HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Dubinsky on the block (Garrioch)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-14-2010, 07:56 PM
  #126
Callahan Auto
Rational Police
 
Callahan Auto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
I haven't seen YOUR statistical analysis, but I know his numbers. I don't know how I could convince you, either. It's obviously a case of different standards. The guy disappears for games at a time, and clearly isn't good enough to create offense for others with any sort of consistency. When I look at the best teams in the league, and try to fit him on the rosters of those teams, he almost always slots in as a third line center.
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p...5#post23827165


Right now, he is playing like a 50 point player and that is definitely second line worthy. Whether he should play at center or at wing is definitely debatable but I think he's already a second line player. Especially when you take into consideration all of the benefits of his game.

Callahan Auto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 07:57 PM
  #127
EJS280
Registered User
 
EJS280's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 503
vCash: 500
hes not gonna put up 20 goals and 50-60 points on the 3rd line...he has a hard time doing that playing with one of the best goal scorers in the world

EJS280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 07:58 PM
  #128
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
And last season he played with Zherdev on his wing, this year he's played primarily with Gaborik, without either one, he's been invisible. Do you choose not to acknowledge that?

I compared him with 3 different players that, at multiple times over their careers, have looked like they would reach another plateau, but it never came to fruition. It has nothing to do with my opinion of Dubinsky, but everything to do with overvaluing a player based on selective memory.
He played PART of the season with Zherdev on his wing, and he's played about half of this season with Gaborik. I acknowledge that, but the bottom line is that whether it's with Jagr, Zherdev, Voros, Gaborik, Callahan, Jokinen or Drury, he keeps improving on his numbers. This is not a case of a player who got lined up with a superstar and put up stats for a season before disappearing.

As to your comparisons, you compared him with three players who for the most part (excepting Prucha for some of his time here) sucked. I get that you think you compared him to those three due to the hypothetical similarity that they all had potential to get to another level. I just think you're full of it. It's clear that you aren't the biggest fan of Dubinsky. To try and bolster your weak arguments on why you think a good, cheap, homegrown player should be shipped out, you chose to compare him to three players who, again, Prucha notwithstanding, have a reputation for being ****** players. You tried a cheap rhetorical tactic and got called on it. Those three players can NOT be compared to Dubinsky in any way shape or form in an argument for why he should be moved.

Quote:
Well then that's where we disagree. Dubinsky should be a better player than that. If he ends up as a 40 point player and we had, at several points, refused to trade him for a player that was proven to be better, I'd be very upset about that.
Then I assume you'll be starting threads any moment for why we should trade Staal, Callahan and Lundqvist, as well, right? Any player who doesn't maximize his potential by the age of 24 should really be shown the door by that logic.

I'm not saying that Dubinsky should never be traded. I'm saying that now is a STUPID time to do it. This team is going nowhere until Drury and Roszival (and ideally Redden) are gone. Moving the deck chairs won't accomplish anything right now.

Quote:
That's a lot of assumptions to try and justify something. You're assuming a GM, that has a laundry list of UFA mistakes to his credit, is going to manage to avoid another one with $10MM+ in cap space? Not likely.
Then there is no point to ANY of this discussion. None of us is Glen Sather (though some of Vitto's posts make me wonder). Why bother discussing a trade? We can't assume to know what the GM would really do, can we? This whole thread is basically about what we would do with the resources available to the team. Knock my logic if you want to (or can), but to try and claim that I'm wrong because "Sather wouldn't do that" is stupid.

Quote:
I'm as high on some of our prospects as anyone, but passing up an opportunity to fill a void because prospect X might be NHL ready in a few years just doesn't work.
That's not what I said. I don't want to make a deal right now exactly because we don't know what "prospect X" might do in the next couple of years. With the unholy trinity of Drury, Redden and Roszival on this team, it isn't going anywhere, no matter what deal you make. The team can't add a superstar's salary AND ice a competitive team. As such, making a bunch of short-sighted moves to try and win "right now" is sacrificing the future for a practically impossible present. Regardless of how most of my fellow NY fans seem to feel, patience is indeed a virtue, and a necessary one if you want to see a truly competitive team.

Quote:
Another cap issue on our hands? Didn't you just say you wanted to address problems via free agency? You're willing to forgo three more years of Horton at a manageable cap hit just because he'll eventually become a free agent? I'm sorry, but that's just kind of silly to me.

Plus, not to mention, how do you know he'll demand more money if his numbers stay the same? You have no idea what the cap, or the market for FA's is going to look like in 2013.
I said I wanted to address A problem through FA. As in a superstar. NOT another Drury or Redden. A true #1 center (if Stepan or Anisimov don't turn into one) or a true #1 LW (if Kreider or Grachev don't turn into one). I want to have the patience to let the kids develop, creating the young, affordable foundation that a championship team needs, and THEN spend some money to fill a hole. We happen to be in a good situation, time wise. The money is set to be available right when we should have an idea of what we have on the farm.

As to how do I know that he'll demand more money? Easy. I'm not an idiot. How many players do you know of who, after being consistent, accept a UFA deal that pays the same or less than their RFA contract? If Horton scores in the 60 point range for the next three years, he'll be asking for AT LEAST 6 million. That would severely hamper any efforts at addressing any holes in the lineup. In other words, we'd be right back where we started.

Quote:
Controlled? We are talking about the same Dubinsky, right? The same one that held out over the summer for more money? I don't see an issue trading a player making less money for a player making more money, especially if the cheaper player has already proven to be a problem during negotiations. You'll have to renegotiate with Dubinsky at least once more before you even have to consider negotiating with Horton.
Oh get off of it with the hold out. You are assuming that he's in the wrong on that contract dispute. The team severely lowballed him. He didn't stand for it. He signed a contract that is not only fair, but a VALUE for his production, and still has him as an RFA when it expires. Dubinsky wasn't seeking "cash." He was seeking a fair wage, and he accepted a deal on the low side of that.

