Crawford extension

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    Yeah, but at least they give us a reason to follow the draft rankings.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to shuperman's comment:

     

     

    and im not too worried that you think its bothersome.  I dont post to please you.  I post an opinion.  Your opinion towards biases is never questioned?   Youve called me a troll have you not? I think the best troll in history?   

     

     



    I don't think so.  Don't recall ever thinking that, although I've thought of so many other names...I think 'baiting' is the word I've used...

    I'm glad you don't post to please me, and wouldn't want it any other way.  I like arguing with you.  It's the way it should be here.  It would be even better over beers.

    I also have plenty of concern about the Rask contract -- any Bruin fan should.  It is long.  It is expensive.  It is a risk.  But I do buy into the PC reasoning and suspect that there are some constraints and equal risks in doing it any other way.  Hopefully the cap goes up.  We'll see. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

    Just thinking about those other two plus me.  Three B's fans with total loser franchises that we also follow.  Panthers, Avs and Jets.  Misery!

     



    Nas, actually all four of us have a loser 'home' team -- shupe has team Canada...;)

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to shuperman's comment:



    Two game 7s for Rask stand out to me and cause concern.  Philly up 3-0.  Lose.   Leafs. Down 4-1. Team wins.  Look at crawfords first series against van as a rookie.  He was awesome.  Ultimately lost, Learned how to be a big game goalie and won all the line in the sand gms.  I dont like rask in big games.   Essentially if rask rises to the occasion one time in either game 1, 4 or 6 we are still cup hungover.  I think he played well.  I Crawford has a cup bc of his raised level of play.  Rasks team gave him enough to win the cup.

     

    i will ask why rask deserves his money yet crawford is a bust or one year wonder who was lucky to play in chi town.   Niemi is still a very good goalie is he not?  

    I think both are elite goalies.  I dont think either especially rask is worth that kinda money.  

    i havent been as bad on this subject lately.  I do see that he is an elite goalie, i just dont think hes deserved the contract he got, nor do i think any goalie is worth that kinda money.  i hate big goalie contracts.  Im pretty consistent with this across the board on all goalies.   But i see crawford in the same light as rask.  The only difference is one is a cup champion

     



    Good points, I wont argue that.

    One question though. Why do you hate long term contracts for goalies but not players? Dipietro, I get. Bryzgalov was a bad one. Other than that though, and I will say I still think Luongo is a top tier goalie who will have one of his better years this upcoming year.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    The biggest difference between Crawford and Rask - to pick terms shupe will recognize - is simply that Crawford's history includes a season and playoffs of taking the pipe behind one of the best teams in the NHL - we call that being the albatross.  While Rask has a limited record spread over a number of seasons and two shortened stints as a #1 goalie, he's been remarkably consistent and, if anything, better when he's been a starter than when he was a backup.

    If I have my chequebook in hand, and I'm looking at Crawford, I'm searching every nook and cranny of his performance over the last two years to feel comfortable that I'm not signing a $6M deal with a guy who could revert to being a .903/2.72 goalie who drops under .900 in the playoffs.  Anyone can put together one great year - Jim Carey, anyone?  Since becoming the starter in Chicago, Crawford has had one slighly above average year, one year as a liability, and one stellar year.  Which year should I trust the most?  He was also 5-8 in his first 13 decisions in the playoffs.  Rask has been under .500 in the playoffs since coming to North America.

    Length of contract is almost beside the point, here.  This has evolved to be Crawford vs. Rask, but just to connect the dots:

    Question #1 is which of these two goalies would you rather have starting tomorrow for the Bruins.  I'll take Rask.  I'll take Rask again every year from now to 2021 whether you want me to re-negotiate with him every year or if he signs an 8 year extension.

    Question #2 is do you believe in paying elite money for goaltending?  I tend to, and Chicago, notoriously the team that decided it could replace cup winning goalie Niemi and let him walk rather than give him $3.5M then didn't win a series for two years, has changed its tune to sing in my choir.  Crawford is benefitting from that change of policy or else he might even have been on the block as an impending UFA.

    Question #3 is do you believe it's a good strategic decision to lock players up long term?  I do, and no amount of "ya, but DiPietro"ing or bringing up Luongo changes that for me.  Tim Thomas at a $5M cap hit was a steal.  Malkin's deal is for more year by year than Crosby's because salaries continue to grow for the top players.  A guy at the top of the market now will be far below the top in 8 years.  Yes, the risk is that he won't be an elite player in 8 years.  There's also a chance he'll be even better for a number of those years, and, if I'm the GM, I have to have a contingency plan for both a decline in his play and a catastrophic injury.  And I'll submit that any GM who is "hamstrung" by one or two big contracts isn't a very good GM or doesn't have the commitment from ownership.

     Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    just happy that we no longer need to rely on the likes of Raycroft, Dafoe, Hackett, Shields, Ranford [post-Oiler days], Lacher, Billington, Casey, Keans and Riggin come playoff time....   

      “People think common sense is common - but it's not.”


     
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    [QUOTE]Preatty much the going rate for a #1 goalie



    so why is Rask's contract higher ?

     

    I'll feel better about Rask's contract in a couple years, that is if he keeps up the performances [/QUOTE]

    And Shupster enters the playhouse from the door at back of the stage..."I sayeth, that, what I have crowed before, all goalies..."

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I just read this whole thread LOL Shupe is funny.  I must have missed some stuff over the summber but I see where he's coming from and for someone that's usually contrary I'm ageeing with most of what Shupe has posted here.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]Preatty much the going rate for a #1 goalie



    so why is Rask's contract higher ?

     

     

    I'll feel better about Rask's contract in a couple years, that is if he keeps up the performances

    [/QUOTE]

    And Shupster enters the playhouse from the door at back of the stage..."I sayeth, that, what I have crowed before, all goalies..."

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I just read this whole thread LOL Shupe is funny.  I must have missed some stuff over the summber but I see where he's coming from and for someone that's usually contrary I'm ageeing with most of what Shupe has posted here.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am at least entertainment.   BsL. You were on summer vacation.  I went over board on the rask contract signing.  

    Fletch- nice canada dig.  

    Book- burp.  How can you look at crawford and say that, then look at rask and say the complete opposite.  You believe from the smallest sample size spread over as essentially a backup that hes worth top dollar, yet crawford was up for rookie of the year, all rookie team, cup winner, william jennings.  He has a 33/18. 30/17 and 19/5 record 82/40 wl in three yrs top this with a cup and outplaying rask in the final.  Last time i checked jim carey didnt win a cup and wasnt invited to anything involving canadas best.  

    A1- at length and term.  Crawford.  i dont see a huge difference in either of their game.  Both elite goalies. 

    A2- no never, too inconsistant.  Chicago won the cup 3 years later. I hardly call that a fail.  Had they signed niemi they likely lose hjalmarsson.  Also had crawford in the picture.  They also signed huet and were likely wise not to jump and overpay.  Seems to have worked very well imo.  I hate long term deals in general, double that for goalies.  Which is why the rask thing isnt personal.  Its just my belief.  

    A3- for every good long term deal i can likely name double-triple bad ones. Yes its a business and a risk, but i dont like mega deals.  I think pitt and boston have done the best in the cap era And i think detroit sets the standard, how they can get anyone to want to live in detroit is amazing.  i think max deals should be 5 yrs.   i think only a portion of contracts should be guaranteed.  I like the nfl cap set up.  I realize they are different sports but i do like it.   

    one example i will throw out which is from both ends of the long term deals...ottawa elected to go with redden over chara.   Can you imagine how good ottawa would be at this moment with chara in the lineup.   So in terms of ufa signings i think chara is the best ever.  Ottawa kept redden who then bolts and signs one of the worst ufa contracts that helped shape the current cba.  

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    Like I said, shupe - I can look at Crawford having been just awful the previous year.  That's the difference.  Rask has never been bad.  Sure, you can keep saying he's been the backup and he's only been the starter for less than a full year on two separate occasions - but that was situational.  He was playing behind a guy who won two Vezinas in that stretch, and he outplayed him and took the starting role - minor injury to Thomas or not. When he played, he played as well as the elite goalies in the league.  When he was the starter, he played even better.  In other words, he controlled what was in his control and played as well as anyone but Thomas and maybe Lundqvist over that period.  That's why I doubt Crawford in a way that I don't doubt Rask.  Crawford.  It's pretty simple.  I think if both were at the very top of their games, I'd take Rask over Crawford.  And if I was committing to one over the other, I would prefer a guy who has never shown me a bad year over a guy who can be all-world one year and boy-meets-world the next.

    Jim Carey never went to Team Canada's camp because they tend not to invite Americans. He did win a Vezina, make the first all-star team, and was Mike Richter's backup when the US won the World Cup of Hockey in 1996.  Then, to put it in family friendly terms - he pooped himself.

