Not that there's anything wrong with that.
GM Hockey
Gohan wrote:So how about Buffalo and Colorado? We're only 20 games in, but wtf Find me someone who had them in the playoff picture in November, let alone March and April and I'll show you someone stuck in 2006.
Cap'n Clutch wrote:
Thats what we thought when we faced the Kovalchuk-less Thrashers and the offensive and PP challenged Predators. The Penguins just won 5 - 2 vs. the Ducks and right now winning a game against ANY team is somewhat of a triumph for the Sens right now. Just imagine if the team could figure out how to fire on all cylanders?
Cheechoo, Kovalev, Foligno, Regin, Shannon - Even if they only got 2 of those guys going our team would be so much better off. Throw in some goaltending without 1 to 2 softies per game and look out. We could make it into the playoffs and maybe even win a round. Ahh to dream.
asq2 wrote:4.7 per year?
I guess because of the length. But this is a guy who, since the lock-out, has put up 97, 96, 78 and 88 points.
7 years would take him to 39, though.
Hey, whatever happened to that league inquiry into whether teams were trying to circumvent the cap by making deals that were intentionally too long?
SpezDispenser wrote:asq2 wrote:4.7 per year?
I guess because of the length. But this is a guy who, since the lock-out, has put up 97, 96, 78 and 88 points.
7 years would take him to 39, though.
Hey, whatever happened to that league inquiry into whether teams were trying to circumvent the cap by making deals that were intentionally too long?
No law against it yet. Next CBA should nip that in the bud. Now would be the time to do it.
asq2 wrote:SpezDispenser wrote:asq2 wrote:4.7 per year?
I guess because of the length. But this is a guy who, since the lock-out, has put up 97, 96, 78 and 88 points.
7 years would take him to 39, though.
Hey, whatever happened to that league inquiry into whether teams were trying to circumvent the cap by making deals that were intentionally too long?
No law against it yet. Next CBA should nip that in the bud. Now would be the time to do it.
We should sign Volchenkov to a 72-year deal worth $50 million.
wprager wrote:I see that both Commodore and Preissing were listed in injury reports as "fatigue/conditioning". Preissing missed one game; not sure if Commodore missed/will miss any action.
Fatigue, really? We're not even at the quarter mark of the season.
asq2 wrote:
We should sign Volchenkov to a 72-year deal worth $50 million.
SpezDispenser wrote:asq2 wrote:
We should sign Volchenkov to a 72-year deal worth $50 million.
Source?
SeawaySensFan wrote:SpezDispenser wrote:asq2 wrote:
We should sign Volchenkov to a 72-year deal worth $50 million.
Source?
GM Hockey » The other NHL teams » General Hockey talk » General Hockey Talk - Injuries, signings, factoids + other news from around the league
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum