This Year
Shrike
Flyers win cup: Chances = somewhat akin to aliens from the
hercules cluster landing in downtown Los Angeles and crowning
Rodney King leader of the world, then eating him.
Flyers go to ECS: Chances = Ed Webb makes sense.
Flyers win two rounds: Chances = Ed Webb loses a pound.
Flyers win one round: Chances = Phillies make a good deal.
Flyers lose round one: Chances = It rains on a saturday.
Flyers miss playoffs: Chances = Bobby Clarke getting fired.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
PUKSTPR 31
>So then, what do you see?
Probably a decent season...nothing great, nothing terrible. It's tough to feel
they have any real chance of winning it all.
There are lots of question marks. I guess more than anything, I'm interested to
see how last year's rookies play. Boucher (assuming he's signed), Gagne,
Delmore...that's a lot of promise in all three areas of the ice.
As great a player as Lindros can be I hope he doesn't come back. He's damaged
goods. We'll never get full value on the return, but I just want the
distraction to go away. I'm tired of it. It's time for both parties to move on.
I'm not as pessimistic as you seem to be, but I can't see them getting past the
2nd or
3rd round.
Jon
Hol2990466
Shrike <bhalverso...@leathercenter.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:0a2e2e90...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com...
> So then, what do you see?
Well......let's see.
I think Brian Boucher will have another stellar year in the nets. I feel
really comfortable with him for reasons I've already posted on other
occasions. I feel pretty good about our goaltending.
I like our defense more than I have in previous off seasons. I think we have
some young, talented kids that have gained a little big league experience
coming back. That bodes well for the future.
Offensively, well......we have some problems. We'll miss the offense that
Eric Lindros provided, although I agree with Pukstpr that it's time to put
the entire sordid affair behind us. The man was good for 80 - 100 points per
season and he was a physical presence.....that's a big hole to fill. It gets
even bigger when you consider how weak the Flyers were last year at scoring
goals. The Flyers were in dire need of a sniper even when Lindros was
playing. Now that he's likely to be gone, we need two players with the
ability to light the lamp. I don't see us getting either. That puts us in a
really bad position.
And then, there's the free agent situation. In my mind, Burt was a decent
D-man. I liked the way Zelepukin played, even if he wasn't scoring many
goals last year. Berube? Not much of a player but was one of the few
enforcers we had on the roster. None of these players were stars and their
departures didn't really damage us all that much but I think we lost more
with the free agents we allowed to leave than we gained with the free agents
we signed. All of which means our first line has been weakened with the loss
of Lindros and our third and 4th lines have been further weakened as well.
No question about it.....offensively we've backslid.
Coaching.....I'd say Ramsey is a slight improvement over Roger Neilson. I
admire the way Ramsey used his rookies last year. I think his willingness to
do so was the correct move in more ways than one. I also like the fact that
Billy Barber is finally up with the big club. He's now only one extended
losing streak away from the top spot. I hope "Mister" Snider and Bobby
Clarke wise up before we lose BB to another team.
Which leads me to my prediction for next season.....an up and down season
marked by a lack of scoring culminating in either a close win or a close
loss in the first round of the playoffs. But the Flyers certainly won't get
any deeper into the playoffs than a second round loss to a team they would
have whipped this season (Pittsburgh or Florida spring to mind)
And hopefully....Bobby Clarke will become the final victim of the fiasco,
losing his job and being permanently banished from the streets of
Philadelphia only to land a front office flunky position with the Toronto
Maple Leafs where he'll find himself several spots lower on the pecking
order than recent acquisition Eric Lindros. May justice ultimately prevail.
Dave McGuriman
rising out of the ashes and I'm surprisingly optimistic. I like Hol's
points so I wont re-iterate them.
Dave, who is trying optimism for a change of pace
--
add a "d" to the beginning to reply
"Hol2990466" <Hol29...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:8mihp8$c8m$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
Jeg7777
"Hol2990466" <Hol29...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:8mihp8$c8m$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
>
> Shrike <bhalverso...@leathercenter.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:0a2e2e90...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com...
> > So then, what do you see?
>
> Well......let's see.
>
> I think Brian Boucher will have another stellar year in the nets. I feel
> really comfortable with him for reasons I've already posted on other
> occasions. I feel pretty good about our goaltending.
I can see him starting to press if the team struggles to score goals. It
might be where his inexperience comes into play. Last season, once he got to
play regularly, pretty much everything else went right for him. This year
won't be the same.
--
Joe
Quinn: "A spa? Great! I need a facial so bad."
Daria: "Don't get excited. This says it's a 'spa for the soul.' Didn't you
sell yours a while back?"