    The reason I put the questions the way I did was to clarify that all of this wasted e-ink is about contracts.  Even when you answered #1, which wasn't about contracts but about which goalie you want in net to start next year, you included the contracts in your answer.  Both are elite - fine.  Which one would you choose?  If they played as volunteers?

    We've been over cataloguing good and bad long term deals.  I'll repeat your line - it's my opinion that the really bad long term deals are easy to spot and spectacular to quote.  The good long term deals fly under the radar.  And we haven't really had the cap system long enough to fine tune how to use them - they've been back-diving enablers to date.  The strategy is sound, even if -SURPRISE!- the Isles and Flyers have been too stupid to use it effectively.  But again, I don't think this is a Rask v. Crawford thing.

    Last bit - I have no idea why you're bringing up Ottawa's Chara v. Redden debacle.  Redden signed a two year deal when Chara left and only signed a longer deal with teh Rangers two years later.  Ottawa pitched both players on hometown deals to keep them both, but apparenlty Chara balked.  And then - here's a surprise - the Rangers made a bad decision by throwing too much money at an over the hill player.

    I guess the other thing I think we're not factoring in is that players can underperform on short term deals just as easily as on long term ones.  You can give Heatley a three year deal at 40+ goal-scorer money, and he can score 20+ goals the first two years then rack up 40+ in the third year and you either lose him as a UFA or you pony up 40+ goal scorer money again.  Performance will fluctuate regardless of contract.  Moving a guy out because he has a bad year, or trying to renegotiate year to year isn't necessarily going to improve teh quality of your team.  Stability is worth something if you have a GM who isn't Snow, Sather, Holmgren, Feaster or whoever worked for Oren Koules giving that stability to the right guys. 

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    I didn't read any of that.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    Book

    crawford was 30/17 in that terrible year.  To me hockey is about the Ws and Ls.  As long as his team is winning i dont care.   He had a very very bad 4th gm.  But guess what.  He won that game.  Jim Carey put together one spectacular year.   Crawford has 2 elite seasons.  His worst(sophmore) year he still had a very good w/l record.  

    for the same reasons you arent sold on crawford i am not sold on rask bc of his playoff performance, bc he has never played in a heavy work load situation.  I think he can handle it but it hasnt been done yet.  He hasnt had consecutive seasons like pekka who plays a boat load.  

    I would at this moment would choose crawford.  I think when big games are on the line he is better.   i think rask if better with the lead in the finals we have another cup.  I dont think his cup appearance was great.  I think crawford even at his worst won 6-5.  

    Chara/redden was just to look at a great ufa signing and a bad one.  

    I cant name a lot of great ufa deals.  i dont wanna list the bad ones bc even the ones you forget like the jeff fingers still happened and are almost forgotten.   Short term deals dont cripple your team.   Long term deals do.  No more firing contracts in the minors.   

    Bottom line as ive been saying is im not a fan of long term deals, especially goalie deals.  but to question crawfords deal and have no concern on rask is funny.  Crawford just won the stanley cup.  Whats he gotta do.  Head to head crawford just beat rask.  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    I didn't read any of that either.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    I didn't read any of that either.




    Too bad you skipped those 2 posts. One of them was interesting.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    the Hawks beat the B'S, not Crawford beat Tuukka....

    in the four games the B'S lost, Tuukka stopped more shots than Crawford in each and every game and i don't recall any bad goals allowed, certainly not the game winners....

    the last minute meltdown in the final game was a team effort....

    “People think common sense is common - but it's not.”


     
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I would at this moment would choose crawford.  



    I don't believe you.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I would at this moment would choose crawford.  



    I don't believe you.



    Hes from canada. Yes i would.  :-)

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/23507864/the-rising-goaltender-costs-and-where-henrik-lundqvist-will-fit-in

    Here's just the highlights..

    Clearly when you're talking about playing at a consistently high level, Lundqvist is atop the chart with Rask a close second. The other two recent big-contract goalies don't quite match up. That would make it simple to say that Lundqvist should have a comparable in Rask to base a contract off of but you can't just ignore the other two when determining true value. Perhaps when you look at it in the scope of the other players and what they received, Rask didn't get enough. It sounds crazy when he is tied with Pekka Rinne as the highest-paid goalie in the league on an annual basis but fair is fair.