Quote:
Assuming Dubinsky and Horton do not improve their games between now and then, explain to me how one more year of a cheap-ish Dubinsky is better than 3 more years of Horton being under contract? How does a cheaper player, but a better contract, make us more competitive in the long-term? You're acting as if Dubinsky will be cheap in 2012, but do you realize he needs to be re-signed again in 2011?
Yes, I do realize that. The issue is that even with the raise he gets in 2011, Dubinsky will be far cheaper than Horton when this team is in any shape to actually compete.

Quote:
I agree, those things are important, but I'm not really concerned with disrupting this team's "chemistry" if all that chemistry does is drive us closer to a lottery pick. I could understand that argument if we were having a lot of success, but we're not.
The team does poorly so you want to trade one of the few guys who actually contributes in a positive way? Way to be a genius with the logic, pal. Again, moving a positive like Dubinsky is NOT going to change the fortunes of this team. Until at least two of the unholy trinity are gone, this team will continue to flirt with disaster.

Quote:
If Dubinsky becomes useful enough that he's contributing at the same level as Horton is, you're only going to avoid those cap implications for another year at most. If he's putting up 60+ points like Horton has, you can bet that you're going to be paying him at least as much as Horton makes now.
If he does. I don't know that I see Dubinsky putting up over 60 points in a season. Even if he does, my issue is not what Horton's contract pays him NOW. If Dubi makes 4 million for 60 points, he'll be making 4 million when this team is actually ready to compete. Horton will be in line for FA money when this team is ready to compete. THAT IS MY POINT. Horton is the better player. I've never argued against that. Dubinsky is better for where this team is right now and in the future due to what he provides and where his eventual cap hit will be.

Quote:
I appreciate toughness and work ethic as much as the next guy, but when your team is desperate for scoring, sometimes concessions need to be made. Still, as I said before, the deal needs to be right before you part with Dubinsky.
It's easy for someone to say "I appreciate toughness and work ethic" when they follow it up with a "but." Say you trade for Horton. First of all, Dubinsky isn't the only piece they will ask for. Who else goes? Callahan? The top-10 first round pick? Stepan? For what? Replace Dubinsky with Horton. Where does that take us? MAYBE make a series out of a first round matchup? Maybe, get knocked out in the 2nd round? All while having a player with a **** attitude around the important rookies coming into the team? No thank you. Build the core, than add the big gun. Dubinsky is part of the core.

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 08:00 PM
  #129
bjthehockeykid
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: new york
Country: United States
Posts: 6
vCash: 500
if it comes down to weiss or horton i think weiss is a center that can make plays and we could use that horton is a power forward that goes to the net and finishes but i think that weiss will offer more then horton for less money plus i have heard horton is a "i show up when i feel like it" type player and do we really need one of those

bjthehockeykid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 08:18 PM
  #130
The Thomas J.*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 18,847
vCash: 500
Can't trade Dubi for some one who doesn;t have the work ethic or the heart he does. If Horton is damaged goods than you can get him for alot less than Dubi, Christensen's stock is way up. We got him for nothing & now we sell high.

The Thomas J.* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 08:39 PM
  #131
Swagelin
aka Bienvenue a ny
 
Swagelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,762
vCash: 500
IMO the rangers should Just get rid of him while his value is high for a scorer. I don't really see him getting any better over the next couple seasons anyway
Posted via Mobile Device

Swagelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 09:47 PM
  #132
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 17,003
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
He played PART of the season with Zherdev on his wing, and he's played about half of this season with Gaborik. I acknowledge that, but the bottom line is that whether it's with Jagr, Zherdev, Voros, Gaborik, Callahan, Jokinen or Drury, he keeps improving on his numbers. This is not a case of a player who got lined up with a superstar and put up stats for a season before disappearing.
No, this is the case of a player who is too inconsistent to remain with guys like Zherdev and Gaborik. If he's continually improving, why is he constantly being moved from lines where he actually had some success?

Quote:
As to your comparisons, you compared him with three players who for the most part (excepting Prucha for some of his time here) sucked. I get that you think you compared him to those three due to the hypothetical similarity that they all had potential to get to another level. I just think you're full of it. It's clear that you aren't the biggest fan of Dubinsky. To try and bolster your weak arguments on why you think a good, cheap, homegrown player should be shipped out, you chose to compare him to three players who, again, Prucha notwithstanding, have a reputation for being ****** players. You tried a cheap rhetorical tactic and got called on it. Those three players can NOT be compared to Dubinsky in any way shape or form in an argument for why he should be moved.
That's great that you think I'm full of it, but you're still ignoring my point. Dubinksy show's flashes of being something better, the same way people swooned over Hossa when he had a great stint on a line with Jagr. The same way people are discussing locking up Christensen for an extended term because he scored two goals this afternoon.

Just because Dubinsky is more productive, doesn't change the fact that he's inconsistent. Until he changes that, I won't consider him untouchable.

Quote:
Then I assume you'll be starting threads any moment for why we should trade Staal, Callahan and Lundqvist, as well, right? Any player who doesn't maximize his potential by the age of 24 should really be shown the door by that logic.
That's asinine. I'm talking about a point in the future, and thereby advocating trading those three players right now? I love a good straw man.

Quote:
I'm not saying that Dubinsky should never be traded. I'm saying that now is a STUPID time to do it. This team is going nowhere until Drury and Roszival (and ideally Redden) are gone. Moving the deck chairs won't accomplish anything right now.
You're entitled to that. I just think it would be unwise to pass up a chance to acquire a better player just because you feel this team is unfit to compete right now. Horton wouldn't be the cure for all of our ailments, but he'd be a valuable piece of the core moving forward.