Mike Barrett
>
>
> Flyers miss playoffs: Chances = Bobby Clarke getting fired.
One or the other. This team just has no offense unless their PP is firing on
all cylinders. They will miss Eric dearly. Primeau is not Rod Brind'AMour,
and Leclair needs Eric like a fish needs water. Recchi's swan song was last
season. His production will begin to fall. The defense will be okay, but far
from great. Boucher can always play awesome, but asking him to do it in his
first full season as a starter is a lot to ask. I expect an up/down year for
him. Of course, if he has a Hasek season, then the Flyers will win a lot of
games, but I want him rested for the playoffs. If they make the post-season
then anything is possible, and I think just making the playoffs is a valid
goal for this group. Let the expectations change from there.
foodsnarfer
is the first post i have ever seen you make that wasn't of the
clueless variety.(why am I telling you this,you have me kill-
filed so you can't see this post.)
well,anyways they will miss Eric but I think your
Primeau/Brindamour comment is a bit off though.Primeau goes to
the net,where Brind'amour just over passed.This was the reason
the flyers went up 3-1 on the devils,then Lindros came back and
everyone figured "hey we'll let eric do it" when they should
have just let primeau do it.
then you said it was recchi's swan song.......Not true,a swan
song means its your last horrah!
last season was Lindros' swan song,recchi is still playing.
your defence comment was 100% on target.
Mike Barrett
> is the first post i have ever seen you make that wasn't of the
> clueless variety.(why am I telling you this,you have me kill-
> filed so you can't see this post.)
Actually, I have Ed Webb killfiled, plus one of your other dumb ID's. I
should probably get around to this one as well.
As for your backhanded compliment, I say FUCK YOU! I could amputate a toe
and, on its own, it would know more about this game than you.
> well,anyways they will miss Eric but I think your
> Primeau/Brindamour comment is a bit off though.Primeau goes to
> the net,where Brind'amour just over passed.This was the reason
> the flyers went up 3-1 on the devils,then Lindros came back and
> everyone figured "hey we'll let eric do it" when they should
> have just let primeau do it.
Primeau blows. He has has a couple decent years a whole bunch of weak ones.
Check their career stats (Preems and Brindy) then get back to me. To make it
worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red Wings and got
1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left. Brindy's time here was
spent mostly with stiffs and he killed a ton of penalties and didn't always
play a lot of PP minutes.
> then you said it was recchi's swan song.......Not true,a swan
> song means its your last horrah!
> last season was Lindros' swan song,recchi is still playing.
> your defence comment was 100% on target.
Yes, I think this is Recchi's last hurrah. He is another guy that one head
shot from the retirement home. His production was skewed last year because
of the pp and Eric. Take that away and he was barely average. The guy is
declining. You'll see.
Brad
mikedoesnot...@bellatlantic.net said...
> Primeau blows. He has has a couple decent years a whole bunch of weak ones.
> Check their career stats (Preems and Brindy) then get back to me. To make it
> worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red Wings and got
> 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left. Brindy's time here was
> spent mostly with stiffs and he killed a ton of penalties and didn't always
> play a lot of PP minutes.
When did Primeau play on the Wings' first line?
foodsnarfer
part of the scoring lead for a good chunk of last season.
as usual you don't know what you are talking about here.
and with primeau,since when do stats determine who is a better
player than another player.Dan Quinn had more goals in his blue
chip year than simon gagne did last season,but I would take
Gagne in a millisecond.
I like Primeau,he goes to the net,and that may not even give him
a point when a goal is scored,but all brindy did was pass pass
pass.Now I am not putting Brindy down,but I like Primeau.
one more thing....without primeau we lose the 5ot game in
Pittsburgh
bob
Shrike wrote:
> So then, what do you see?
>
> Flyers win cup: Chances = somewhat akin to aliens from the
> hercules cluster landing in downtown Los Angeles and crowning
> Rodney King leader of the world, then eating him.
Well, the Democratic convention is next week. Stranger things could
happen there.
>
>
> Flyers go to ECS: Chances = Ed Webb makes sense.
>
> Flyers win two rounds: Chances = Ed Webb loses a pound.
>
> Flyers win one round: Chances = Phillies make a good deal.
>
> Flyers lose round one: Chances = It rains on a saturday.
Win or lose first round, no further. Not enough offense, Boucher
wouldn't be the first player to suffer a sophomore jinx, and Desjardins
isn't getting any younger.
>
> Flyers miss playoffs: Chances = Bobby Clarke getting fired.
If you could promise me that would happen, I'd be ok with missing the
playoffs. I personally think Clarke is here as long as he wants to be.
