Your own CRAZY projections

Dash wrote:The Sens draft Nail Yakupov in 2012.

Regin gets waived, or at best traded, after disappointing in Ottawa. Goes back to Europe.

Crosby has played his last game of NHL hockey.

Alfredsson retires after or by end of this season. :'(

Craig Anderson fails just like all others before him

(I obviously hope a lot of these do not happen).

My crazy prediction: Someone ACTUALLY "nails" Yakupov.

Dash wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:I also think SJ wins the Cup (gasp!)

Hossa! Chara! Next, Havlat? I miss those guys.

Me to... thanks Muckler..

And thanks Salary Cap. But I would really like to know the truth regarding the Chara situation. I've heard numerous rumours on the net, and I really want the truth. I think Redden should be blamed too, because he made himself look better than he was.

Dash wrote:And thanks Salary Cap. But I would really like to know the truth regarding the Chara situation. I've heard numerous rumours on the net, and I really want the truth. I think Redden should be blamed too, because he made himself look better than he was.

Me too. Although it's one or the other:

EITHER:
he wanted 7.5 X 5 - or BARE minimum of 7 X 5. The Sens were trying to micro manage the salary cap and they were too scared to commit that kind of loot to him, Redden and Hossa, so they let him get to the 11th hour and counldn't sign.

OR:
He was severely put off by the Hossa sign and trade.

OR:
A combination of those.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Dash wrote:And thanks Salary Cap. But I would really like to know the truth regarding the Chara situation. I've heard numerous rumours on the net, and I really want the truth. I think Redden should be blamed too, because he made himself look better than he was.

Me too. Although it's one or the other:

EITHER:
he wanted 7.5 X 5 - or BARE minimum of 7 X 5. The Sens were trying to micro manage the salary cap and they were too scared to commit that kind of loot to him, Redden and Hossa, so they let him get to the 11th hour and counldn't sign.

OR:
He was severely put off by the Hossa sign and trade.

OR:
A combination of those.

From what I heard... Chara did not want to leave Ottawa. He wanted to be dealt with separately from Redden... ie.. don't try to tie both contracts to same $ (I assume that was his thinking.. but don't know for sure).
I heard he was very upset when he realized he was not coming back to the Sens.
How did I hear this? I worked with a lady who was friends with Chara's wife..

No offence, but a lot of people have a "heard it from" story.

Stories I have heard:

- Chara was not offered a contract at all
- both Chara and Redden offered same contract, Chara refused
- Hossa's mistreatment burned bridges with Chara (as Spez already mentioned)
- Chara wanted to be captain
- Chara refused to re-sign period

So there's lots of innuendo. As I said, I want to hear it from Muckler or Melnyk or Chara. Not a friend of a friend of Chara's wife, a neighbour, the cashier at the store.

Dash wrote:No offence, but a lot of people have a "heard it from" story.

Stories I have heard:

- Chara was not offered a contract at all
- both Chara and Redden offered same contract, Chara refused
- Hossa's mistreatment burned bridges with Chara (as Spez already mentioned)
- Chara wanted to be captain
- Chara refused to re-sign period

So there's lots of innuendo. As I said, I want to hear it from Muckler or Melnyk or Chara. Not a friend of a friend of Chara's wife, a neighbour, the cashier at the store.

The two bolds are the reasons, nothing about being C IMO.

Are you saying those are the reasons as your opinion or fact? Because I have not seen any facts. And you admit that the captaincy issue is your opinion, which doesn't help get to the bottom of this at all

Dash wrote:Are you saying those are the reasons as your opinion or fact? Because I have not seen any facts. And you admit that the captaincy issue is your opinion, which doesn't help get to the bottom of this at all

I already told you that I'd like to know the real reasons as well, but I'd wager good $$ that it's one of the two bolded statements.

Dash wrote:No offence, but a lot of people have a "heard it from" story.

Stories I have heard:

- Chara was not offered a contract at all
- both Chara and Redden offered same contract, Chara refused
- Hossa's mistreatment burned bridges with Chara (as Spez already mentioned)
- Chara wanted to be captain
- Chara refused to re-sign period

So there's lots of innuendo. As I said, I want to hear it from Muckler or Melnyk or Chara. Not a friend of a friend of Chara's wife, a neighbour, the cashier at the store.

No even offered a contract but Muckler. Chara told The Sens what he wanted and instead of talk it out, Muckler said "screw you" and let him walk. Wasn't offered a cent by The Sens.

