|
Post by Captain Obvious on Dec 16, 2014 11:15:39 GMT -4
Re: Rumor Transaction !! Today at 18:46 I thought I heard on the radio that a transaction between Rimouski and Drummon had been confirmed for the acquisition of Louis Philippe Guindon quelqun can confirm that? From the French board. Sorry for the bad translation, it's google translate Sounds logical because in Today's Cape Breton Post , Dumont gives his Goaltending Tandem a Vote of Confidence . Saying that Sullivan has a very respectful 900 save percentage and that Brassard is definetly a Number 1 and can / will play better down the stretch..............I guess the question is ......Do U believe him ? You can't really read much into that...he's probably just saying that 1-to not kill his negotiating position and 2-so as not to mess up with the goalies' heads always looking over their shoulder.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Dec 16, 2014 11:23:21 GMT -4
Sounds logical because in Today's Cape Breton Post , Dumont gives his Goaltending Tandem a Vote of Confidence . Saying that Sullivan has a very respectful 900 save percentage and that Brassard is definetly a Number 1 and can / will play better down the stretch..............I guess the question is ......Do U believe him ? You can't really read much into that...he's probably just saying that 1-to not kill his negotiating position and 2-so as not to mess up with the goalies' heads always looking over their shoulder. they been looking over their shoulder all year...... in the net again shit
|
|
|
Post by seagle on Dec 16, 2014 11:40:30 GMT -4
You can't really read much into that...he's probably just saying that 1-to not kill his negotiating position and 2-so as not to mess up with the goalies' heads always looking over their shoulder. they been looking over their shoulder all year...... in the net again shit
|
|
|
Post by hal on Dec 16, 2014 12:15:11 GMT -4
Not to Cape Breton ....it won't help us achieve "BALANCE" !
|
|
|
Post by hal on Dec 16, 2014 12:16:00 GMT -4
All joking aside is Balance now code for Whatever makes the Team better ?
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 16, 2014 12:20:56 GMT -4
All joking aside is Balance now code for Whatever makes the Team better ? It's a cliche'd answer that really means nothing as much as some would like it to mean something. Wait to see the trades and that will dictate the direction. The odd opinion piece from a CB Post sports writer wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Brad Rowe's columns used to give us lots of details and info prior to key points like the trade period. Now we get Dumont's canned media answers to a generic question.
|
|
|
Post by ldub23 on Dec 16, 2014 12:49:25 GMT -4
All joking aside is Balance now code for Whatever makes the Team better ? I believe that Dumont is saying that the team needs to upgrade the 19 year-old players. I had one GM tell me that a balanced line-up would have three each of 20 and 16 year-olds with six players in each of the 17-19 age groups. Also, you can have a ton of draft picks but at some point you need to use them to acquire players to fill voids in the current line-up. I'm quite sure that Cape Breton will be "buyers".
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Dec 16, 2014 13:09:21 GMT -4
All joking aside is Balance now code for Whatever makes the Team better ? It's a cliche'd answer that really means nothing as much as some would like it to mean something. Wait to see the trades and that will dictate the direction. The odd opinion piece from a CB Post sports writer wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Brad Rowe's columns used to give us lots of details and info prior to key points like the trade period. Now we get Dumont's canned media answers to a generic question. Can't wait, these decisions have to be made 3 months ago (couldn't resist) I think what Dumont meant by 'balance' was what he said: "keep a balance between improving our team and keeping enough values to secure our future" aka don't blow your load at the trade deadline for a few more wins this season but still try to make some tweaks to improve certain areas. I like it. Hopefully it means those 3 1st round picks aren't wasted.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 16, 2014 13:18:16 GMT -4
All joking aside is Balance now code for Whatever makes the Team better ? I believe that Dumont is saying that the team needs to upgrade the 19 year-old players. I had one GM tell me that a balanced line-up would have three each of 20 and 16 year-olds with six players in each of the 17-19 age groups. Also, you can have a ton of draft picks but at some point you need to use them to acquire players to fill voids in the current line-up.I'm quite sure that Cape Breton will be "buyers". This is a point i'm behind as well. Picks are currency. You keep some and fill holes with others. Keep too many in 1 year and you inevitable end up wasting some resources.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 16, 2014 13:22:12 GMT -4
It's a cliche'd answer that really means nothing as much as some would like it to mean something. Wait to see the trades and that will dictate the direction. The odd opinion piece from a CB Post sports writer wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Brad Rowe's columns used to give us lots of details and info prior to key points like the trade period. Now we get Dumont's canned media answers to a generic question. Can't wait, these decisions have to be made 3 months ago (couldn't resist) I think what Dumont meant by 'balance' was what he said: "keep a balance between improving our team and keeping enough values to secure our future" aka don't blow your load at the trade deadline for a few more wins this season but still try to make some tweaks to improve certain areas. I like it. Hopefully it means those 3 1st round picks aren't wasted. Decisions didn't have to be 100% made but conversations had to start then. Did you miss the players who were already traded? Those teams GM's were working on some of those deals at a time where you argued the entire league should be watching and doing nothing. You can let it go or continue this nonsense forever I suppose. Mass consensus has been that everyone else is sick of the rhetoric from both sides. Hard to argue with that when there's nothing new to say. An actual question: Do you think moving a 1st now for help for next year could be capitalizing on the assets we have now? Our 3 picks are all high right now and probably in high demand. Moving 1 could be a coup in the right deal for the right player in my opinion. Contending this year isn't happening, trying to fix this teams issued to help next years though isn't out of the question. Maybe some of the same talks that started when Darcy came back 3 months ago (couldn't resist)
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Dec 16, 2014 13:35:58 GMT -4
I was trying to make a joke about it but I can now see the stick is still in your ass.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 16, 2014 13:56:50 GMT -4
I was trying to make a joke about it but I can now see the stick is still in your ass. That stuff works both ways. I was also making a joke. Where is the stick exactly?