Bob
c_we...@my-deja.com
> Primeau/Brindamour comment is a bit off though.Primeau goes to
> the net,where Brind'amour just over passed.This was the reason
> the flyers went up 3-1 on the devils,then Lindros came back and
> everyone figured "hey we'll let eric do it" when they should
> have just let primeau do it.
Primeau is a good player - - above average, but I don't think he gives
you much more than Brind'Amour. I really believe this was a bad trade
for the Flyers because they gave away a Team leader, one of the hardest
workers on the team (and the guy who would be captain if he was still
here) - for a guy who is an even trade at best. They could have gotten
Primeau for a Renberg and Eaton type packcage. Primeau was a good pick-
up. . . but they gave up a lot to get him.
> then you said it was recchi's swan song.......Not true,a swan
> song means its your last horrah!
> last season was Lindros' swan song,recchi is still playing.
> your defence comment was 100% on target.
Recchi needs another stud player to take some of the pressure off him.
When he is on the first line for the etire year he is going to
struggle. He may have 30 or 35 goals - but he will pay dearly for it
physically. LeClair's point total may go down without Lindros but he
will survive physically. It will be tough for Recchi to take the
beating he is going to get being the top guy on the Flyers.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
salzy
news:cSpj5.1913$eN3....@typhoon1.ba-dsg.net...
> Primeau blows. He has has a couple decent years a whole bunch of weak
ones.
> Check their career stats (Preems and Brindy) then get back to me. To make
it
> worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red Wings and
got
> 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
That's not true at all. He was the third line center at best with the
Wings, and got very little ice time compared to Brind'amour. He turned into
a very good all around player with the Canes, when he didn't play in anyones
shadow. He may be able to do well as the #1 center in Philly.
> Yes, I think this is Recchi's last hurrah. He is another guy that one head
> shot from the retirement home.
WHAT? Isn't he only 32 or 33? And he certainly hasn't had a history of
injury problems. He had one season where he missed a lot of games. It's a
blip on the map. He may have 5 good years left in him.
> His production was skewed last year because
> of the pp and Eric. Take that away and he was barely average. The guy is
> declining. You'll see.
My God, the numbers don't bear that out at all, but we'll see. I hope
you're wrong.
Conrad S
PUKSTPR 31 <puks...@aol.com> wrote in message
> As great a player as Lindros can be I hope he doesn't come back. He's
damaged
> goods. We'll never get full value on the return, but I just want the
> distraction to go away. I'm tired of it. It's time for both parties to
move on.
I couldn't agree more!
So, did you make the team?
PUKSTPR 31
Great minds think alike.
>So, did you make the team?
I'm a complete idiot for doing this, but I changed my mind and decided not to
try out. I'll probably regret it forever.
Just wasn't feeling super sharp out there.
Neo
>
> As great a player as Lindros can be I hope he doesn't come back. He's damaged
> goods. We'll never get full value on the return, but I just want the
> distraction to go away. I'm tired of it. It's time for both parties to move on.
Uh, why not just keep him then? If we take a pile of shit for him and he somehow
comes back after a long layoff and plays great for a long time it will be a steal,
and if we keep him and he never returns to full form we still haven't lost out on
much. I don't see the negative side of keeping him.
Conrad I
> >damaged
> >> goods. We'll never get full value on the return, but I just want the
> >> distraction to go away. I'm tired of it. It's time for both parties to
> >move on.
> >
>
> Great minds think alike.
>
> >So, did you make the team?
>
> I'm a complete idiot for doing this, but I changed my mind and decided not
to
> try out. I'll probably regret it forever.
> Just wasn't feeling super sharp out there.
>
>
you knucklehead......hmph
Conrad I
Neo <T...@Matrix.hasyou> wrote in message
> I don't see the negative side of keeping him.
>
this statement immediately brought memories of Lindros lying on the ice
post-Stevens, with his tongue sticking out and eyes rolled back in his head
Neo
Conrad I wrote:
but is that the reason we should get rid of him? it's not like we're going to
get anything in return, so the best return on the investement would be to keep
him, IMO.
--
Dal
Bruce Quaglia
> Conrad I wrote:
I watched Rome interview Barkley recently and he asked him why
he didn't just play one more season in order to leave the game
"on his own terms"...(Barkely had explained that he needed to
play one more game after his injury becasue he didn't want his
final memory to be of being carried off the court, even playing
barely a game and walking off the court under his own power
was better). The answer Barkley gave Rome was that it wasn't
fair to the Rockets becasue it was Steve Francis's team now
and as long as he and Hakim stayed, it couldn't really become
his team. Now I don't know "whose" team the Flyers will become,
but it has been Eric's and that is over, so it really would be
best to not have him around in some limbo state. The question
of whose team it's going to be is a pretty big one...Recchi's?