Not sure where the captaincy thing came from. That's a fabricated story that somehow got legs because he was automatically given the C in Boston.

NEELY wrote:

Dash wrote:No offence, but a lot of people have a "heard it from" story.

Stories I have heard:

- Chara was not offered a contract at all
- both Chara and Redden offered same contract, Chara refused
- Hossa's mistreatment burned bridges with Chara (as Spez already mentioned)
- Chara wanted to be captain
- Chara refused to re-sign period

So there's lots of innuendo. As I said, I want to hear it from Muckler or Melnyk or Chara. Not a friend of a friend of Chara's wife, a neighbour, the cashier at the store.

No even offered a contract but Muckler. Chara told The Sens what he wanted and instead of talk it out, Muckler said "screw you" and let him walk. Wasn't offered a cent by The Sens.

Not sure where the captaincy thing came from. That's a fabricated story that somehow got legs because he was automatically given the C in Boston.

Jason York said this on the radio. Said he wanted to be THE man in Ottawa and made it clear.
To me that sounds like a Captaincy request.
But I don't really care anyways. It's the past.

To be "THE man" may also have meant "Don't try to give Redden and me the same contract." And, perhaps, when NEELY says he told them what he wanted that was "Pay me more than Redden".

So, you see, you could both be correct and yet the real story is not what either of you are implying.

I never got to meat the Big Slovakian, but he lived on my street and was not the most outgoing person. I caught him driving his car way too fast for my liking (this would have been 5-1/2 years ago so the girls would have been not even 4 -- I was very protective with fast drivers on family crescents). I also heard the story how his neighbor was putting in a fence and wanted him to go half on the shared portion, and Chara refused. Can't really corroborate that story because I heard it second hand, but at least while I was still living on that street you could see the fully fenced-in neighbor's yard and Chara's had no fence.

What does any of that mean? Well, it means I wouldn't put it past Chara to demand (more money, better contract) and Muckler had already shown he wouldn't stand for that with his sign-and-trade of Hossa.

So I'm actually inclined to believe the *original* story of how Muckler wanted to sign both to the same contract and Redden was fine with that, but Chara wasn't. This would have been a verbal offer, not a contract, so it does not contradict what NEELY says.

And, frankly, that's about the only way it makes sense that Muckler signed Redden and let Chara walk. THat, and senility.

wprager wrote:To be "THE man" may also have meant "Don't try to give Redden and me the same contract." And, perhaps, when NEELY says he told them what he wanted that was "Pay me more than Redden".

So, you see, you could both be correct and yet the real story is not what either of you are implying.

I never got to meat the Big Slovakian, but he lived on my street and was not the most outgoing person. I caught him driving his car way too fast for my liking (this would have been 5-1/2 years ago so the girls would have been not even 4 -- I was very protective with fast drivers on family crescents). I also heard the story how his neighbor was putting in a fence and wanted him to go half on the shared portion, and Chara refused. Can't really corroborate that story because I heard it second hand, but at least while I was still living on that street you could see the fully fenced-in neighbor's yard and Chara's had no fence.

What does any of that mean? Well, it means I wouldn't put it past Chara to demand (more money, better contract) and Muckler had already shown he wouldn't stand for that with his sign-and-trade of Hossa.

So I'm actually inclined to believe the *original* story of how Muckler wanted to sign both to the same contract and Redden was fine with that, but Chara wasn't. This would have been a verbal offer, not a contract, so it does not contradict what NEELY says.

And, frankly, that's about the only way it makes sense that Muckler signed Redden and let Chara walk. THat, and senility.

Chara said he wanted a certain deal, Muckler said "ok, I'll get back to you", signed Redden, let him walk. There was not offer from The Sens and Muckler and it just showed how out of touch he was with the game and the players in it. Chara is obviously a leader but never did he ever demand the captancy from Alfi. As for York, he's full of it and I would tell him that to his face. Saying he wanted to be more of a leader and wanted a bigger role in that aspect is not the same. If people disagree with that, Stanley Cups for Chara = 1, Sens = 0.

People want to vilify Chara to make the organization look not as bad and make Chara look worse. Fact of the matter is that Muckler let one of the most dominate players in the last 1/4 century of hockey walk for nothing without even giving him an offer. It was one of the biggest mistakes in league history, looking at both teams current situations just proves it.

