagree with bringing him in.
I think alot of posters here know Hagman brings. The only problem is you trapped in your fantasy world. Would your move been keeping the likes of Tucker, Raycroft, etc. without resorting to buyouts. The whole teams unproven, that's the least of our concerns.

ugotmybeef* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:27 PM
  #59
LTL
Registered User
 
LTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.T
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EazyB97 View Post
It's a move I wouldn't have made, but one I did see potential in. That's the problem when you argue blindly against something. You think it's black and white. Alot of posters seem to get caught up in this. I wouldn't have signed Hagman for a few reasons. One was I worry about what he's proven so far. I see potential, but he's a veteran who had one good offensive year. That said, I like the way he plays and like how he's looked this pre-season. It seems like he'll help the team out. Do you see how that works? I would've taken the team in a different direction, but I don't hate Hagman as a player and won't dismiss him because I disagree with bringing him in.
I agree with the whole one year wonder thing and it's much like the Blake signing in that respect. The bonus about the Hagman signing is he very competent defensively so each and every shift he contributes something even if he's isn't scoring.

Hagman was on my target list before July1st and I was floored when we actually inked him to a deal. When all is said and done, he'll earn every penny of that contract.

The other signings (Finger and Frogren) I haven't seen enough to form a real opinion on either.

LTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:30 PM
  #60
TheLeastOfTheBunch
Registered User
 
TheLeastOfTheBunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,668
vCash: 500
Sucks for Kulemin but we need him to be 100% healthy and the conditioning stint through the AHL might benefit him greatly.

TheLeastOfTheBunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:36 PM
  #61
Shaggyman
Registered User
 
Shaggyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLeastOfTheBunch View Post
Sucks for Kulemin but we need him to be 100% healthy and the conditioning stint through the AHL might benefit him greatly.
I think RW handled the Kulemin situation incorrectly. He was struggling and he kept throwing him out there. He played every preseason game to date and I am not suprised he was hurt. He should have sat him in the pressbox for a few games to rest and watch and learn.

Its tough to throw a guy into 5 games in like 7 days at the beggining of the season and expect him to respond and not get hurt. My 2 cents.

Shaggyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:39 PM
  #62
alienanton*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Leaf Nation
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggyman View Post
I think RW handled the Kulemin situation incorrectly. He was struggling and he kept throwing him out there. He played every preseason game to date and I am not suprised he was hurt. He should have sat him in the pressbox for a few games to rest and watch and learn.

Its tough to throw a guy into 5 games in like 7 days at the beggining of the season and expect him to respond and not get hurt. My 2 cents.
so because he was struggling to adjust to the NA game he should sit on the bench and watch?

glad you're not coaching.

alienanton* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:41 PM
  #63
EazyB97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ugotmybeef View Post
I think alot of posters here know Hagman brings. The only problem is you trapped in your fantasy world. Would your move been keeping the likes of Tucker, Raycroft, etc. without resorting to buyouts. The whole teams unproven, that's the least of our concerns.
Fantasy world how? Because I suggested keeping Raycroft and sending him down or playing him? Because I would've threatened McCabe, Kaberle and Tucker at the deadline in the offseason and at the deadline to move? I suggested Fletcher wasn't forceful enough and it was a move that backfired. My problem came in the long-term cap-hit of buying out Tucker and the way McCabe was handled after the Kubina threat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTL View Post
I agree with the whole one year wonder thing and it's much like the Blake signing in that respect. The bonus about the Hagman signing is he very competent defensively so each and every shift he contributes something even if he's isn't scoring.

Hagman was on my target list before July1st and I was floored when we actually inked him to a deal. When all is said and done, he'll earn every penny of that contract.

The other signings (Finger and Frogren) I haven't seen enough to form a real opinion on either.
In fairness to Blake, he's played well after the lock-out (aside from last year) and made his career from being responsible defensively. He had a poor season last year, but he did have a longer history of good offensive production behind him.

I don't like what Fletcher's done because I think the rebuild has been rushed. I think he rushed to trade away McCabe, rushed to get rid of Tucker, I think he rushed into waiving Welly and rushed into finding his replacement. This doesn't mean I won't compliment a player that he brought in. Like I said, I really like what Hagman's brought to the table so far. If Finger is what some posters claim, I'll be happy, but from what I saw last year and in his first pre-season, I wouldn't have spent the money on him. Doesn't mean I want him run out of town or think he'll be terribly awful and will do what I can to make it seem like he is.