Leclair's? Certainly not Desjardins' (well, IMO anyway). Bouch
and Gagne are too young to take over that kind of leadership
role and Primeau's not that type of player (again, IMO). So,
who?
PUKSTPR 31
>
>you knucklehead......hmph
>
I know....next time you see me, feel free to slap me around.
Neo
Bruce Quaglia wrote:
You've just added another reason to the list of why we should keep him.
His potential, despite his damaged physical condition, outweighs any return we could
get, unless there is some kind of really sweet offer, which there won't be.
--
Dal
czec...@aolnospam.com
A sports radio station out here reported today that the Flyers offered
Lindros to the Kings for Stumpel and a 1st round pick.
--
The Fig
Neo
> .
> > You've just added another reason to the list of why we should keep him.
> > His potential, despite his damaged physical condition, outweighs any return we could
> > get, unless there is some kind of really sweet offer, which there won't be.
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Dal
>
> A sports radio station out here reported today that the Flyers offered
> Lindros to the Kings for Stumpel and a 1st round pick.
>
> --
> The Fig
I said a really sweet offer. Not a really sweet request. Flyers won't get Stumpel and a
first rounder for Lindros.
--
Dal
Hol2990466
Neo <T...@Matrix.hasyou> wrote in message
Agreed. But I'd take that trade in a heartbeat if we actually could catch
the LA GM while he was busy with his crack pipe and actually agreed to that
deal...
Au Revoire
Especially since Stumpel has put us away in the final minute of a game
twice in the last three years. Bastard.
Au Revoire
Bruce Quaglia
> You've just added another reason to the list of why we should keep him.
> His potential, despite his damaged physical condition, outweighs any return we could
> get, unless there is some kind of really sweet offer, which there won't be.
Yes, except that EL is in no position to fulfill any kind of
leadership role as the estranged, injured and outcast former
captain. Most of his teamates feel that his various dramas have
been a big distraction.
I think they should keep EL until he's either 1) worth
something in trade 2)willing to play again as a Flyer
(who knows maybe Clarke leaves) 3) EL retires and they can retire his jersey as a Flyer
and pretend we don't remember how it all got so ugly...
I expect that they will unload him to the leafs for something
but not much and later rather than sooner. (Then he'll make it
through less than four games before his next concussion).
Rick
Bruce Quaglia wrote:
> I expect that they will unload him to the leafs for something
> but not much and later rather than sooner. (Then he'll make it
> through less than four games before his next concussion).
I was with you up until that concussion remark. Isn't that the whole purpose of waiting 6/7 months
to play?
Rick Youells
Bruce Quaglia
> Bruce Quaglia wrote:
> Rick Youells
In 6-7 months he'll be recovered from his last round of
concussions and some (probably including EL himself) will
wishfully conclude he is fine. However, after the number of
severe concussions that he's had, it is inevitable that there
will be more of them and that they will only be worse. I
guarntee you are never going to hear Kelly come out publicly
and say he thinks Eric should return to hockey, it's going
to be Eric or some part of Camp Lindros selectively reciting
parts of what Kelly said and leaving out others...
Mike Barrett
got
> > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
>
Gotta learn to read, Brad ol' boy. I guess the "when he left" part sort of
slipped by, eh?
Mike Barrett
> got
> > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
>
> Wings, and got very little ice time compared to Brind'amour. He turned
into
> a very good all around player with the Canes, when he didn't play in
anyones
> shadow. He may be able to do well as the #1 center in Philly.
Gotta learn to read, Salzy ol' boy. I guess the "when he left" part sort of
slipped by, eh?
> > Yes, I think this is Recchi's last hurrah. He is another guy that one
head
> > shot from the retirement home.
>
> WHAT? Isn't he only 32 or 33? And he certainly hasn't had a history of
> injury problems. He had one season where he missed a lot of games. It's
a
> blip on the map. He may have 5 good years left in him.
Recchi has been on the decline for a few year. Last year was an anomaly
because of his success on the PP, much of which can be credited to Lindros.
He also has lost his scoring touch a bit, and he only scored 11 goals after
Christmas. Rex is a nice player, but i don't rate him nearly as high as most
of the people here. I think he will be a big disappontment next season.
Sorry, but that is my opinion.
> > His production was skewed last year because
> > of the pp and Eric. Take that away and he was barely average. The guy is
> > declining. You'll see.
>
> My God, the numbers don't bear that out at all, but we'll see. I hope
> you're wrong.