    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    *waits for shupe's head to explode*

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    Shupe it was me who called u a troll & it was a joke, but you're totally out of your mind to take Crawford over Rask no matter what Country he plays for. Yes, Crawford won the cup, but when you compare the type of goals that each goalie allowed. Crawford allowed quite a few more weak ones. His glove hand is atroshish for an NHL goalie who you consider "elite". And it's going to be fun watching him allow a lot more goals with his diminished equipment. I like Crawford, but there's no way he's considered elite. If there's a goalie who's stats are padded, because of the team he plays for, it's this guy. You're over-rating him to another "statusphere" & it's rather disgusting actually. 

    "Why is a puck called a puck? Because Dirty little bastar d was taken!"- Marty Brodeur

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:

    Shupe it was me who called u a troll & it was a joke, but you're totally out of your mind to take Crawford over Rask no matter what Country he plays for. Yes, Crawford won the cup, but when you compare the type of goals that each goalie allowed. Crawford allowed quite a few more weak ones. His glove hand is atroshish for an NHL goalie who you consider "elite". And it's going to be fun watching him allow a lot more goals with his diminished equipment. I like Crawford, but there's no way he's considered elite. If there's a goalie who's stats are padded, because of the team he plays for, it's this guy. You're over-rating him to another "statusphere" & it's rather disgusting actually. 

    "Why is a puck called a puck? Because Dirty little bastar d was taken!"- Marty Brodeur



    No Fletch called me the best troll in history.  If you did i missed it.  

    Yes Crawford won the cup.  Yes Crawford won the cup!   He won the stanley cup!  He just got 6m per, he is invited to team canada!   How is this me over-rating him.  

    I counter that rask plays in the best system in the NHL!   i therefore say hus stats are just as padded.  

    I dont care if you consider him elite or not.  Chicago does, Canada does.  And most important I do.  Tongue Out

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to shuperman's comment:

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:

     

    Shupe it was me who called u a troll & it was a joke, but you're totally out of your mind to take Crawford over Rask no matter what Country he plays for. Yes, Crawford won the cup, but when you compare the type of goals that each goalie allowed. Crawford allowed quite a few more weak ones. His glove hand is atroshish for an NHL goalie who you consider "elite". And it's going to be fun watching him allow a lot more goals with his diminished equipment. I like Crawford, but there's no way he's considered elite. If there's a goalie who's stats are padded, because of the team he plays for, it's this guy. You're over-rating him to another "statusphere" & it's rather disgusting actually. 

    "Why is a puck called a puck? Because Dirty little bastar d was taken!"- Marty Brodeur

     



    No Fletch called me the best troll in history.  If you did i missed it.  

     

    Yes Crawford won the cup.  Yes Crawford won the cup!   He won the stanley cup!  He just got 6m per, he is invited to team canada!   How is this me over-rating him.  

    I counter that rask plays in the best system in the NHL!   i therefore say hus stats are just as padded.  

    I dont care if you consider him elite or not.  Chicago does, Canada does.  And most important I do.  Tongue Out



    I was waiting for that. And your right to an extent. Crawford and Rask certainly benefit from having good players, especially on defense in front of them. Both those players, on both teams benefit from the two goalies. Add the two up and you get the two teams who met in the Finals.
    Personally, I think Rask is the better goalie. It's just my oponion, and while I'd like to say it's not bias, who knows, my love for everything Bruins runs over 30 years deep. Put the same exact hockey player next to my son and i will tell you a thousand reasons why my son is better.  One thing I will point out, it seems most people here look at the 6-5 game and feel Crawford got away with one. But to me, that game raised my opinion of him. High scoring games happen, and he found a way to win it. Some nights your not going to have your best stuff find you have to find a way to win, be one save better than the guy across the ice. He did that, cuase thats what good goalies do.

    Debates likes this, make being a fan and coming on here with you guys that much funner.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to shuperman's comment:

     

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:

     

     

     

    Shupe it was me who called u a troll & it was a joke, but you're totally out of your mind to take Crawford over Rask no matter what Country he plays for. Yes, Crawford won the cup, but when you compare the type of goals that each goalie allowed. Crawford allowed quite a few more weak ones. His glove hand is atroshish for an NHL goalie who you consider "elite". And it's going to be fun watching him allow a lot more goals with his diminished equipment. I like Crawford, but there's no way he's considered elite. If there's a goalie who's stats are padded, because of the team he plays for, it's this guy. You're over-rating him to another "statusphere" & it's rather disgusting actually. 

