|
|
Post by berner on Jan 16, 2008 22:04:21 GMT -4
I guess my question is, why is it ridiculous? Dunnett could have played two games for us even if he lost both. And he could have continued to play full time, much like Andrew Langan did for his midget team. Passingham could have played every game back home. You yourself state that it does not matter who a back up is so I still say Passingham wasted a year in my opinion. If he is back as our second goalie next year then I was wrong. However do you think that everyone who is promised something by a GM on a Q team actually has those promises fulfilled. Tell me any kid who would be thrilled at 16 to play two games a year? Do the teams taking a run this year have two quality goalies? We certainly do. I met Passignham, he is a great kid, but I bet he is having second thoughts. The answer to your question, what is ridiculous about your post: the final line, where you state that chances are Passingham won't be here next year. Chances are? What do you know about the likelihood he's back? Why would he give up a year of playing hockey to stay in SJ if chances are he won't be back? Why would JB keep him around all this time if chances are he won't be back? Chances are, that really was a ridiculous thing to say. |
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Jan 16, 2008 22:16:26 GMT -4
I guess my question is, why is it ridiculous? Dunnett could have played two games for us even if he lost both. And he could have continued to play full time, much like Andrew Langan did for his midget team. Passingham could have played every game back home. You yourself state that it does not matter who a back up is so I still say Passingham wasted a year in my opinion. If he is back as our second goalie next year then I was wrong. However do you think that everyone who is promised something by a GM on a Q team actually has those promises fulfilled. Tell me any kid who would be thrilled at 16 to play two games a year? Do the teams taking a run this year have two quality goalies? We certainly do. I met Passignham, he is a great kid, but I bet he is having second thoughts. The answer to your question, what is ridiculous about your post: the final line, where you state that chances are Passingham won't be here next year. Chances are? What do you know about the likelihood he's back? Why would he give up a year of playing hockey to stay in SJ if chances are he won't be back? Why would JB keep him around all this time if chances are he won't be back? Chances are, that really was a ridiculous thing to say. It wasnt that ridiculous... Who knows what will happen in the off-season...im sure if JB can add a better #2 he will do it...if he doesnt, he isnt putting the team in the best position to contend. |
|
|
|
Post by canucklehead on Jan 16, 2008 22:42:35 GMT -4
I agree personally but I think I'm slightly out numbered  |
|
|
|
Post by springer on Jan 17, 2008 10:43:25 GMT -4
How many promises have been made to kids by GM's that have not come true? There is no guarantee that Passingham will be here next year. To think that he is a given is just crazy. During our first year there was a kid in camp who was told before coming that he was going to be our number one or two goalie and he was gone before the end of training camp. What if Mayer pulls a Bartos and stays in Europe next year?? Anything can happen but let's enjoy the pair of Mayer and Fullerton while they are here and next year we can see what decisions are made. If I was 16/17 I would want to be playing everyday and getting better on a competitive stage. Missing basically an entire year of competition would not be my choice. If Passignham is not thinking about the fact that he made a bad choice it would surprise me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judas In My Mind on Jan 17, 2008 11:23:46 GMT -4
Why would JB keep the kid around for a full year if he didn't think Passingham will be able to fill the role of backup next year? Nobody has said "no matter what happens, it's Passingham as backup next year", but the fact that JB thinks enough of the kid to keep him around instead of risking losing him to another team at least should make a person think JB has some confidence in Passingham's skill and potential.
Basically I feel it's Passingham's job to lose. I'm sure JB will trade for a better backup IF Passingham fails to live up to JB's expectations next year, but to say we should be looking to make a move before the start of next year for a backup goalie to replace Passingham seems absurd to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by habh8er on Jan 17, 2008 12:35:17 GMT -4
The answer to your question, what is ridiculous about your post: the final line, where you state that chances are Passingham won't be here next year. Chances are? What do you know about the likelihood he's back? Why would he give up a year of playing hockey to stay in SJ if chances are he won't be back? Why would JB keep him around all this time if chances are he won't be back? Chances are, that really was a ridiculous thing to say. It wasnt that ridiculous... Who knows what will happen in the off-season...im sure if JB can add a better #2 he will do it... if he doesnt, he isnt putting the team in the best position to contend. I'm not sure if that was an attempt to ride the fence or if you are saying that he should be replaced.....of course the GM of any team is going to be looking for the best fit at all positions within the organization....if he can find a better trainer, assistant coaches, bus driver whatever , he should pull the trigger on that move. Just wondering Lalalaprise.... have you seen Passingham play before, you seem to have your finger on the pulse of most of these young prospects, and if you have how does he compare to any other 16/17 y.o. goaltenders in their first year. I agree that if there is a better option JB should and would make that move, but as of Jan.17/2008 I think Troy Passingham will be the backup in Saint John. |
|
|
|
Post by berner on Jan 17, 2008 12:47:49 GMT -4
Why would JB keep the kid around for a full year if he didn't think Passingham will be able to fill the role of backup next year? Nobody has said "no matter what happens, it's Passingham as backup next year", but the fact that JB thinks enough of the kid to keep him around instead of risking losing him to another team at least should make a person think JB has some confidence in Passingham's skill and potential. Basically I feel it's Passingham's job to lose. I'm sure JB will trade for a better backup IF Passingham fails to live up to JB's expectations next year, but to say we should be looking to make a move before the start of next year for a backup goalie to replace Passingham seems absurd to me. My point exactly. Obviously there are no guarantees. However to state that the chances are that Passy won't be back is what I found foolish... is it that hard for reddog and lala to understand my point? |
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Jan 17, 2008 21:49:14 GMT -4
Why would JB keep the kid around for a full year if he didn't think Passingham will be able to fill the role of backup next year? Nobody has said "no matter what happens, it's Passingham as backup next year", but the fact that JB thinks enough of the kid to keep him around instead of risking losing him to another team at least should make a person think JB has some confidence in Passingham's skill and potential. Basically I feel it's Passingham's job to lose. I'm sure JB will trade for a better backup IF Passingham fails to live up to JB's expectations next year, but to say we should be looking to make a move before the start of next year for a backup goalie to replace Passingham seems absurd to me. My point exactly. Obviously there are no guarantees. However to state that the chances are that Passy won't be back is what I found foolish... is it that hard for reddog and lala to understand my point? I never said he wasn't going to be back...I just said discussing the matter isnt ridiculous. Ive been around the Q way too long to buy into anything a GM says..and ive seen enough kids get screwed over by Q teams.... |
|
|
|
Post by berner on Jan 17, 2008 22:42:17 GMT -4
My point exactly. Obviously there are no guarantees. However to state that the chances are that Passy won't be back is what I found foolish... is it that hard for reddog and lala to understand my point? I never said he wasn't going to be back...I just said discussing the matter isnt ridiculous. Ive been around the Q way too long to buy into anything a GM says..and ive seen enough kids get screwed over by Q teams.... Lala, when I stated that reddogs comment that chances are Passy won't be back was ridiculous, you said it wasn't... anyways whatever, while the possibility always exists that players won't be back to state that the odds are that Passy won't be back is absurd. |
|