Actually, they do. 39 of his 91 pts were on the power play, where he played
with Lindros for a pretty good chunk of time. He also played the wing for L
and L quite a few times. Eric contributed to Mark's success, and now he is
gone.
I like Rex. However, I think he is going to struggle next year. Leclair went
to arb, so he is good as gone. A lot will depend on what Clarke brings back.
I just feel this team had its window and blew it.
salzy
news:3991AAEA...@ericsson.com...
>
>
> Bruce Quaglia wrote:
>
> > I expect that they will unload him to the leafs for something
> > but not much and later rather than sooner. (Then he'll make it
> > through less than four games before his next concussion).
>
> I was with you up until that concussion remark. Isn't that the whole
purpose of waiting 6/7 months
> to play?
>
> Rick Youells
I think they should trade him before the season starts. Then you have an
active player for the whole season. Let him sit on someone else's injured
list. That's what I couldn't understand aboot the Primeau trade. Why did
they wait until January to trade Brind'amour? He sat most of the year, then
when he was healthy, they traded him. They should have made the trade in
October, then they'd have had Primeau and the Canes would have had an
injured Brindy.
salzy
> > > worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red Wings
and
> got
> > > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
> >
>
> slipped by, eh?
That's not true, and even if it was, you are somehow trying to lead us to
believe that he got significant time on the 1st line and PP. It may be true
that he got a couple games in, but not enough to draw any conclusions
whatsoever.
salzy
news:MPG.13fa8c78a...@news.earthlink.net...
> In article <3990E6E9...@Matrix.hasyou>, T...@Matrix.hasyou says...
> >
> >
> > Bruce Quaglia wrote:
> >
> > > Neo <T...@Matrix.hasyou> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Neo <T...@Matrix.hasyou> wrote in message
> > > > >
> > His potential, despite his damaged physical condition, outweighs any
return we could
> > get, unless there is some kind of really sweet offer, which there won't
be.
> >
> >
> >
> > Dal
>
> A sports radio station out here reported today that the Flyers offered
> Lindros to the Kings for Stumpel and a 1st round pick.
That sounds like a decent deal for Philly, since it gets Lindros out of the
conference.
salzy
> > > worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red Wings
and
> > got
> > > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
> >
> > Wings, and got very little ice time compared to Brind'amour. He turned
> into
> > a very good all around player with the Canes, when he didn't play in
> anyones
> > shadow. He may be able to do well as the #1 center in Philly.
>
of
> slipped by, eh?
Again, I can read, but you are just trying to mislead people by saying that.
He may have played a couple games as the #1 center (although I HIGHLY doubt
it), but that doesn't make him the #1 center. He never was, and he never
would be with Fedorov and Yzerman on the team. Why do you think he demanded
the trade. It's got nothing to do with reading, it's got everything to do
with history. Quit revising it.
> Recchi has been on the decline for a few year. Last year was an anomaly
> because of his success on the PP, much of which can be credited to
Lindros.
> He also has lost his scoring touch a bit, and he only scored 11 goals
after
> Christmas. Rex is a nice player, but i don't rate him nearly as high as
most
> of the people here. I think he will be a big disappontment next season.
> Sorry, but that is my opinion.
That's pretty silly. Last year wasn't the anomoly, the year before was. He
has definitely had more seasons like last year than he has had like the year
before. The guy holds the Flyers points record for christ sake.
> > > His production was skewed last year because
> > > of the pp and Eric. Take that away and he was barely average. The guy
is
> > > declining. You'll see.
> >
> > My God, the numbers don't bear that out at all, but we'll see. I hope
> > you're wrong.
>
> Actually, they do.
Not at all. Show me how his numbers (no matter how you slice them) were
AVERAGE? The points that follow don't cut it.
>. 39 of his 91 pts were on the power play, where he played
> with Lindros for a pretty good chunk of time.
How's that? Lindros missed how many games?
>He also played the wing for L
> and L quite a few times. Eric contributed to Mark's success, and now he is
> gone.
Give me a break. Most of his success was with Gagne and a variety of other
wingers, especially early on when Lindros was hurt.
> I like Rex. However, I think he is going to struggle next year. Leclair
went
> to arb, so he is good as gone.
If he is gone, it is good. He will bring a nice return.
>A lot will depend on what Clarke brings back.
> I just feel this team had its window and blew it.
Unfortunately, I can't argue with you there.
Brad
mikedoesnot...@bellatlantic.net said...
> > > worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red Wings and got
> > > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
> >
>
> slipped by, eh?
It was not a particularly clear sentence and I wasn't the only one that
read it that way.
Brad
bsa...@hotmail.com said...