Quote:
Then there is no point to ANY of this discussion. None of us is Glen Sather (though some of Vitto's posts make me wonder). Why bother discussing a trade? We can't assume to know what the GM would really do, can we? This whole thread is basically about what we would do with the resources available to the team. Knock my logic if you want to (or can), but to try and claim that I'm wrong because "Sather wouldn't do that" is stupid.
What logic? You're basing your projections on events that go against the documented history of this GM. Sather makes poor UFA signings year after year, therefore it's likely that he will make a good one when we clear those contracts from the book? How does that represent any form of logic?

Do we know for sure what Sather will do? No. Can we make an educated guess based on past trends? Absolutely.

Quote:
That's not what I said. I don't want to make a deal right now exactly because we don't know what "prospect X" might do in the next couple of years. With the unholy trinity of Drury, Redden and Roszival on this team, it isn't going anywhere, no matter what deal you make. The team can't add a superstar's salary AND ice a competitive team. As such, making a bunch of short-sighted moves to try and win "right now" is sacrificing the future for a practically impossible present. Regardless of how most of my fellow NY fans seem to feel, patience is indeed a virtue, and a necessary one if you want to see a truly competitive team.
Again with the straw man. Where did I say I was advocating a "bunch of short-sighted moves?" Where did I say I want to "win now?" I've been one of the most vocal supporters of a rebuild for the last several years. I've never once said "Sacrifice the youth!" in favor of a quick fix. You're blowing a lot of hot air here.

Quote:
I said I wanted to address A problem through FA. As in a superstar. NOT another Drury or Redden. A true #1 center (if Stepan or Anisimov don't turn into one) or a true #1 LW (if Kreider or Grachev don't turn into one). I want to have the patience to let the kids develop, creating the young, affordable foundation that a championship team needs, and THEN spend some money to fill a hole. We happen to be in a good situation, time wise. The money is set to be available right when we should have an idea of what we have on the farm.
Again, trying to acquire anything through free agency with this GM at the helm is suicide. You want to get rid of the contract trifecta, but who gave them those deals as free agents? You don't build a core and then acquire superstars. You grow those players and then add support pieces via free agency.

Quote:
As to how do I know that he'll demand more money? Easy. I'm not an idiot. How many players do you know of who, after being consistent, accept a UFA deal that pays the same or less than their RFA contract? If Horton scores in the 60 point range for the next three years, he'll be asking for AT LEAST 6 million. That would severely hamper any efforts at addressing any holes in the lineup. In other words, we'd be right back where we started.
What 60 point player is making $6MM that wasn't signed by Glen Sather? Even then, you're assuming he'll make it to free agency and won't sign a new deal before July 1st. If he does, I have no doubt it would be a reasonable one. No 60 point player demands $6MM+ as a free agent.

Quote:
Oh get off of it with the hold out. You are assuming that he's in the wrong on that contract dispute. The team severely lowballed him. He didn't stand for it. He signed a contract that is not only fair, but a VALUE for his production, and still has him as an RFA when it expires. Dubinsky wasn't seeking "cash." He was seeking a fair wage, and he accepted a deal on the low side of that.
Sather was trying to pinch pennies, that's his job as the GM and a position he forced himself into. Dubinsky also made outrageous demands of his own, which is why the talks stalled and a hold out ensued.

60 points, with the potential for more, at $4M per season is good value.

Quote:
Yes, I do realize that. The issue is that even with the raise he gets in 2011, Dubinsky will be far cheaper than Horton when this team is in any shape to actually compete.
Hardly a sure thing. He might be cheaper, he might not be. Then again, he might be cheaper because he's just not as productive.

Quote:
The team does poorly so you want to trade one of the few guys who actually contributes in a positive way? Way to be a genius with the logic, pal. Again, moving a positive like Dubinsky is NOT going to change the fortunes of this team. Until at least two of the unholy trinity are gone, this team will continue to flirt with disaster.
Get off your high horse. I never said I "want" to trade Dubinsky. I said (twice) that I wouldn't be opposed to moving him if the return was right.

Quote:
If he does. I don't know that I see Dubinsky putting up over 60 points in a season. Even if he does, my issue is not what Horton's contract pays him NOW. If Dubi makes 4 million for 60 points, he'll be making 4 million when this team is actually ready to compete. Horton will be in line for FA money when this team is ready to compete. THAT IS MY POINT. Horton is the better player. I've never argued against that. Dubinsky is better for where this team is right now and in the future due to what he provides and where his eventual cap hit will be.
Your timeline for this team being able to compete is just a guess. Not to mention you're assuming that he'll demand an absurd contract based on a couple more 60 point seasons. If Dubinsky does not improve, then how does this team become more competitive? You addressed him as a piece of the "core" below but I don't feel he's good enough to be considered a part of the core right now. Your core should be based around your two best forwards, best d-man, and your goaltender.

Quote:
It's easy for someone to say "I appreciate toughness and work ethic" when they follow it up with a "but." Say you trade for Horton. First of all, Dubinsky isn't the only piece they will ask for. Who else goes? Callahan? The top-10 first round pick? Stepan? For what? Replace Dubinsky with Horton. Where does that take us? MAYBE make a series out of a first round matchup? Maybe, get knocked out in the 2nd round? All while having a player with a **** attitude around the important rookies coming into the team? No thank you. Build the core, than add the big gun. Dubinsky is part of the core.
Again, like I said, the deal has to be right. You're assuming I'm willing to throw the farm at Florida to acquire Horton, and that's not even close to being true. Don't make assumptions about my stance just because I don't consider Dubinsky irreplaceable.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 09:52 PM
  #133
alkurtz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mahopac, NY
Posts: 901
vCash: 500
I'm really having a difficult time comprehending all the negative feelings regarding Dubinsky.