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Dec 16, 2014 14:29:16 GMT -4
Decisions didn't have to be 100% made but conversations had to start then. Jokes on you I guess. It's 10 games into the season and there's only been 1 game played with Darcy. When I say I'm in favor of waiting until December, that means I wouldn't answer that question until December. Does not matter, the decision still is being made today. Are you shopping Darcy or Legare today? That alone answers the question. Dumont was quoted in the article as saying he wants it assessed in the next few days. Not months. Days. You can't put off your decision to trade up or down for months when you have a key decision you admit you want done in days. These are from the man himself, my opinion is irrelevant honestly. You questioned going for it. People like myself asked you what you'd like to see done. You essentially said it's a pointless question to answer as it's too early to make that decision. That is simply wrong. Getting Darcy back forces you to make that decision now, as Dumont essentially said in that article you copied. He's the one who said we'll see what offers are there over the next few days. It's not an interrogation. You took a stand which was 180 degrees from what most were discussing then defend it with message board rhetoric and some lame attempts to make yourself look superior. My posting record speaks for itself here. I stand by my opinion and don't hide behind them. I never claim to be the only one who can be right, i'm just willing to take a stand and explain why. You're not. People tend to respect those who can at least offer some insight as to why they've come to that conclusion. No, clearly you're superior in your wait and see attitude. Fact is GM Dumont is taking offers on the 2 players mentioned. Which 1 he moves tells you what his decision already it.
You're attempts to avoid the very black and white decision presented is rather laughable. You're the exact hfboard style poster you criticize. You could choose to reply with some comments and facts and well thought out points. Instead you try to criticize and belittle those asking you questions. You're the one coming off as the know it all. Not me or anyone else. Let it go, you look like a bigger knob every time you try to salvage your argument.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Dec 16, 2014 14:37:57 GMT -4
Decisions didn't have to be 100% made but conversations had to start then. Jokes on you I guess. Does not matter, the decision still is being made today. Are you shopping Darcy or Legare today? That alone answers the question. Dumont was quoted in the article as saying he wants it assessed in the next few days. Not months. Days. You can't put off your decision to trade up or down for months when you have a key decision you admit you want done in days. These are from the man himself, my opinion is irrelevant honestly. You questioned going for it. People like myself asked you what you'd like to see done. You essentially said it's a pointless question to answer as it's too early to make that decision. That is simply wrong. Getting Darcy back forces you to make that decision now, as Dumont essentially said in that article you copied. He's the one who said we'll see what offers are there over the next few days. It's not an interrogation. You took a stand which was 180 degrees from what most were discussing then defend it with message board rhetoric and some lame attempts to make yourself look superior. My posting record speaks for itself here. I stand by my opinion and don't hide behind them. I never claim to be the only one who can be right, i'm just willing to take a stand and explain why. You're not. People tend to respect those who can at least offer some insight as to why they've come to that conclusion. No, clearly you're superior in your wait and see attitude. Fact is GM Dumont is taking offers on the 2 players mentioned. Which 1 he moves tells you what his decision already it.
You're attempts to avoid the very black and white decision presented is rather laughable. You're the exact hfboard style poster you criticize. You could choose to reply with some comments and facts and well thought out points. Instead you try to criticize and belittle those asking you questions. You're the one coming off as the know it all. Not me or anyone else. Let it go, you like a bigger knob every time you try to salvage your argument. Using terms like 'knob' shows us who the 'knob' really is. At that point the decision was made. That's why Darcy was kept and Legare traded. Decisions had to be made at that point do to that decision. Trade talks, which started the 'debate', were well underway at that point. Your argument was to make no decisions until Friday when the trade period opened and judge the teams position and THEN start your trade talks. The counter argument to that was if you hold no dialogue at all until the trade period then you hurt yourself by missing out when everyone else is talking. Whether it was buying or selling the talks had to happen. How else do you know what GM's want if you don't talk to them? Since buying from 17th place is not going to happen and there's nothing to sell, i'm not sure what your point is. The team may still ADD experience which essentially makes what you quoted accurate. Don't know how many 'last words' I need to give you on the topic. You call me down, troll, and shit disturb then say 'lol i'm joking take the stick out of your ass' like you're a child caught in a bad lie. You can continue to select certain statements used but when will you realize that you're still the only one who sees an issue in the statements made? That's on you if you can't let things go. Much easier to criticize from the position of giving no opinion ever. That's what you do then want to essentially police those who share opinion. You say I take myself too seriously when you live in fear of having the wrong opinion on a junior hockey message board. Last word is yours friend. Happy Holidays.
|
|
|
Post by goeagles on Dec 16, 2014 14:40:26 GMT -4
I am thinking you two can start a new thread instead of having pages of your garbage to get through before trying to read what the original topic is. In your Bauer vs Norris thread you can argue, quote, go back and copy and paste, flirt whatever it is you would like. At the very least you can use me as a common enemy say something nasty to me, I will ignore, it will be over and we can open up a thread about the upcoming trading period and see some interesting related info that has not been discussed for the past two months. Also, respectfully you are both very interesting reads when not pissing on each other, JB your perspective and knowledge of the game is excellent. Both of you bring past teams and players in to the conversation, which is excellent.
|
|