D call up

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

    Re: D call up

    "we are getting another undersized, college hockey player" - Any comment on size and where the player developed is ridiculous.  
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheShepherd. Show TheShepherd's posts

    Re: D call up

    your crazy... it was a blanket statement. There are fewer college players than junior players. even fewer from america. even fewer really good ones. every rule has an excpetpion... valabrik is 6-8 and absolutely awful... small doesnt mean bad, tall doesnt mean good. everyone on your list is practically an allstar. does that mean kampfer will be an all star? no.. Being on the bubble of the AHL and NHL mean he has no talent.. no. Are the odds of him being the answer to bruins problem high... no. i like certain players more than others. And i wish we had more than just wish we had more size and non college players in our farm.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: D call up

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PirOjJ0gtzI&feature=related

    Francois Bouillon is only 5'8" 198lbs. and is imo one of the best hitting d men in the league, even though I can't stand him.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: D call up

    So because the Bruins don't have 6 d men in Providence that are 6'7" 250 lbs. from Canada, they aren't any good.  How much size do you need?  Chara is the biggest in the NHL, Boychuk is 6'2", McQuaid is 6'4", and Seidenberg is 6'1". Ia m not saying that Kampfer is the answer and will become a hofer, I just don't agree with your take.  Each player should be evaluated on their play, not size or where they played hockey before they turned pro.  Take off your maple leaf colored glasses and evaluate each player for what they do on the ice.  I for one am interested in seeing what Steve brings to the table, as I have openly criticized Stuart's play this season.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: D call up

    How about this?  Can you guys agree to discuss Kampfer based on his own skills, characteristics, and accomplishments?  For instance, how many of his assists are on the power-play?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: D call up

    That's my point DrCC - I don't care how big he is, or where he played his amatuer hockey.  I want to see what he can do on the ice.  I haven't seen any p bruins games and no wolverine games.  I only saw him in the preseason and he didn't look out of place.  
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeanE. Show MeanE's posts

    Re: D call up

    Are the Bruins stronger or weaker with McQuaid & Kampfer in the lineup as opposed to Stuart & Hunwick?  I am hoping for stronger and at the very least I think that McQuaid covers Stuart's toughness and Kampfer covers Hunwick's "puck moving" abilities.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: D call up

    Let me do my NAS imitation, MeanE - "Remains to be seen"

    On style points, sure, the Bruins have simply replaced two guys with their understudies - right down to replacing one Wolverine with another.  In the weeks before the deal, Hunwick seemed to have decided to play defense and then worry about O, and he was much better.  Stuart has seemed stalled, and he definitely hasn't developed an offensive game, but while McQuaid is tall and ferocious, he has Q-Tip legs (as opposed to Bourque who was 130lbs of legs no matter what his overall weight).  If they had made these moves independently as cap management decisions, it would have saved significant coin, but I don't think I'd have been real fond of the idea.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share