Yes, he may "only" top out as a #2 (or perhaps a 2A center) who will deliver only 55-60 points a year in his prime. But 60 points is 20 goals + 40 assists (or 15+45 or 25+35), not bad stats. The top elite teams usually or strong throughout their lineup and almost always have a strong #2 man. Dubby can be a perfect #2 man if we give him a chance to mature. Even at a 50 point rate, he'd be valuable. Even if he only becomes a #3 center, he'd be an important cog for this team's future.

Yes, he is still frustratingly inconsistent. But he is still finding himself and maturing. We all wish he was further along on his development curve, but many are to harsh on him and demonstrate little patience. He doesn't "dog it," and it doesn't seem to be part of his make up to do so; maturity will likely cure him of his inconsistent play.

In the big picture, the Rangers are a low-energy, non-physical team. When he is on his game Dubby is one of the few to play with a physical edge and with energy. It doesn't happen often enough but likely will with maturity. Who else on this team (besides Avery) would have the guts to get on TV and call Crosby a big baby?

Compare him say to Stephen Weiss. Sure Weiss in a much more talented offensive player but will never play with the edge Dubby sometime demonstrates. As for Horton, if he has a work ethic problem now when he is young, what will he be like when he's established with a big contract? No thanks, I'll take Dubinsky.

Plus......if he matures into the player I hope and am confident he will, he is one of the future leaders of the team...perhaps even a captain.

Of course, if the right trade came along I would deal him. But overall, as frustrated as I am with his inconsistent play, I am not in the least ready to give up on him. In many ways I am very happy with his development. Sometimes we don't appreciate what we have and only dwell on what is in the pipeline. If Ethan Werek develops into another Dubinsky, that would be great. Lets appreciate what we have here: a young potentially fine 60 point #2 center who plays with an edge, intensity, and a physical aspect to his game. He is not there yet but the glimpses of it are. Give the guy some slack. He may ultimately disappoint, but I am far from ready to say that he will do so. In fact, I have every confidence that he will be a fine and key player for us for many years.

That he held out over the summer should not in any way be held against him or should reflect on his commitment to the team. Hockey, after all is a business, and teams have little loyalty to players when it comes to their perceived self-interest. Players have finite careers and most maximize their earnings inside of a brief window that could end any day, any game, any shift. Holding out was his right, won in collective bargaining, and in the end he received a contract appropriate to his ability and experience level.

This is a fine young player who should be nurtured and appreciated. Just about everyone is tradeable, but to actively market this guy is a big, big mistake.

alkurtz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 10:34 PM
  #134
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
No, this is the case of a player who is too inconsistent to remain with guys like Zherdev and Gaborik. If he's continually improving, why is he constantly being moved from lines where he actually had some success?

That's great that you think I'm full of it, but you're still ignoring my point. Dubinksy show's flashes of being something better, the same way people swooned over Hossa when he had a great stint on a line with Jagr. The same way people are discussing locking up Christensen for an extended term because he scored two goals this afternoon.

Just because Dubinsky is more productive, doesn't change the fact that he's inconsistent. Until he changes that, I won't consider him untouchable.
Going to try and combine some of the discussion to avoid the unreadable back and forth.

1st- You say this like Dubi is the only player to be moved around. Outside of Henrik, Gaborik and (for some unfathomable reason) Prospal, EVERY player has been jostled from line to line. Renney and Torts seem to hate the concept of keeping a line together, even when it's working. Dubi shifting lines has nothing to do with his ability, and everything to do with the coaching philosophy. We haven't had a consistent "line" since Straka Nylander Jagr.

2nd- I am not ignoring your point. I'm simply recognizing the shady nature of the way you phrased it. You can talk all you like about not wanting to throw him away unless it's for "the right deal," but you keep making comments and framing the argument in ways that intentionally try to make Dubinsky look like less of the player that he is. I get the "point" you were trying to make. You could make the same "point" by comparing Dubinsky to Zherdev or...wait for it...Weiss. Much more was expected out of those players as well. Zherdev and Weiss have also teased with signs of brilliance only to come back down to earth. You specifically chose three players who have a predominately negative reputation on this board, including two who flat out suck. The only reason to use those players to make that point is to try and paint Dubinsky in a negative light. It's not a new trick.

Quote:
That's asinine. I'm talking about a point in the future, and thereby advocating trading those three players right now? I love a good straw man.

You're entitled to that. I just think it would be unwise to pass up a chance to acquire a better player just because you feel this team is unfit to compete right now. Horton wouldn't be the cure for all of our ailments, but he'd be a valuable piece of the core moving forward.

You want to trade Dubinsky because, as you have said, he has not fulfilled the promise that you thought he had. People thought Staal woud be a Norris contender. He's improved, but not as much as we thought he would, and it's looking like he's going to be nothing more than a good shut-down defenseman who can chip in a handful of points. That's no strawman. I'm only applying YOUR logic to a player in the exact same situation. You just don't like it because you like Staal (as do I- Even if he never becomes a Norris candidate, he's a great piece to keep around on this team. Just like Dubinsky).

As to your second point, you are so tied up in the idea of which player has "more talent" that you can't see the reality of how a good team gets put together. Talent is important, but you don't win **** by simply collecting as many different pieces of talent as possible. I've coached multiple sports for many years, and I've got to tell you, when you get players with the combination of skills and mindset like Dubinsky and Callahan, you don't let them go in exchange for a more talented player with no heart. Didn't you ever wonder why Florida, with all of these forwards who are "better" than the Rangers' and with Vokoun in the net, are lower in the standings?


Quote:
What logic? You're basing your projections on events that go against the documented history of this GM. Sather makes poor UFA signings year after year, therefore it's likely that he will make a good one when we clear those contracts from the book? How does that represent any form of logic?