    "Why is a puck called a puck? Because Dirty little bastar d was taken!"- Marty Brodeur

     

     



    No Fletch called me the best troll in history.  If you did i missed it.  

     

     

    Yes Crawford won the cup.  Yes Crawford won the cup!   He won the stanley cup!  He just got 6m per, he is invited to team canada!   How is this me over-rating him.  

    I counter that rask plays in the best system in the NHL!   i therefore say hus stats are just as padded.  

    I dont care if you consider him elite or not.  Chicago does, Canada does.  And most important I do.  Tongue Out

     



    LMAO! You're impossible...But I luv ya!

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    Well Shupe,  you got 2 goalies here back to back saying Rask is the better goalie.  I'm going to bend a little that way although I agree with you "a full season" for Rask and then we can make final judgement. 

    As for Crawford , in the final , at time he did look lucky. Scrambled, didn't know where he was, lost his stick , bottom line the puck didn't find it's way in . He won the cup . Sound familiar ? Agree that if he weren't that good he woudl not be invited to Team Canada. 

    About Team Canada I still prefer Price,  this is his spotlight .  Luongo will be there as backup. We'll see if anyone else beats out Crawford.

     

     
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

     

    In response to shuperman's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:

     

    Shupe it was me who called u a troll & it was a joke, but you're totally out of your mind to take Crawford over Rask no matter what Country he plays for. Yes, Crawford won the cup, but when you compare the type of goals that each goalie allowed. Crawford allowed quite a few more weak ones. His glove hand is atroshish for an NHL goalie who you consider "elite". And it's going to be fun watching him allow a lot more goals with his diminished equipment. I like Crawford, but there's no way he's considered elite. If there's a goalie who's stats are padded, because of the team he plays for, it's this guy. You're over-rating him to another "statusphere" & it's rather disgusting actually. 

    "Why is a puck called a puck? Because Dirty little bastar d was taken!"- Marty Brodeur

     



    No Fletch called me the best troll in history.  If you did i missed it.  

     

    Yes Crawford won the cup.  Yes Crawford won the cup!   He won the stanley cup!  He just got 6m per, he is invited to team canada!   How is this me over-rating him.  

    I counter that rask plays in the best system in the NHL!   i therefore say hus stats are just as padded.  

    I dont care if you consider him elite or not.  Chicago does, Canada does.  And most important I do.  Tongue Out

     

     



    I was waiting for that. And your right to an extent. Crawford and Rask certainly benefit from having good players, especially on defense in front of them. Both those players, on both teams benefit from the two goalies. Add the two up and you get the two teams who met in the Finals.
    Personally, I think Rask is the better goalie. It's just my oponion, and while I'd like to say it's not bias, who knows, my love for everything Bruins runs over 30 years deep. Put the same exact hockey player next to my son and i will tell you a thousand reasons why my son is better.  One thing I will point out, it seems most people here look at the 6-5 game and feel Crawford got away with one. But to me, that game raised my opinion of him. High scoring games happen, and he found a way to win it. Some nights your not going to have your best stuff find you have to find a way to win, be one save better than the guy across the ice. He did that, cuase thats what good goalies do.

     

     

    Debates likes this, make being a fan and coming on here with you guys that much funner.

     

     



    Funner Became a word in 2010

     

    All said and done i do believe Rask is the better tender.  His rebound control simply amazing.  Crawford is an elite goalie in my eyes.  He elivated it at the right time and is a champion.  As far as Price goes if you dig into my old posts you will see not only do i think he should start for canada, but also that i truly believe he is in the top 5 in the world.  And with the way goalies flip flop pole positions he could be the best this year.   

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Crawford extension

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    Well Shupe,  you got 2 goalies here back to back saying Rask is the better goalie.  I'm going to bend a little that way although I agree with you "a full season" for Rask and then we can make final judgement. 

    As for Crawford , in the final , at time he did look lucky. Scrambled, didn't know where he was, lost his stick , bottom line the puck didn't find it's way in . He won the cup . Sound familiar ? Agree that if he weren't that good he woudl not be invited to Team Canada. 

    About Team Canada I still prefer Price,  this is his spotlight .  Luongo will be there as backup. We'll see if anyone else beats out Crawford.

     

     



    I think its Price Loungo Crawford as well.   Loungo is gonna have a huge year.  Torts and his system is perfect for Lou.  

     

Share