eagleeyedak

Members
  • Content count

    900
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

204 Good

About eagleeyedak

  • Rank
    Comets Star

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. I'm genuinely concerned that this kid and Adam Clendening join Linden Vey as being waiver eligible next fall. That's three spots on the fall roster next year effectively held down by big question marks. Its not Sven's fault that Vey and Clendening are struggling. But, taken cumulatively, its worrisome that GMJB would plug a third player into the roster like this in the fall. Vey is the odd man out when Burr gets back, as it stands. Another body (Dorsett or Kenins?) is going to sit when Richie gets back. Plug Sven in there, and that's two forwards who either have to go this summer to make room for Vey/Sven, or they'll be sitting in the press box. Then, there is the question of the kid's dad. We all know how far south that this can go. Great potential value, no questions. And, sounds as though he was prepared to not sign an RFA contract with CGY this fall. So, its a trade that JB probably has to make, considering. But, I like our UFAs, too, and don't want to see any of them leave either.
  2. #wewanttrotz
  3. Well, I disagree with you...but, I appreciate what you're trying to say....
  4. Incidental contact, at best. He was not shoved full bore into the net. In fact, he was actually moved into the post, not the net (watch the replay). The goal was the incidental part of a legal play/scrum for a loose puck. The ref did an A+++ job being in the right position the entire time to see the puck and the play as it evolved. As bad as we all complain about the refs, he was in the absolute best position to see the entire play. All kudos to him. The only whining from the SJBabies bench was based on the thought that Stalock at it covered, as Cheatin' Joe Thornton admitted in the post game himself. There was no complaining about him being pushed into the net. They thought the puck was covered. So did Drew Remenda, as he whined himself through the last ten mins of the game and post-game. They didn't have the right angle, nor see that the puck was loose. Had they, there would have been no complain, even from that bunch of babies. You're trying to hang on to a weak technicality, which no one is even disputing.
  5. Its unreal to me that Canucks fans don't see this en masse. Diving Logan Couture during first intermission..."we need to draw penalites in the second". They whine (the puck was lose girls...the second goal was totally legit), they cry (poor Joey Thornton runs over Drew Doughty, while Todd McClellan is still screaming like a girl on the bench), they scratch (Logan trying to fight for the first time in, what...years? in the third...Andrew Desjardins doing the same and getting his a** handed to him in the first)...this team is the epitome of trash. Garbage team and franchise, all the way up to their crybaby homer announcers. Total trailer trash. They deserve the distinction of blowing a 3-0 lead.
  6. The ref was staring right at the puck! What is he supposed to do? Blow the whistle because, despite the puck being lose at the goaltenders skate, the possibility exists that he may be pushed into the net? Of all the phony controversies. The puck was loose. End of story.
  7. A week ago, I was all Dal Colle. Now, I'm warming up to Ritchie. Either could potentially compliment Kesler and Higgins, though beginning to believe the latter can contribute more quickly and has demonstrated his defensive skills. Unsure whether Ehlers tops these two. Lots of time though to keep digging.
  8. Got his contract.
  9. Wow....reminiscint of Daniel's call in Game 4 @ San Jose last year...50-50 puck battle...horrible call
  10. You're still wrong. Any, my argument never changed. You're defining things purely on offensive output, rather than defensive efficiency. And, if you saw Richardson's player usage chart, and understood what that meant, you'd get it.
  11. Sorry...thank goodness!!!
  12. Where are the Canucks? Just terrible....
  13. You're missing the point. Richardson is asked to do one thing. Its no duh that if you pair a guy like Kassian with him, and wish to evaluate his relative offensive output, that you will see it decline. But, that alone, doesn't make your point.
  14. I'll double up by saying that there is no reason that Kassian and Richardson should be playing together on the same line. That doesn't compromise one's performance vs. the other. To the contrary, they, and Booth, have been our best two-way line for the last month. Slagging one versus the other, however, was wrong on your part. And, Richie isn't a 13th forward, by any reasonable measure. In fact, he has saved our a**es this year from making this whole thing worse. My Goodness....good on you Ryan....
  15. Spot on. Hope Henrik doesn't "leave early" like last year, eh?