Do we know for sure what Sather will do? No. Can we make an educated guess based on past trends? Absolutely.
Again- If we are going to have to frame every discussion based on what Sather would do, then there is no point in having a discussion. Frankly, he has just as much of a recent track record on NOT trading the youthful core as he does of making dunderheaded FA signings. So if we're going to play that game, then you're stupid for suggesting that Dubinsky should be traded, because we can make an "educated guess based on past trends" that Sather wouldn't do that.

My point is that I would not trade Dubinsky for Horton because the team would be better served in 2012 by having Dubinsky and the cap flexibility that he provides when that money is freed up.

Quote:
Again with the straw man. Where did I say I was advocating a "bunch of short-sighted moves?" Where did I say I want to "win now?" I've been one of the most vocal supporters of a rebuild for the last several years. I've never once said "Sacrifice the youth!" in favor of a quick fix. You're blowing a lot of hot air here.


Again, trying to acquire anything through free agency with this GM at the helm is suicide. You want to get rid of the contract trifecta, but who gave them those deals as free agents? You don't build a core and then acquire superstars. You grow those players and then add support pieces via free agency.

Call it blowing hot air as much as you like. You want to trade a young player who plays with heart and physicality (two of the most glaring weaknesses on this team this season) for a more expensive player who by all accounts is heartless and lazy simply because he's "the better player" on paper. The late 90's called. They want their philosophy for building a hockey team back.

As to the Sather bit, I addressed that earlier in this post.

Quote:
What 60 point player is making $6MM that wasn't signed by Glen Sather? Even then, you're assuming he'll make it to free agency and won't sign a new deal before July 1st. If he does, I have no doubt it would be a reasonable one. No 60 point player demands $6MM+ as a free agent.

Sather was trying to pinch pennies, that's his job as the GM and a position he forced himself into. Dubinsky also made outrageous demands of his own, which is why the talks stalled and a hold out ensued.
Sather also has a track record for letting players get to free agency. Have you forgotten why he paid so much for Roszival? Bottom line is that in FA, Horton can ask for whatever he likes. If the team doesn't give it to him, he can go elsewhere. The team has NO ability to control costs at precisely the time that (in my opinion) they will be ready to make a run and will NEED that cost-controlling ability.

As for Dubinsky, at the end of the day, he signed the bargain contract. He won't hit FA for quite a while yet, and that ability to control costs is crucial if you want to avoid being in a mess like the team is currently in.


Quote:
60 points, with the potential for more, at $4M per season is good value.

Hardly a sure thing. He might be cheaper, he might not be. Then again, he might be cheaper because he's just not as productive.
So potential now matters somehow? No way Dubinsky gets close to 4 million at 40-45 points per season. If he doesn't have an absolute career year next season, I can't see him getting more than 2.5. Again, 4 million for 60 points per year is a decent value (he's not a bargain, but he's not overpaid). My concern is that he will garner much more than that when the team is ready to compete.


Quote:
Get off your high horse. I never said I "want" to trade Dubinsky. I said (twice) that I wouldn't be opposed to moving him if the return was right.

Your timeline for this team being able to compete is just a guess. Not to mention you're assuming that he'll demand an absurd contract based on a couple more 60 point seasons. If Dubinsky does not improve, then how does this team become more competitive? You addressed him as a piece of the "core" below but I don't feel he's good enough to be considered a part of the core right now. Your core should be based around your two best forwards, best d-man, and your goaltender.

Again, like I said, the deal has to be right. You're assuming I'm willing to throw the farm at Florida to acquire Horton, and that's not even close to being true. Don't make assumptions about my stance just because I don't consider Dubinsky irreplaceable.
You can say that you don't want to trade him, but it comes across as empty talk. Every argument you try to make and the ways that you try to make them makes it pretty clear that you want the kid gone. You and I also have different ideas of what constitutes a "core." Your superstars (4 best players based on what you said) are to me the part of the team that puts them over the top. The core is, again, to me, that group of players who support those 4 and keep that team going when they are not on the ice. You can make the playoffs with a core and no superstars. You can make the playoffs with a couple of superstars and no core. You can't win the Stanley Cup without the combination of both.

This team is on the right track. The superstar goalie and one of the superstar forwards are in place and locked up for years. The superstar D is likely to come from within (the odds of Del Zotto, Sanguinetti, McDonagh and Staal ALL falling short of expectations is unlikely). The core (by my definition) is being built. These are guys like Dubinsky, Callahan, Anisimov and the up and coming prospects like Kreider, Stepan and Grachev. One of those young guys might turn into a superstar. They might turn into a guy like Horton. We need to let them develop so that when those salaries come off the books, the team can make informed choices on asset management (Dubi shouldn't be moved until 2012 at the earliest, if at all).

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 10:44 PM
  #135
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I'll also add that two years ago there some rumors about a similar deal involving Horton and Dubinsky.

Hindsight has shown it was not a good idea then nor would it be now.

Dubinsky is still very young and figuring out his game. I'd give up any thought to trading him for at least another season or two. At least then we'll have some idea how Kreider and Grachev are shaping up.
yeah, I'm gonna need to go ahead and see a link. I follow this team every day and never heard a word of that.

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 10:45 PM
  #136
Dredden
JT Miller
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,430
vCash: 500
I would trade him if we do get a better significant player. I dont know if i would trade him for a guy like Booth. Who would you trade him for?

Dredden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 11:43 PM
  #137
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by n8 View Post
Dubinsky is a 2B/3A center. In 5 years he will likely develop into a 1B/2A center but the Rangers have no history of waiting that long. In another Dubi thread I pointed out that Patrick Marleau SEVEN seasons to break 60 points. While Dubi is no Marleau, I see the same sort of development arc.