Why would Carolina do that? Primeau wasn't signed so they weren't
paying him anything. They would have had to pay Brind'Amour while he
sat. He would have been worth less.
czec...@aolnospam.com
<snipped>
> > A sports radio station out here reported today that the Flyers offered
> > Lindros to the Kings for Stumpel and a 1st round pick.
>
> That sounds like a decent deal for Philly, since it gets Lindros out of the
> conference.
Decent for Philly, not for L.A. They'll never go for it.
--
The Fig
czec...@aolnospam.com
> Rick <"(no Junk)Rick.Youells"@ericsson.com> wrote in message
> news:3991AAEA...@ericsson.com...
> >
> >
> > Bruce Quaglia wrote:
> >
> > > I expect that they will unload him to the leafs for something
> > > but not much and later rather than sooner. (Then he'll make it
> > > through less than four games before his next concussion).
> >
> > I was with you up until that concussion remark. Isn't that the whole
> purpose of waiting 6/7 months
> > to play?
> >
> > Rick Youells
>
> I think they should trade him before the season starts. Then you have an
> active player for the whole season. Let him sit on someone else's injured
> list. That's what I couldn't understand aboot the Primeau trade. Why did
> they wait until January to trade Brind'amour? He sat most of the year, then
> when he was healthy, they traded him. They should have made the trade in
> October, then they'd have had Primeau and the Canes would have had an
> injured Brindy.
Is this a joke? Why would anyone trade an active player for someone
who's going to sit on an injured list for months if not forever?
--
The Fig
Mike Barrett
> and
> > got
> > > > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
> > >
> > > When did Primeau play on the Wings' first line?
> >
> > Gotta learn to read, Brad ol' boy. I guess the "when he left" part sort
of
> > slipped by, eh?
>
> believe that he got significant time on the 1st line and PP. It may be
true
> that he got a couple games in, but not enough to draw any conclusions
> whatsoever.
>
What's not true? That Primeau didn't get 1st line and power play duty AFTER
HE LEFT the Red Wings? Did anybody here actually pass those reading
comprehension courses in elementary school? This isn't that hard, people!
Mike Barrett
> > Gotta learn to read, Salzy ol' boy. I guess the "when he left" part sort
> of
> > slipped by, eh?
>
> Again, I can read, but you are just trying to mislead people by saying
that.
> He may have played a couple games as the #1 center (although I HIGHLY
doubt
> it), but that doesn't make him the #1 center. He never was, and he never
> would be with Fedorov and Yzerman on the team. Why do you think he
demanded
> the trade. It's got nothing to do with reading, it's got everything to do
> with history. Quit revising it.
I hate to do this to someone I like, but FUCK YOU!!!!!!!! READ WHAT I
FUCKING WROTE AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL IT SINKS THE FUCK INTO YOUR
THICK SKULL!!!!!! *AFTER HE LEFT*, as in with the Whalers and Canes!!!!!!
JESUS CHRIST ALMIGHTY, HELP ME ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!
Now, that is over and I hope we can proceed. :-)
> That's pretty silly. Last year wasn't the anomoly, the year before was.
He
We'll certainly see, won't we?
> has definitely had more seasons like last year than he has had like the
year
> before. The guy holds the Flyers points record for christ sake.
Yeah, in his first stint with the team. BTW, who was his center? The name is
escaping me.....
> >. 39 of his 91 pts were on the power play, where he played
> > with Lindros for a pretty good chunk of time.
>
> How's that? Lindros missed how many games?
Look at the splits and get back to me.
> >He also played the wing for L
> > and L quite a few times. Eric contributed to Mark's success, and now he
is
> > gone.
>
> Give me a break. Most of his success was with Gagne and a variety of
other
> wingers, especially early on when Lindros was hurt.
Look at the splits and get back to me.
> > I like Rex. However, I think he is going to struggle next year. Leclair
> went
> > to arb, so he is good as gone.
>
> If he is gone, it is good. He will bring a nice return.
I sure hope so, but I doubt it. How much can you get for a guy who will be
an unrestricted FA after the year? Clarke fucked this one up good, but what
is new there?
> > I just feel this team had its window and blew it.
>
> Unfortunately, I can't argue with you there.
Ahh, common sense returns! There ya go! :-)
Good night.
MB
Donnie Brook
to grips with the loss of Valerie Zelepukin. What will we do
without him?
I am Enzo... the baker.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
salzy
news:MPG.13fba7a0e...@news.earthlink.net...
Because the player they are giving up is a holdout, and thus not on their
active roster either. There was no reason to believe Brind'amour wouldn't
be back, and as it turned out, he was back BEFORE Primeau.
salzy
news:MPG.13fbe540e77646349897f8@news...
