Location: Auckland -Burn it all down Joined: 10.22.2008
Oct 17 @ 11:09 PM ET
Yeah that chemistry could be interesting. - A_SteamingLombardi
If (and i'm getting way ahead of myself here), but if Burmistov works out. I would think that Baer is def moved as a result.
Which i would be more than ok with.
If (and i'm getting way ahead of myself here), but if Burmistov works out. I would think that Baer is def moved as a result.
Which i would be more than ok with. - dbot
Bear Cheese will get moved whether Burmistrov works out or not.
The one game he got benched was because he decided not to hit someone and they took the puck and got a shot on net, mistake yes, but to bench him for that is stupid. Today i have no idea, he should at least be 12 mins or Utica - phyllee
10-12minutes sounds about right. Don't know what his confidence will be like if he gets demoted when he is doing things right.
Or, does not playing him a little more also affect his confidence?
It is only game 5, so let's see what happens by game 20.
Also maybe he needs to get some special teams time.
Complimentary? He's their second line center and he scored 32 goals last year. Their top eight scorers last year were all Burke and Nonis guys except Matthews and Marner.
Apparently Marner has been demoted to their fourth line I read today. - LeftCoaster
Their top 8 scores included Mathews Nylander, Marner, brown and zaitzev who all were brought in under this group I think?
You can also throw in Anderson, Hyman, Marleau, Babcock as important pieces. Anyways I don't really want to talk about the leafs success.
As much as I liked everyone's effort tonight, especially Nilsson's, I thought EG had a hell of a game. He looked very determined and positioned himself well to hit, block shots and passes, and clear the puck out with confidence. Big difference from last year, thus far.
Location: When youre 7 pages behind Dont bother catching up, you will never get that time back - Codes1087 Joined: 07.26.2010
Oct 17 @ 11:51 PM ET
I know I am in the extreme minority here, but I have been very happy with Vanek. I was a fan of his before, so obviously a little biased but I like the little things he does in the offensive zone. I hope some of the kids learn how he plays around the boards and the net
On the flip side, since I haven't watched every minute of every game, can someone fill me in on if Sam Gagner has done anything positive?
I know I am in the extreme minority here, but I have been very happy with Vanek. I was a fan of his before, so obviously a little biased but I like the little things he does in the offensive zone. I hope some of the kids learn how he plays around the boards and the net
On the flip side, since I haven't watched every minute of every game, can someone fill me in on if Sam Gagner has done anything positive? - WhiteLie
Ganger had a decent shift with the Sedin's... Does that count.
I know I am in the extreme minority here, but I have been very happy with Vanek. I was a fan of his before, so obviously a little biased but I like the little things he does in the offensive zone. I hope some of the kids learn how he plays around the boards and the net
On the flip side, since I haven't watched every minute of every game, can someone fill me in on if Sam Gagner has done anything positive? - WhiteLie
I agree with you, Vanek has been better than I expected and certainly dangerous offensively. Considering the contract and potential recoup of a pick, it's hard to complain about the addition IMO.
Gagner on the other hand has been dog poop. It's petty but I saw him fail 3 times to catch a puck flittering overhead this game and it pissed me off.
He's now been taken off the PP as well, which he was brought in to fix. It's early days but he looks like the lemon of Benning's FA signings this year.
I know I am in the extreme minority here, but I have been very happy with Vanek. I was a fan of his before, so obviously a little biased but I like the little things he does in the offensive zone. I hope some of the kids learn how he plays around the boards and the net
On the flip side, since I haven't watched every minute of every game, can someone fill me in on if Sam Gagner has done anything positive? - WhiteLie
It's easy to pile on Vanek cause he's slow and so doesn't look engaged. But the guy is strong and actually is one of the few Canucks that knocks players on their buts. Plus he goes to the dirty areas. If he's played in a middle support role, with Sedins is fine, he'll add value for a trade.
Gagner clicked with Burmi and JV but no one else since. Now Burmi is showing chemistry with BB. So maybe Gagner would be good for Sutter who's a shooter. Then have JV and Granlund play with Bo.
And, while technically it was Shanahan et al. who drafted Matthews you can’t really give them “credit” for that. It’s not like they were deciding between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.