That's why I think if we trade Dubi, it has to be as part of a package for a #1 top 3 player.

What would Dubi, Girardi, Rosival (cap), and a 1st land us? I'm thinking more along those lines.


Savard > Weiss. Weiss + Gaborik = 80pts? Savard + Gaborik = 100+ pts
Savard - another player who took ~7 seasons to put it all together. A player that was Ranger property we juuuuust didn't have the patience to wait around for.
Crap comment.

Savard threw up 50+ points in nis 2nd season. 60+ points in year 3

It's insulting to mention Dubinsky's name in the same sentance as Savard. Marc is / was and always be a MUCH better offensive player than Brandon.

With Savard there was a clear progression, not so much with Brandon (even with his somewhat increased points per game average this year)

Additionally, the Rangers brass at that time didn't want to deal with the attitude that Marc had, which followed him to Calgary and was part of the reason they also dealt him.

Lets not revise history here. It's not like he was dealt for some veteran that we thought could do a a better job. He was traded in a youth for youth deal that didn't work out for either team really. We got 2 respectable seasons out of Hlavac and Calgary got two respectable seasons from Savard.

Bottom line is that as nice a player that Brandon may be, he's never going to be more thna a decent 2nd line center. That's not bad. It's really not, but he plays a roll on this team that we need more from him.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2010, 12:05 AM
  #138
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 17,003
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
1st- You say this like Dubi is the only player to be moved around. Outside of Henrik, Gaborik and (for some unfathomable reason) Prospal, EVERY player has been jostled from line to line. Renney and Torts seem to hate the concept of keeping a line together, even when it's working. Dubi shifting lines has nothing to do with his ability, and everything to do with the coaching philosophy. We haven't had a consistent "line" since Straka Nylander Jagr.
No, you interpret it like that. The line juggling is due to a lack of consistency throughout the lineup. Point being, he's plagued by inconsistency. That's really not debatable.

Quote:
2nd- I am not ignoring your point. I'm simply recognizing the shady nature of the way you phrased it. You can talk all you like about not wanting to throw him away unless it's for "the right deal," but you keep making comments and framing the argument in ways that intentionally try to make Dubinsky look like less of the player that he is. I get the "point" you were trying to make. You could make the same "point" by comparing Dubinsky to Zherdev or...wait for it...Weiss. Much more was expected out of those players as well. Zherdev and Weiss have also teased with signs of brilliance only to come back down to earth. You specifically chose three players who have a predominately negative reputation on this board, including two who flat out suck. The only reason to use those players to make that point is to try and paint Dubinsky in a negative light. It's not a new trick.
Again, you're simply trying to undermine a valid argument by using words like "shady" and "rhetoric." I chose those 3 players because Rangers fans are familiar with them. They're all players that, when they were on their games, looked as if they could be something more than they could be. Weiss and Zherdev were highly touted prospects that never, at least until recently, got their heads on straight. Even then, they should be contributing, or should have contributed, more to their teams.

It's not a trick at all. Dubinsky show's flashes of being a quality centerman. Still, he's been unable to harness that talent. You're convinced that I'm anti-Dubinsky, but you're just ultimately proving my initial point: Some players are over valued by their own fan base.

Quote:
You want to trade Dubinsky because, as you have said, he has not fulfilled the promise that you thought he had. People thought Staal woud be a Norris contender. He's improved, but not as much as we thought he would, and it's looking like he's going to be nothing more than a good shut-down defenseman who can chip in a handful of points. That's no strawman. I'm only applying YOUR logic to a player in the exact same situation. You just don't like it because you like Staal (as do I- Even if he never becomes a Norris candidate, he's a great piece to keep around on this team. Just like Dubinsky).
Again, I don't "want" to trade Dubinsky. Once you stop trying to twist my argument, you'll understand that. I said I would be open to trading Dubinsky for the right package, not that he should be shipped out at all costs.

You determined that because I was open to trading Dubinsky --or in your mind, that I "want" to do it-- that I'd, by default, be eager to trade Lundqvist, Callahan, and Staal. That's a straw man. You twisted my argument and then attacked the mutated version of what I said. You can't apply my logic when you clearly have no understanding of it.

Very simple: Do I want to trade Staal? No. Would I trade Staal if I felt it improved the team? Maybe.

Quote:
As to your second point, you are so tied up in the idea of which player has "more talent" that you can't see the reality of how a good team gets put together. Talent is important, but you don't win **** by simply collecting as many different pieces of talent as possible. I've coached multiple sports for many years, and I've got to tell you, when you get players with the combination of skills and mindset like Dubinsky and Callahan, you don't let them go in exchange for a more talented player with no heart. Didn't you ever wonder why Florida, with all of these forwards who are "better" than the Rangers' and with Vokoun in the net, are lower in the standings?
You're right. If they're so low in the standings, their players must not be better than any of ours. Just like Carolina has no players that are better than any of ours.

You don't win **** by assembling a group that lacks talent either. Can you name the last team that won a cup with one legitimate first line talent in their lineup? If we had talent throughout the lineup, I'd be less open to the thought of trading Dubinsky. However, that's not the case. It's easier to find a hard working 45 point centermen than it is a 30 goal scoring winger with size.

Quote:
Again- If we are going to have to frame every discussion based on what Sather would do, then there is no point in having a discussion. Frankly, he has just as much of a recent track record on NOT trading the youthful core as he does of making dunderheaded FA signings. So if we're going to play that game, then you're stupid for suggesting that Dubinsky should be traded, because we can make an "educated guess based on past trends" that Sather wouldn't do that.
Again, you're basing this all on some BS notion that I'm trying to sell off "the core" for whatever talent I can get. Your plan involves acquiring players via free agency when we get Rozsival and Drury off the books. I never said that my plan begins with moving Dubinsky. You're making a big deal out something you've tricked yourself into believing.