> > news:3991AAEA...@ericsson.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > Bruce Quaglia wrote:
> > >
> > > > I expect that they will unload him to the leafs for
something
> > > > but not much and later rather than sooner. (Then he'll make
it
> > > > through less than four games before his next concussion).
> > >
> > > I was with you up until that concussion remark. Isn't that the whole
> > purpose of waiting 6/7 months
> > > to play?
> > >
> > > Rick Youells
> >
> > I think they should trade him before the season starts. Then you have
an
> > active player for the whole season. Let him sit on someone else's
injured
> > list. That's what I couldn't understand aboot the Primeau trade. Why
did
> > they wait until January to trade Brind'amour? He sat most of the year,
then
> > when he was healthy, they traded him. They should have made the trade
in
> > October, then they'd have had Primeau and the Canes would have had an
> > injured Brindy.
>
> paying him anything. They would have had to pay Brind'Amour while he
> sat. He would have been worth less.
I would think the offer of Brind'amour, Pelletier and a 2nd rounder was a
pretty good one, and they would want to make the deal before Philly pulled
it off the table, even if it meant waiting until Brind'amour was healthy.
Plus, I don't think it's that difficult to convince Clarke to pay a chunk of
a guys salary, no matter what team he is on.
salzy
> > > > > worse, understand that Primeau played with the powerhouse Red
Wings
> > and
> > > got
> > > > > 1st line duty and 1st team PP time when he left.
> > > >
> > > > When did Primeau play on the Wings' first line?
> > >
sort
> of
> > > slipped by, eh?
> >
to
> > believe that he got significant time on the 1st line and PP. It may be
> true
> > that he got a couple games in, but not enough to draw any conclusions
> > whatsoever.
> >
>
>
> What's not true? That Primeau didn't get 1st line and power play duty
AFTER
> HE LEFT the Red Wings? Did anybody here actually pass those reading
> comprehension courses in elementary school? This isn't that hard, people!
OHHHHH! Okay, now I get it. So he wasn't on the Red Wings first line,
right?
salzy
> > >
> > > Gotta learn to read, Salzy ol' boy. I guess the "when he left" part
sort
> > of
> > > slipped by, eh?
> >
> that.
> > He may have played a couple games as the #1 center (although I HIGHLY
> doubt
> > it), but that doesn't make him the #1 center. He never was, and he
never
> > would be with Fedorov and Yzerman on the team. Why do you think he
> demanded
> > the trade. It's got nothing to do with reading, it's got everything to
do
> > with history. Quit revising it.
>
> I hate to do this to someone I like, but FUCK YOU!!!!!!!! READ WHAT I
> FUCKING WROTE AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL IT SINKS THE FUCK INTO YOUR
> THICK SKULL!!!!!! *AFTER HE LEFT*, as in with the Whalers and Canes!!!!!!
> JESUS CHRIST ALMIGHTY, HELP ME ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!
Yikes! You are pretty pissed. I don't think you said "After he left", I
think you said "When he left", which indicated to me that you thought he was
getting 1st line and PP duty, yet he still demanded a trade (which I realize
now you did not). But still, you can see where how you worded led to a
little ambiguity in the statement. I apologize, and thanks for liking me.
> Now, that is over and I hope we can proceed. :-)
>
> Yeah, in his first stint with the team. BTW, who was his center? The name
is escaping me.....
I know what you are getting at, for most of the year it was a hot shot
rookie. But that kid missed quite a few games that year, and I think Recchi
ended up with many more points , so who was the star that year? In 10 years
will we say "yeah Recchi had a good year in 99-00, but GAGNE was his center!
I could score 80 with GAGNE! It's a symbiotic relationship.
> > Give me a break. Most of his success was with Gagne and a variety of
> other
> > wingers, especially early on when Lindros was hurt.
>
> Look at the splits and get back to me.
Actually I'm too busy to look for that. Could you post them for me?
> I sure hope so, but I doubt it. How much can you get for a guy who will be
> an unrestricted FA after the year? Clarke fucked this one up good, but
what
> is new there?
Hey, send him to the Islanders. Dipietro is due to be traded. He's been
with the team for a month and a half!
salzy
news:MPG.13fba66b9...@news.earthlink.net...
Actually, it's more than decent for LA. Lindros could play 10 more games or
10 more years. Unless you know what it'll be, you can't say what's a good
deal and what's not.
Wayne
restricted free agent, and as such was under no obligation to sign any
contract. Yashin was a holdout. He had a valid contract and refused to
play. There is an enormous difference between the two and I wish people
would stop calling people like Primeau and Khabiboulin hold outs. They are
free agents.
