|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Oct 15, 2008 20:17:34 GMT -4
Cameron answered a lot of questions in that game. He played very well as did others.
|
|
|
Post by hockey1981 on Oct 15, 2008 20:20:44 GMT -4
I'm sure Bell will be in the lineup soon enough. All 6 D's won't stay healthy all year....Gormley will be gone at some point for under-17's...
|
|
|
Post by Dalkiel on Oct 15, 2008 20:24:11 GMT -4
Gotta say on another note that Im pretty disapointed that Lane didn't dress for this game. We brought this guy in for toughness and to fight. There are probably a handful of teams in the league who have tough guys or players willing to fight Lane, Bathurst being one of them. Lane has sat on our bench for 55 of the 60 minutes of nearly every game waiting to play a team where he can have a scrap. I cannot tell you who I would pull out of the lineup to insert him, and I realize it's because Sill is back. I'd never suggest pulling Sill out for Lane, but it just doesn't make any sense.. We finally play a team with a willing combatant and Lane is in the stands.. Why do we have him at all, if he wont be used??? And also WHERE IS JEFF BELL. I read in another post that they are working on his conditioning first. I hope thats the case because if not then send the kid to another league Junior A or something, whats the point of sitting for 68 games, play him... What is the sense of dressing him for one fight a game??? This makes no sense in todays Q. Lane IMO cannot play good enough hockey for the Q and in one of, if not the last year rebuild mode for the Cats, I just can't see hauling anyone off the ice for this guy. Lane would have been better suited in the year after the Cup when we had the smaller team, he just isn't needed on this years team nor do I believe he'll be here on Jan 1.
|
|
|
Post by hockey1981 on Oct 15, 2008 20:26:47 GMT -4
In my opinion Lane won't be around after Xmas....
|
|
|
Post by qfan on Oct 15, 2008 20:27:09 GMT -4
Lane will play alot more home games than visiting games. Better to have him fight in front of Moncton fans than visiting teams. Also, we don't want suspensions getting the better of him.
|
|
|
Post by Dalkiel on Oct 15, 2008 20:29:24 GMT -4
Cameron answered a lot of questions in that game. He played very well as did others. What questions did he answer??? Yes, he played well tonight but how does that explain some of the previous games/years?
|
|
|
Post by qfan on Oct 15, 2008 20:30:09 GMT -4
Don't forget the suspensions and injuries. I'm a firm believer that you need a guy like Lane.
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Afanasenkov on Oct 15, 2008 20:31:21 GMT -4
Cameron answered a lot of questions in that game. He played very well as did others. One game does not answer questions.
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Oct 15, 2008 20:42:47 GMT -4
Cameron answered a lot of questions in that game. He played very well as did others. One game does not answer questions. No but its a start. If he continues to play like he did tonight, the points will come.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Oct 15, 2008 21:18:56 GMT -4
Cameron answered a lot of questions in that game. He played very well as did others. What questions did he answer??? Yes, he played well tonight but how does that explain some of the previous games/years? He has what, 9 points in 7 games(90 point pace), maybe if he had 2-3 points you could complain, but he is producing offensively and doing very good on special teams(good on pk and point on the PP).
|
|
|
Post by buckybuckbuck on Oct 15, 2008 21:36:40 GMT -4
What questions did he answer??? Yes, he played well tonight but how does that explain some of the previous games/years? He has what, 9 points in 7 games(90 point pace), maybe if he had 2-3 points you could complain, but he is producing offensively and doing very good on special teams(good on pk and point on the PP). I've not been complaining but I have read some posts that have. His goal tonight was a beauty.
|
|
|
Post by zambonidriver on Oct 16, 2008 6:15:20 GMT -4
Gotta say on another note that Im pretty disapointed that Lane didn't dress for this game. We brought this guy in for toughness and to fight. There are probably a handful of teams in the league who have tough guys or players willing to fight Lane, Bathurst being one of them. Lane has sat on our bench for 55 of the 60 minutes of nearly every game waiting to play a team where he can have a scrap. I cannot tell you who I would pull out of the lineup to insert him, and I realize it's because Sill is back. I'd never suggest pulling Sill out for Lane, but it just doesn't make any sense.. We finally play a team with a willing combatant and Lane is in the stands.. Why do we have him at all, if he wont be used??? And also WHERE IS JEFF BELL. I read in another post that they are working on his conditioning first. I hope thats the case because if not then send the kid to another league Junior A or something, whats the point of sitting for 68 games, play him... What is the sense of dressing him for one fight a game??? This makes no sense in todays Q. Lane IMO cannot play good enough hockey for the Q and in one of, if not the last year rebuild mode for the Cats, I just can't see hauling anyone off the ice for this guy. Lane would have been better suited in the year after the Cup when we had the smaller team, he just isn't needed on this years team nor do I believe he'll be here on Jan 1. Having Lane on the bench is a deterent to the other teams. If things get too rough, you still have the ability to put him on the ice. No Lane, and other teams are free to walk all over us. Remember the times when we didn't have a guy like Lane around?
|
|
|
Post by Dalkiel on Oct 16, 2008 6:36:27 GMT -4
What is the sense of dressing him for one fight a game??? This makes no sense in todays Q. Lane IMO cannot play good enough hockey for the Q and in one of, if not the last year rebuild mode for the Cats, I just can't see hauling anyone off the ice for this guy. Lane would have been better suited in the year after the Cup when we had the smaller team, he just isn't needed on this years team nor do I believe he'll be here on Jan 1. Having Lane on the bench is a deterent to the other teams. If things get too rough, you still have the ability to put him on the ice. No Lane, and other teams are free to walk all over us. Remember the times when we didn't have a guy like Lane around? Our team this year is much bigger and stronger than the past two years, we aren't going to get pushed around
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Oct 16, 2008 8:07:51 GMT -4
Gotta say on another note that Im pretty disapointed that Lane didn't dress for this game. We brought this guy in for toughness and to fight. There are probably a handful of teams in the league who have tough guys or players willing to fight Lane, Bathurst being one of them. Lane has sat on our bench for 55 of the 60 minutes of nearly every game waiting to play a team where he can have a scrap. I cannot tell you who I would pull out of the lineup to insert him, and I realize it's because Sill is back. I'd never suggest pulling Sill out for Lane, but it just doesn't make any sense.. We finally play a team with a willing combatant and Lane is in the stands.. Why do we have him at all, if he wont be used??? And also WHERE IS JEFF BELL. I read in another post that they are working on his conditioning first. I hope thats the case because if not then send the kid to another league Junior A or something, whats the point of sitting for 68 games, play him... We rolled 4 lines ... having Lane in there doesn't allow you to do that the same way. Bathurst having Worden in the lineup and with nobody to fight just meant that they had one less player on their bench. On Bell ... he'll get in when he is ready. Remember how much Ted Stephens played last year in the 1st half ? Taking the time for him to be ready to play was worth it. Right now ... Bell would have a hard time bumping anybody out of the lineup ... we have the best team defense in the Q and so its tough to justify sitting anbody.
|
|
|
Post by hockey1981 on Oct 16, 2008 8:29:31 GMT -4
I thought Dimitruk played his best game all year last night....
|
|