Quote:
My point is that I would not trade Dubinsky for Horton because the team would be better served in 2012 by having Dubinsky and the cap flexibility that he provides when that money is freed up.
And I maintain that giving cap flexibility to a guy who hands out awful contracts like candy is a poor decision. Dubinsky at $3M in 2012, isn't that much easier to swallow than Horton at $4M in 2012. Especially if Horton continues to prove that he is the better player. Clearing ~$1MM in cap space in 2013 to resign Horton is hardly a trying endeavor.

Quote:
Call it blowing hot air as much as you like. You want to trade a young player who plays with heart and physicality (two of the most glaring weaknesses on this team this season) for a more expensive player who by all accounts is heartless and lazy simply because he's "the better player" on paper. The late 90's called. They want their philosophy for building a hockey team back.

As to the Sather bit, I addressed that earlier in this post.
He's been the better player all season. He was the better player last season. He'll likely be the better player throughout his entire career. They don't base the standings on how hard a player tried.

Sorry, one player being moved for a better player doesn't relate to the late 90's. If Horton was 30 years old, you might have a point, but he's only 24.

Quote:
Sather also has a track record for letting players get to free agency. Have you forgotten why he paid so much for Roszival? Bottom line is that in FA, Horton can ask for whatever he likes. If the team doesn't give it to him, he can go elsewhere. The team has NO ability to control costs at precisely the time that (in my opinion) they will be ready to make a run and will NEED that cost-controlling ability.

As for Dubinsky, at the end of the day, he signed the bargain contract. He won't hit FA for quite a while yet, and that ability to control costs is crucial if you want to avoid being in a mess like the team is currently in.
Dubinsky will be eligible for salary arbitration. Don't act as if we have him all locked up with nowhere to go during his next contract negotiation. You have marginally more control over Dubinsky than you do Horton. It's not as if Horton is locked into a mega deal for the next decade. If the cap is an issue, you let him walk. If it's not, you sign him.

Quote:
So potential now matters somehow? No way Dubinsky gets close to 4 million at 40-45 points per season. If he doesn't have an absolute career year next season, I can't see him getting more than 2.5. Again, 4 million for 60 points per year is a decent value (he's not a bargain, but he's not overpaid). My concern is that he will garner much more than that when the team is ready to compete.
Of course it matters? Horton is a better player and has more potential than Dubinsky. Of course that is factored into his value.

I don't share the concern that you do.

Quote:
You can say that you don't want to trade him, but it comes across as empty talk. Every argument you try to make and the ways that you try to make them makes it pretty clear that you want the kid gone. You and I also have different ideas of what constitutes a "core." Your superstars (4 best players based on what you said) are to me the part of the team that puts them over the top. The core is, again, to me, that group of players who support those 4 and keep that team going when they are not on the ice. You can make the playoffs with a core and no superstars. You can make the playoffs with a couple of superstars and no core. You can't win the Stanley Cup without the combination of both.
It's far easier to fill the holes left by role players, than it is to replace superstars. What is the "core" of the Captials? Is it Ovechkin, Backstrom, and Green, or is it Laich, Fehr, and Poti? Does Pittsburgh consider Kennedy, Cooke, and Rupp their core? Or are they simply role players that work hard because their real core is Crosby, Malkin, Staal and Gonchar?

You can replace a role player via free agency every summer. You can't replace a superstar.

No matter how badly you want to think otherwise, I don't hate Dubinsky.

Quote:
This team is on the right track. The superstar goalie and one of the superstar forwards are in place and locked up for years. The superstar D is likely to come from within (the odds of Del Zotto, Sanguinetti, McDonagh and Staal ALL falling short of expectations is unlikely). The core (by my definition) is being built. These are guys like Dubinsky, Callahan, Anisimov and the up and coming prospects like Kreider, Stepan and Grachev. One of those young guys might turn into a superstar. They might turn into a guy like Horton. We need to let them develop so that when those salaries come off the books, the team can make informed choices on asset management (Dubi shouldn't be moved until 2012 at the earliest, if at all).
They also might turn into nothing at all. Passing up a boat because the mystery box might end up being a boat is foolish. What's better: A guy like Kreider turning into Nathan Horton, or having Kreider turn into Nate Horton and then having him play on a line with Horton? There's no such thing as too much talent.

Lundqvist and Gaborik will be free agents one year after Horton. Why aren't they an issue? By your own logic, they'll be coming off the books when this team is starting to compete. Isn't that the same problem? Not to mention they'll both be over 30 years old.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2010, 12:06 AM
  #139
Block More Shots
Registered User
 
Block More Shots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,358
vCash: 500
Dubi is not going anywhere. Seriously guys? We wouldn't give Dubi up for freakin' Dany Heatley! What makes you think we'll give him up in a deal for Horton or Weiss?

Block More Shots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2010, 12:10 AM
  #140
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubi Has Arrived View Post
Dubi is not going anywhere. Seriously guys? We wouldn't give Dubi up for freakin' Dany Heatley! What makes you think we'll give him up in a deal for Horton or Weiss?
Maybe the organization feels that he's not going to take the next step and thus they want to deal him while is value is high. Or maybe they aren't looking forward to negotiating with him again next summer. I'm not anti Dubinsky, but I do think he's a bit overrated around these parts.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2010, 12:13 AM
  #141
Block More Shots
Registered User
 
Block More Shots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,358
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
Maybe the organization feels that he's not going to take the next step and thus they want to deal him while is value is high. Or maybe they aren't looking forward to negotiating with him again next summer. I'm not anti Dubinsky, but I do think he's a bit overrated around these parts.
I can see the reasoning in that, but I just don't think you can give up on the kid yet. Maybe next season at this time he can be re-evaluated, but not now.

