I like Louis CK's bit where he talks about how men worry about women not (frank)ing them...women have to worry about men KILLING them.

For 4 million vs. 1, I'll take Ranger all day.

I realize that some people will say, "But we're paying Liles almost that much, anyway."

However, we're saving a portion by keeping Liles in the AHL, and with how tight to the cap we are, I don't see the point in gambling for a player who costs even more and might very well come with less utility and tradability.
- Leeman4Gilmour

so would most gms.
who would you rather have on your team come playoff time, ranger or gleason?

I like Louis CK's bit where he talks about how men worry about women not (frank)ing them...women have to worry about men KILLING them.
- Zezel

Bill Burr.


"there's no reason to hit a woman"

Hilarious.

so would most gms.
who would you rather have on your team come playoff time, ranger or gleason?
- Barx

Depends...


Gleason from 2 years ago or Ranger from 4 years ago?

Depends...


Gleason from 2 years ago or Ranger from 4 years ago?
- AngryWhiteMale

gleason under carlyle.

gleason under carlyle.
- Barx

Good point.

Detroit has 7 loser points already.

They must be on pace to break records in that department. The NHL's standings are such a joke. I'll bet we get screwed by that.

Detroit has 7 loser points already.

They must be on pace to break records in that department. The NHL's standings are such a joke. I'll bet we get screwed by that.
- Leeman4Gilmour

Yeah I noticed that too the other day.

A lot of close hockey games for sure

so would most gms.
who would you rather have on your team come playoff time, ranger or gleason?
- Barx

In that the salary cap doesn't apply to the playoffs, Gleason.

However, to get there, you need the financial flexibility to build a well-balanced team. I'd say that 4 million for a #6 d-man backs you into a pretty tight corner.

I'm still sticking with Ranger for that reason. Gleason as a rental? Sure. Gleason with two years left at 4 million? Pass.

In that the salary cap doesn't apply to the playoffs, Gleason.

However, to get there, you need the financial flexibility to build a well-balanced team. I'd say that 4 million for a #6 d-man backs you into a pretty tight corner.

I'm still sticking with Ranger for that reason. Gleason as a rental? Sure. Gleason with two years left at 4 million? Pass.
- Leeman4Gilmour

liles.
you are forgetting that wee tidbit in the equation.

Yeah I noticed that too the other day.

A lot of close hockey games for sure
- AngryWhiteMale

Detroit's abnormally large percentage of OT loser points goes to show that they'll always be good enough to hang around with most teams, but not good enough to really be a factor.

liles.
you are forgetting that wee tidbit.
- Barx

Yes, but as I said, we're operating under the assumption that Gleason would be in the line-up while Liles would be buried. That's a swing of about a million bucks.

I just don't think we have the spare space to be gambling any amount on a project like Gleason.

Bill Burr.


"there's no reason to hit a woman"

Hilarious.
- AngryWhiteMale

Burr's pretty funny, I've been checking him out lately. He was good in Breaking Bad too.

Detroit has 7 loser points already.

They must be on pace to break records in that department. The NHL's standings are such a joke. I'll bet we get screwed by that.
- Leeman4Gilmour

Detroit's abnormally large percentage of OT loser points goes to show that they'll always be good enough to hang around with most teams, but not good enough to really be a factor.
- Leeman4Gilmour

What if the losses came by means of shootout?

Detroit's abnormally large percentage of OT loser points goes to show that they'll always be good enough to hang around with most teams, but not good enough to really be a factor.
- Leeman4Gilmour

With most losses likely coming via shootout. OT loss doesn't mean poop. How many playoff games go into OT. There is no shootout to save them against having to skate with datsyuk and zetterberg then.

What if the losses came by means of shootout?
- Cherry--Skoal

If we're going to assume shootouts are not indicative of a team's talent (probably true), then we just treat them as ties.

But, then we'd have to look at their nine wins and take away any of those won in a shootout and treat them as ties, as well.

I still think it means they just don't have the horses to be anything more than a blip on the playoff radar. They still have the talent to pull off a series victory, but they just can't close the deal like they used to.

Yes, but as I said, we're operating under the assumption that Gleason would be in the line-up while Liles would be buried. That's a swing of about a million bucks.

I just don't think we have the spare space to be gambling any amount on a project like Gleason.
- Leeman4Gilmour

rielly goes to jr.....

rielly goes to jr.....
- Barx

rielly goes to jr.....
- Barx

Yep where he should be if all he's gonna do it sit and eat popcorn...

Yep where he should be if all he's gonna do it sit and eat popcorn...
- Fruitcakenipple

Why does everyone assume its always popcorn?
Cant a kid have a hot dog every once in awhile?

Why does everyone assume its always popcorn?
Cant a kid have a hot dog every once in awhile?
- UsernameUnknown

Or Nachos. For (frank)s sake, people.

Or Nachos. For (frank)s sake, people.
- systemtool

or beer...what the fk was i thinking....

Or Nachos. For (frank)s sake, people.
- systemtool

Deep fried nachos with a cut up hot dog on top.