Wayne
--
http://members.home.net/kid88/money/money.html
"salzy" <bsa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1_Fk5.139603$Gh.20...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> <czec...@aolnospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.13fba7a0e...@news.earthlink.net...
> > bsa...@hotmail.com says...
czec...@aolnospam.com
Sorry, I was addressing the Lindros part rather than Primeau. I should
have been more clear.
--
The Fig
czec...@aolnospam.com
Or Lindros could be finished in his first 10 seconds on the ice.
You're right, no one knows what it'll be. That's the gamble someone is
presumingly going to take but I don't see it being Dave Taylor.
--
The Fig
salzy
news:xDIk5.7855$c5.4...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
> Primeau didn't have a contract, therefore he didn't hold out. He was a
Really? THANKS!!! Why wasn't he playing? Was he HOLDING OUT for a new
contract by any chance?
> restricted free agent, and as such was under no obligation to sign any
> contract. Yashin was a holdout. He had a valid contract and refused to
> play. There is an enormous difference between the two and I wish people
> would stop calling people like Primeau and Khabiboulin hold outs. They
are
> free agents.
Again, THANK YOU for explaining that for me. I've only been watching hockey
for about 6 months, so I am fairly new to the game. I am not too sure about
all the jargon and expressions and what not. I want to thank you for
clearing that up for me. Do you think if you get time, you could explain
icing for me? For what it's worth, though, I agree with you. I have no
problem with Khabibulin sitting out the year, whereas I think Yashin is
pretty much pondscum. Khabi has no obligation to the Yotes at this point,
but Yashin certainly does. I hope he rots for another couple years.
salzy
news:MPG.13fcf8dbb...@news.earthlink.net...
Oh, sorry. But the answer is pretty much the same. If the Leafs (or Kings
or whoever) want to land Lindros, they better do it before someone else nabs
him.
salzy
news:MPG.13fcfc3a4...@news.earthlink.net...
I don't think Stumpel and a 1st rounder is much to give up for the potential
ROI.
Wayne
> Wayne <ki...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:xDIk5.7855$c5.4...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
> > Primeau didn't have a contract, therefore he didn't hold out. He was a
>
> Really? THANKS!!! Why wasn't he playing? Was he HOLDING OUT for a new
> contract by any chance?
See, I guess the difference here is how one defines holding out. To me, a
hold out is someone who has a contract and doesn't play.
> > restricted free agent, and as such was under no obligation to sign any
> > contract. Yashin was a holdout. He had a valid contract and refused to
> > play. There is an enormous difference between the two and I wish people
> > would stop calling people like Primeau and Khabiboulin hold outs. They
> are
> > free agents.
>
> Again, THANK YOU for explaining that for me. I've only been watching
hockey
> for about 6 months, so I am fairly new to the game. I am not too sure
about
> all the jargon and expressions and what not. I want to thank you for
> clearing that up for me. Do you think if you get time, you could explain
> icing for me? For what it's worth, though, I agree with you. I have no
> problem with Khabibulin sitting out the year, whereas I think Yashin is
> pretty much pondscum. Khabi has no obligation to the Yotes at this point,
> but Yashin certainly does. I hope he rots for another couple years.
There wasn't much need for the initial sarcasm, especially considering that
you agreed with me. However, I'm curious about something. You have no
problem with Khabi, but your tone in previous posts would suggest that you
did have a problem with Primeau. Is that true, and if so how come??
salzy
No, not at all. I have no problem with Khabi, or Primeau, or Fedorov, or
any of the other ummm...contractless hold outs? I was just saying they
should have traded Brindamour for Primeau while Brindamour was hurt, that
way Philly has Primeau and Carolina still has an unactive player. Yashin
and Tkachuk and whoever else pulls that dishonest stuff can kiss my ass,
though.
jonathank...@gmail.com
> >From: Shrike bhalverso...@leathercenter.com.invalid
> >So then, what do you see?
> Probably a decent season...nothing great, nothing terrible. It's tough to feel
> they have any real chance of winning it all.
> There are lots of question marks. I guess more than anything, I'm interested to
> see how last year's rookies play. Boucher (assuming he's signed), Gagne,
> Delmore...that's a lot of promise in all three areas of the ice.
> As great a player as Lindros can be I hope he doesn't come back. He's damaged
> goods. We'll never get full value on the return, but I just want the
> distraction to go away. I'm tired of it. It's time for both parties to move on.
>
> I'm not as pessimistic as you seem to be, but I can't see them getting past the
> 2nd or
> 3rd round.
> Jon