Block More Shots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2010, 12:15 AM
  #142
EmDeeZee4MVP
Registered User
 
EmDeeZee4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubi Has Arrived View Post
Dubi is not going anywhere. Seriously guys? We wouldn't give Dubi up for freakin' Dany Heatley! What makes you think we'll give him up in a deal for Horton or Weiss?
Exactly what I was thinking.

If Slats wouldn't agree to package Dubi for a player of Heatley's caliber, what makes you think he would settle for anything less? All of the Heatley "type" of players have already been traded; Kessel, Kovy, etc. I can see Gilroy + Voros/Brash being dealt for a role player with an expiring contract, though. However, the Rangers MUST have their long term sights set on Kovy via FA. Not very much sense in trading Dubi right now.

EmDeeZee4MVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2010, 12:22 AM
  #143
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubi Has Arrived View Post
I can see the reasoning in that, but I just don't think you can give up on the kid yet. Maybe next season at this time he can be re-evaluated, but not now.
Certainly plenty of guys take a few years to put it all together...and maybe Dubi is one of those. But perhaps if the team waits until next year to decide he's not, well then you've got a guy who after 3 full seasons hasn't scored 20 goals once. Maybe Dubi is just a 20G, 30A guy? Certainly that's not terrible...but if the organization believes that they may try to deal him while his value is at its peak.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 01:50 AM
  #144
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,418
vCash: 500
Rene Bourque just signed a $20M / 6 year deal (3.333 cap hit). He IS better than Dubi but right now not really by that much. The big thing is he is showing that he is getting better. Rather developing faster than Dubi. He is also FIVE years older than Dubi. I guess it really doesn't matter until we see what Dubi can do after next season.

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 03:13 PM
  #145
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,527
vCash: 500
If there's a guy on this team who can play center or wing and he's not creating offensive for those around him and he disappears for games on end, then yes, we should trade Drury.

With AA showing signs of being able to develop into at least a solid #2 pivot and Stepan's play at the WJC, I could see the organization using Dubinsky to fill another need outside of center and I wouldn't be against it. However, anything other then some top line talent, doesn't help this team and makes no sense.

I'm absolutely okay with keeping Dubinsky if he never gets any better then what he is, because already he competes every game, he's versatile and he's cheap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubi Has Arrived View Post
Dubi is not going anywhere. Seriously guys? We wouldn't give Dubi up for freakin' Dany Heatley! What makes you think we'll give him up in a deal for Horton or Weiss?
The organizational depth charge has changed.

...then, the team only had Drury, Dubinsky and an unknown Anisomov for centers. Now Prospal has filled a hole better then those three and Christensen has too. AA has shown he can play in the NHL and could develop into a fine center. Prospal and Christensen may not be here next year, but Stepan just lead the WJC in scoring and lead team USA to gold. Although, IMO, Stepan could use a year in the minors to mature physically and get used to being a professional athlete, I can't help but think about something Ken Holland said in an interview during the early portion of the WJCs. It went something like "The talent in this tournament is so high, that if a player can excel in it, he's ready for the NHL". Stepan wasn't just #1 on his team, it was for all teams and that's a really big statement.


Last edited by vipernsx: 02-26-2010 at 03:23 PM.
vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 03:28 PM
  #146
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,345
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubi Has Arrived View Post
Dubi is not going anywhere. Seriously guys? We wouldn't give Dubi up for freakin' Dany Heatley! What makes you think we'll give him up in a deal for Horton or Weiss?
1) Because he's not improved to the point where the organization hoped he would.

2) Because Sather felt he had leverage in any Heatley deal and didn't have to include Dubinsky.

3) Because the look of the organization has changed.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 04:49 PM
  #147
chip chipperson*
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
1) Because he's not improved to the point where the organization hoped he would.

2) Because Sather felt he had leverage in any Heatley deal and didn't have to include Dubinsky.

3) Because the look of the organization has changed.
the rangers were hoping dubinsky would be improved in only 50 games or so?

what about this organizaton has changed? higgins and kotalik... thats about it

chip chipperson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 04:49 PM
  #148
BrianLeetch2
Registered User
 
BrianLeetch2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toms River NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 713
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BrianLeetch2 Send a message via MSN to BrianLeetch2
I mean its just not the right time to trade dubi if ever.....This team chemistry is crap since guys never play on the same line with each other...trading him for another player even if better talent wont change a damn thing....we need frigin patience we need to stop having 7 or 8 new guys on the team every year.

BrianLeetch2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 04:57 PM
  #149
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
there are many reasons why Dubi is on the block, or rumored to be on the block. First, he's one of a few trading chips Sather has - young, cheap and still has potential. Which makes the #2 reason redundant which is he is one of few other teams are asking for (realize that a rumor can begin as a result of the Anaheim GM asking for Dubinsky in a trade (an example)). #3 - perhaps Sather feels the center position is one of strength and he wants to find a player similar to Dubi to play the wing, thus moving other centermen back to their natural center position.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2010, 09:27 PM
  #150
Loto68
Registered User
 
Loto68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I think you have to look at moving Dubinsky. Granted, I'm not as big a fan of the guy as some but he's the kind of guy who will actually bring back something that can really help this team. To me, he's over 200 games into his career and there's still too many "he could bes". And that's while playing consistently with the team's best offensive players.
This is one of my two biggest problems with him. Despite playing most of his career with superstar players, he is still only a 40 point guy. What if he played with other 3rd line players (like he is) would he only be a 30 point player? I truly utterly believe this.

My second problem with him is that there has been talk since he was in junior about attitude problems. When he was in the AHL, his coach almost threw him off the team bus for pissing everyone off.

Loto68 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 11:36 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.