NEELY wrote:

wprager wrote:To be "THE man" may also have meant "Don't try to give Redden and me the same contract." And, perhaps, when NEELY says he told them what he wanted that was "Pay me more than Redden".

So, you see, you could both be correct and yet the real story is not what either of you are implying.

I never got to meat the Big Slovakian, but he lived on my street and was not the most outgoing person. I caught him driving his car way too fast for my liking (this would have been 5-1/2 years ago so the girls would have been not even 4 -- I was very protective with fast drivers on family crescents). I also heard the story how his neighbor was putting in a fence and wanted him to go half on the shared portion, and Chara refused. Can't really corroborate that story because I heard it second hand, but at least while I was still living on that street you could see the fully fenced-in neighbor's yard and Chara's had no fence.

What does any of that mean? Well, it means I wouldn't put it past Chara to demand (more money, better contract) and Muckler had already shown he wouldn't stand for that with his sign-and-trade of Hossa.

So I'm actually inclined to believe the *original* story of how Muckler wanted to sign both to the same contract and Redden was fine with that, but Chara wasn't. This would have been a verbal offer, not a contract, so it does not contradict what NEELY says.

And, frankly, that's about the only way it makes sense that Muckler signed Redden and let Chara walk. THat, and senility.

Chara said he wanted a certain deal, Muckler said "ok, I'll get back to you", signed Redden, let him walk. There was not offer from The Sens and Muckler and it just showed how out of touch he was with the game and the players in it. Chara is obviously a leader but never did he ever demand the captancy from Alfi. As for York, he's full of it and I would tell him that to his face. Saying he wanted to be more of a leader and wanted a bigger role in that aspect is not the same. If people disagree with that, Stanley Cups for Chara = 1, Sens = 0.

People want to vilify Chara to make the organization look not as bad and make Chara look worse. Fact of the matter is that Muckler let one of the most dominate players in the last 1/4 century of hockey walk for nothing without even giving him an offer. It was one of the biggest mistakes in league history, looking at both teams current situations just proves it.

Obviously letting him go was a mistake but I think the statement of him being one of of the most dominant players in the last 1/4 century is a bit of a stretch.

Sure Chara is a force for Boston, but he isn't what made them win the Cup. It was the man between the pipes.

Thomas was awesome, he was the MVP, no argument here. Chara was the man that started the turn around in Boston, he was the man who lead that team, he is the man who is considered the best D man in the game today.

I think it's pretty safe to say that not signing Chara is the reason both teams are where they are today. That move could take Ottawa 10-15 years to come back from and who knows if they will ever be as good a team as they were with Chara,

But is he considered the best d-man in the game today? I don't think he is. Before this year he always choked when the games really mattered. Hell he wasn't even dominant in this year's Cup run. Seidenberg was better than him all-around, IMO.

but as it was mentioned before, I don't care anymore about letting him walk either, it's in the past.

But just to add, we made the Final without Chara, so that should show you a little something about how much value he has.

Here's a crazy projection: Bryan Murray suddenly begins to speak without a speech impediment.

Big Ev wrote:But is he considered the best d-man in the game today? I don't think he is. Before this year he always choked when the games really mattered. Hell he wasn't even dominant in this year's Cup run. Seidenberg was better than him all-around, IMO.

but as it was mentioned before, I don't care anymore about letting him walk either, it's in the past.

But just to add, we made the Final without Chara, so that should show you a little something about how much value he has.

Well the Chara discussion started about what happened when Muckler let him walk... I told it right from the horses mouth. Chara was considered a choker...? To who? Obviously that isn't the case and I never thought it was. Hard to play 30 plus mins a night in every situation and not be the fall guy when the team he is on doesn't win the cup.

The Sens made the finals, absolutely... were they a better team then the year before? Not a chance. Only a casual fan will look at that Sens team and say "they made the finals, they were better". Fact is that was a perfect storm for The Sens to get to the finals unlike years before where everything that could go wrong, went wrong. The East was weak, The Sens were on a hot streak, and they got to play a Buffalo team who's number they always seemed to have. Questioning his value because they made the finals? Doesn't work that way because that question has been answered. Question should be do The Sens win if they have Chara? Who knows.

You always loved to knock Chara because he hadn't won The Cup, he has now, as a captain and as a 30 min D man. The Sens are a basement team with no one even close to as dominate as Chara on their team or in the organization.