EazyB97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:45 PM
  #64
ugotmybeef*
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: LA BABY!!
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EazyB97 View Post
Fantasy world how? Because I suggested keeping Raycroft and sending him down or playing him? Because I would've threatened McCabe, Kaberle and Tucker at the deadline in the offseason and at the deadline to move? I suggested Fletcher wasn't forceful enough and it was a move that backfired. My problem came in the long-term cap-hit of buying out Tucker and the way McCabe was handled after the Kubina threat.


In fairness to Blake, he's played well after the lock-out (aside from last year) and made his career from being responsible defensively. He had a poor season last year, but he did have a longer history of good offensive production behind him.

I don't like what Fletcher's done because I think the rebuild has been rushed. I think he rushed to trade away McCabe, rushed to get rid of Tucker, I think he rushed into waiving Welly and rushed into finding his replacement. This doesn't mean I won't compliment a player that he brought in. Like I said, I really like what Hagman's brought to the table so far. If Finger is what some posters claim, I'll be happy, but from what I saw last year and in his first pre-season, I wouldn't have spent the money on him. Doesn't mean I want him run out of town or think he'll be terribly awful and will do what I can to make it seem like he is.
funny thing is no body noticed Belfour's caphit when we bought him out. Tucker's cap hit is nothing and we're not spending to the cap the next two years so Raycroft's hit is nothing. I used those guys as examples, I'll use Grabo as an example, you said you didn't like what you saw but other posters thought he was impressive. So which game were you watching.

ugotmybeef* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:46 PM
  #65
Shaggyman
Registered User
 
Shaggyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienanton View Post
so because he was struggling to adjust to the NA game he should sit on the bench and watch?

glad you're not coaching.
Thats exactly what he should do. I am not saying sit him out for all the games, but maybe 1 or 2. He was the only Leaf to play every game and it was obvious he was not getting it. He showed flashes but nothing prolonged. Somtimes a game in the box will help a young player see the game from a different angle and give him a different perspective.

That being said my point was more from a conditioning standpoint. These games are much closer together then in the regular season and these guys are still working themselves into game shape. If you play a guy in every preseason game you will wear him down and risk an injury. Even Schenn sat out a game. This is all I am saying. Its only my opinion, never said I should be the coach.

Shaggyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:51 PM
  #66
LTL
Registered User
 
LTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.T
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EazyB97 View Post
Fantasy world how? Because I suggested keeping Raycroft and sending him down or playing him? Because I would've threatened McCabe, Kaberle and Tucker at the deadline in the offseason and at the deadline to move? I suggested Fletcher wasn't forceful enough and it was a move that backfired. My problem came in the long-term cap-hit of buying out Tucker and the way McCabe was handled after the Kubina threat.


In fairness to Blake, he's played well after the lock-out (aside from last year) and made his career from being responsible defensively. He had a poor season last year, but he did have a longer history of good offensive production behind him.

I don't like what Fletcher's done because I think the rebuild has been rushed. I think he rushed to trade away McCabe, rushed to get rid of Tucker, I think he rushed into waiving Welly and rushed into finding his replacement. This doesn't mean I won't compliment a player that he brought in. Like I said, I really like what Hagman's brought to the table so far. If Finger is what some posters claim, I'll be happy, but from what I saw last year and in his first pre-season, I wouldn't have spent the money on him. Doesn't mean I want him run out of town or think he'll be terribly awful and will do what I can to make it seem like he is.
I would rather have the axe drop in one offseason then spread it over 2-3 years. I think this helps Wilson out much more then having players around both feel won't buy into whatever he's selling. Not to mention the much quicker drop to the bottom of the league which benefits us come draft time.

A majority of the players Fletch has brought in are "team first" type players with sandpaper in their resumes. This doesn't mean all of the players going out didn't have any of these qualities. It makes "selling the strategy" MUCH easier when you remove the current leadership who've been through two coaches already.

No doubt Fletch has taken a few BIG chances on some of his acquisitions: Finger and Grabovski.

We'll see how both play out over the course of the season.

LTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:55 PM
  #67
zeke
#freewilly
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 28,954
vCash: 500
You can like Hagman and Finger as players, and still think signing them to those contracts was a bad move.

You can like Schenn as a player, and still think picking him 5th was a bad move.

You can like what Grabovski, Mayers, Hollweg bring to the table, and still think giving up picks for them and not giving pre-existing borderline players a chance were bad moves.

You can dislike Tucker, McCabe, and Wellwood and still think paying to give them away was a bad move.

zeke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 04:57 PM
  #68
EazyB97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ugotmybeef View Post
funny thing is no body noticed Belfour's caphit when we bought him out. Tucker's cap hit is nothing and we're not spending to the cap the next two years so Raycroft's hit is nothing. I used those guys as examples, I'll use Grabo as an example, you said you didn't like what you saw but other posters thought he was impressive. So which game were you watching.
I was watching the same one, but I watch the defensive side of the puck more than usual. I watch the offensive creativity and look at the options for each play as well. I see what he did and what he should have done, then evaluate. Now you seem to think others having the same opinion validates it, I know a few people who share my opinion. So does that make you feel better? Maybe you need a list of the names in order to do that?

PS - Tucker's cap hit isn't nothing, it's low. It puts us down a mill less than we really should be. Some here noticed it when we signed someone like Blake and weren't able to upgrade other areas.

EazyB97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 05:34 PM
  #69
LTL
Registered User
 
LTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.T
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,288
vCash: 500
Leafs nursing injuries for St. Louis game

Quote:
Defenceman Richard Petiot will see his first exhibition game action with the Maple Leafs tonight in St. Louis.

In 40 games last season with Manchester of the AHL, Petiot had seven points and 56 penalty minutes.

Curtis Joseph is going to start for the Leafs against St. Louis on Wednesday night. It's just his second action of the pre-season, so the veteran netminder wants lots of action.

"I want to face a lot of shots, I want to get a lot of work," said Joseph. "As a goalie you want to get in to the game as early as possible. I'm not going to get a lot of work in the regular season, so I've got to stay sharp."

Five Leafs are nursing injuries and did not make the trip to St. Louis for tonight's game: defencemen Jeff Finger (foot) and Pavel Kubina (finger), as well as forwards Dominic Moore (groin), Jason Blake (knee) and LW Nikolai Kulemin (knee).

Link

LTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 05:42 PM
  #70
Acekicker123
Registered User
 
Acekicker123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,513
vCash: 500
Should be fun to see Petiot play. 6'4 210 lbs. He was a significant prospect for Los Angeles, a possible bruising, top 4 shutdown defenseman, before suffering a severe injury.

Just turned 26, so still quite young. Could make for an interesting reclamation project with the Marlies this year.

Acekicker123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 05:53 PM
  #71
Lauro
Teeder
 
Lauro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Berlin
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTL View Post
Leafs nursing injuries for St. Louis game
LTL, thanks for changing your avatar so I can concentrate on reading your posts now!

Lauro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 06:03 PM
  #72
LTL
Registered User
 
LTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.T
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lauro View Post
LTL, thanks for changing your avatar so I can concentrate on reading your posts now!
Maybe that's not such a good thing

Same woman though, Kate Beckinsale.

LTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 06:06 PM
  #73
Antropovsky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,521
vCash: 500
Hagman Steen Mitchell
Hollweg Bell Mayers


Two of the lines that will be going tonight.

7 D Also going tonight.

That leaves, Rogers/Tlusty/Grabovski/Earl/Devereaux? to fill out the bottom 6.


Last edited by Antropovsky: 10-01-2008 at 06:14 PM.
Antropovsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 06:07 PM
  #74
Shaggyman
Registered User
 
Shaggyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTL View Post
Maybe that's not such a good thing

Same woman though, Kate Beckinsale.
She is smoking hot, especially in the Underworld movies.

Shaggyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-01-2008, 06:12 PM
  #75
iPunch
50 Mission Cap
 
iPunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antropovsky View Post
Hagman Steen Mitchell
Hollweg Bell Mayers


Two of the lines that will be going tonight.

7 D Also going tonight.
Think I saw this line somewhere today;

Tlusty Grabovski Deveraux

iPunch is online now   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 01:51 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.