Carolina Hurricanes @ Ottawa Senators, Tuesday, April 3, 2012, 7:00 PM EST

The whole Carkner/Gilroy choice seems to spark a lot of discussion... heh heh.

Michallica wrote:here we go with the gilroy bashing again.....

you know who sucked noodles yesterday? Alfie. And needless to say, Anderson was a whole lotta suck as well

But....Gilroy so noticeably sucks...I don't know what else to say. It's shades of Picard all over again, where he's okay offensively, but crap defensively and it always leads to cluster diddles in our zone.

Anderson wasn't great at all, he looked disinterested, but he's been amazing all year, Gilroy...has not.

Hoags wrote:

Michallica wrote:
Not saying he's not bad, but give it a rest. He's not the reason they lost yesterday yeesh

I didn't say we lost because of him, I just said he is terrible.

They're going to have to find another right handed puck mover in the offseason.

And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Hoags wrote:

Michallica wrote:
Not saying he's not bad, but give it a rest. He's not the reason they lost yesterday yeesh

I didn't say we lost because of him, I just said he is terrible.

They're going to have to find another right handed puck mover in the offseason.

Used to think that could be Gryba, but recently saw a tweet with the practice lines, and Gryba was on the third pairing. Yikes, what's happening there? Can we expect *any* D to challenge in camp and be on the top of the callup list? Borowiecki, I guess, but he is a lefty and not exactly a puck mover. Wiercioch is a puck mover but also a leftie and may still need more time. Man, we need to draft some D in a hurry.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Michallica wrote:here we go with the gilroy bashing again.....

you know who sucked noodles yesterday? Alfie. And needless to say, Anderson was a whole lotta suck as well

But....Gilroy so noticeably sucks...I don't know what else to say. It's shades of Picard all over again, where he's okay offensively, but crap defensively and it always leads to cluster diddles in our zone.

Anderson wasn't great at all, he looked disinterested, but he's been amazing all year, Gilroy...has not.

Maybe Gilroy is there to convince the sports writers that Karlsson is not as bad defensively as they all remember.

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Boy, imagine if he had also used irregardless in place of irrespective? One of us may have blown a gasket. Phew! Dodged one, there.

wprager wrote:

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Boy, imagine if he had also used irregardless in place of irrespective? One of us may have blown a gasket. Phew! Dodged one, there.

Let me try:

What did you mean by "Dodged one?"

wprager wrote:

Hoags wrote:

Michallica wrote:
Not saying he's not bad, but give it a rest. He's not the reason they lost yesterday yeesh

I didn't say we lost because of him, I just said he is terrible.

They're going to have to find another right handed puck mover in the offseason.

Used to think that could be Gryba, but recently saw a tweet with the practice lines, and Gryba was on the third pairing. Yikes, what's happening there? Can we expect *any* D to challenge in camp and be on the top of the callup list? Borowiecki, I guess, but he is a lefty and not exactly a puck mover. Wiercioch is a puck mover but also a leftie and may still need more time. Man, we need to draft some D in a hurry.

Yes we do (need to draft Ds). Gryba's only issue is still his speed. When I watched a couple of B-Sens feeds, he looked fine, but he may have to really work on it this summer and then play another year in the A, then work on it again before he gets a chance.

Also, watch for Ottawa to get in on some of the UFA college D-men, there are a couple.

wprager wrote:
Used to think that could be Gryba, but recently saw a tweet with the practice lines, and Gryba was on the third pairing. Yikes, what's happening there? Can we expect *any* D to challenge in camp and be on the top of the callup list? Borowiecki, I guess, but he is a lefty and not exactly a puck mover. Wiercioch is a puck mover but also a leftie and may still need more time. Man, we need to draft some D in a hurry.

We badly need a RH puck mover to replace Gonchar when he is done here. It would've been Rundblad but things turned out differently. I'm sure we'll draft a D-man this year. We got Chris Wideman on the way but he'll be in Bingo next year and who knows how he'll turn out. Borowiecki is the only guy D-man down there that seems anywhere near NHL ready.

I was looking at free agency but nothing really stands out. It also depends on whether they'll resign Kuba and/or Carkner short term and go with the same defence for next year or not.

I think short-term they re-sign Carkner. Until Cowen puts on a bit more muscle, at least. Not that he is small, not at all, but he seemed to have hit a wall a while back. He's played a lot of games since last season and hasn't really had a lot of playing time the two years before that (knee injury and rehab).

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Heh. You "pragered" me. Correct spelling != correct grammar.



Yeah, everyone just needs to forget last night and we'll see what the next two games bring.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:
And I was simply eluding to the reason he was IN was because Gonch was OUT.



Irrespective of who we played and if we had won or lost...

And I'm just alluding that Gilroy bashing is generally warranted, he's not good at all

The whole team lost last night, Andy let a softie in, we had a goal waved off, Neil was in playoff mode, the refs were in preseason mode.... etc.

Boy, imagine if he had also used irregardless in place of irrespective? One of us may have blown a gasket. Phew! Dodged one, there.

Let me try:

What did you mean by "Dodged one?"

Oh, nice burn.

Spezza is saying "That is one serious burn, dude."

wprager wrote:I think short-term they re-sign Carkner. Until Cowen puts on a bit more muscle, at least. Not that he is small, not at all, but he seemed to have hit a wall a while back. He's played a lot of games since last season and hasn't really had a lot of playing time the two years before that (knee injury and rehab).

I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

SpezDispenser wrote:
I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

Well we still need a #6 D-man if he's #7, assuming we're not keeping Gilroy.

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

Well we still need a #6 D-man if he's #7, assuming we're not keeping Gilroy.

Then I ask what was the point of the Lee/Girloy trade?

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:
I think so too - even if it's as a 7th D-man, I think they try to sign Carkner.

Well we still need a #6 D-man if he's #7, assuming we're not keeping Gilroy.

That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

shabbs wrote:
Then I ask what was the point of the Lee/Girloy trade?

Lee wasn't in our future plans, we had him on waivers a few times with no takers. They thought Gilroy might be a good replacement (A decent D-man who can skate and move the puck). Doesn't look like it'll work out so we'll have to go elsewhere.

SpezDispenser wrote:
That's where Foligno + our 1st comes in I think. Any ideas on what young D-man we could acquire.

Not really sure why we'd trade Foligno now, 46 points, 5th in team scoring and good physical play. Yeah he's streaky and all ...