In Case You Missed It

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    How bout Mark Recchi, he was a relic who worked out okay, right?

    What about the play of Satan? He did pretty good in his playoff run.

    It's perception. The B's had Coffey over the hill, have Jagr at that stage (although his skills continue to create scoring chances), Rogie Vachon past his prime, Tocchett, but then they had guys who were gone too soon like a Ryder (who was harrassed severely for his long stretches of futility), Mike Knuble, Joe Thornton for that matter. Those Oates/Neely teams were top heavy--it was a big scoring line and then a lot of futility, especially in the playoffs against a good team. But the late 70s B's had several good lines and could go 4 deep even back then. I always felt goaltending was an achilles heel during the non-Cup stretch and that it would take a goalie standing on his head--Tim Thomas--to win a Cup. Well, Rask is doing a helluva job and is playing better than I've ever seen him--certainly more acrobatic in the playoffs and making highlight reel saves, which TT did every night. 

     




    Ah Hah.....Nice memory....

     

    I always felt the B's traded for washed up players, because it was a name thing. Why is it the RedWings always get the best out of the superstars that are considered over the hill. They always scrounge up these type players and end up getting out of them, what no other team could possibly do, given the chance. Im not saying the B's always did this with the older named player, but it seemed to happen more times than not. Same goes for the Russian player we picked up, whos name escapes me. He got hurt years back and we paid him forever.....Uhhhh brain fart....Someone help me out. I feel like he just came off the books several years ago....LTIR.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    I didn't grow up glued to cable television. I didn't completely grow up with the internet. I remember when the only place you could find a computer was a school, and the only game they had was Number Munchers! I remember UPN38, "millenials" has nothing to do with that. Hell I remember using rabbit ears to get the games on my mini-tv and pretending to be asleep to watch the games (it was black and white too!). I don't like how you use generalizations to make your arguments more substantiated. It also wouldn't hurt if the "nerds" "fanboys" and "dorks" comments stopped crawling into your arguments. When someone resorts to name calling it draws away from their argument. Your argument can be 100% correct and then you call someone a "pink-hat, fanboy dork" and then your argument has no merit.

    I grew up and was a HUGE counter-strike fan. That being said I am in no way shape or form a nerd because at the same time I had a social life and played several different sports. So generally speaking when you use generalizations for entire age groups its not the best way to frame an argument.

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    You look at this B's team and then you see nothing but good things in the future AND NOW.

    Young d-men, young goalies, young forwards. Other than Jagr and Kelly and maybe Thornton, the only guy who is old is probably the team's most fit player--Chara. Lucic, Marchand, Seguin, Krug, Hamilton, McQuaid--youth squad. The team is young, and the old B's had a history of having too many veterans and not enough youth. 

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    What's this obsession with high school cliques, anyway?

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    What's this obsession with high school cliques, anyway?




    Too many viewings of The Breakfast Club.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    ally sheedy was a hottie 

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

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

     

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

    I hated the Jacobs/Sinden era. I do feel Sinden was a chump and jacobs monkey. I always felt the B's were a couple players away from making a push for the cup, but it never happened. I feel management just rode the Neely/Bourque wave all the way until they called it quits. Always a day late and a dollar short with the B's organization.

    The team they currently have now is a masterpiece and has been for several years now. Ive relished the time watching this team for the past 5-6 years. Such a special group of players we have, which will come to an end some day.

     




    Do you think Sinden should have not done what his boss told him to do and gotten fired?

     

     




    No, not at all. I get it, its a business. It was just frustrating when other teams were having no problem doing more than the B's. But with Chirelli and Neely at the helms, it appears these two have more room to work with. Almost as if the reigns have been taken off the organization, in which they can do alot that Sinden couldnt do. Of course they have a cap to maintain, but I think with these two in charge, they have a better understanding of what players fit nicely with team. Also, they have done a great job keeping the players they have. Have you ever seen a team that is so solid all around. The only team the B's had that can sort of compare was the year Bill Guerin was on the team. The B's looked destined to win a cup that year and then lost in the first round. Thorton got hurt that playoffs and was awful. Sorry, I dont remember the year that was, its been a while.

     

     




    Alexy Zhamnov.....

     

     




    Yep, thats who I was thinking of. Thanks Bgriff. LOL

     



    Are you talking to yourself?

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    Fair, but most of the people I know and associate with don't have the "gimme" attitude, but I know what you mean. I feel that the younger generation, whether it is actually split by these years or not, is far worse. I would say 1998 and up. Lebron is not exactly the pillar of a model citizen.

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    In response to DrCC's comment:

     

    What's this obsession with high school cliques, anyway?

     




    You like clubs and cliques?   Wow. 

     




    Hard to believe that someone who describes himself as having the ability to think critically would ever arrive at this conclusion.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from kitchener. Show kitchener's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    Bury this you guys have missed a beautiful weekend,your all right your all wrong who cares,move on.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    What's this obsession with high school cliques, anyway?


    You like clubs and cliques?   Wow. 



    You constantly classify people using adolescent terminology.  You assign generational characteristics to people while knowing little, if anything about them.  I don't think there is a single other poster here that refers to others using labels as much as you do.  The reference to an obsession with cliques was a reference to you.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    If they are going to act like a child, expect it in return.  Pretty simple stuff here. I am well aware you asked me what it was I didn't like about cliques and am wondering what it is you like about them?

    Read again.  I asked why you are obsessed with them, to the point that you constantly revert to using them in your discussions.  I have no use for cliques, and never have.

    As for acting the child, you have thrown the first 'barb' as often as not.  Want it to end?  Don't respond to it.  Stick to information, and logic, and reasoning in your discussions.  Don't constantly denigrate your partners in interlocution, and you will find it coming your way far less often.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

    Funny, let me know when I initiate anything.  Focus on the source. NAS is a good start.

    Lately?  Perhaps not, but most of this feud is recent, and is a result of the bed you yourself made.

    People have countered your statements with their own arguments.  You come back with "dorks!" and "pinkhats!" instead of any kind of discussion.  Perhaps others have insulted inbetween - but instead of responding to the debates, you you counter the insults.  Almost every time.  I will say you've at least toned it down a bit these past couple of days.

    So, going to answer my question? 

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     



    Can you source that paperwork?  I am not saying what you are saying isn't correct, but even if it is, how does that explain them getting nothing back for Orr? Why they didn't they just resign him?

     

    Why didn't they trade him the year before if they were never intending to resign him.   They didn't have the balls? Apparently, that's the case or they thought he would retire. Or, they were flat out too cheap.  If Eagleson wanted a higher commission, all they had to do was blow away the Hawks offer to Orr. Simple.  It's not like his knee problems came out of nowhere.

    Any way you slice it Jacobs was to cheap to immediately extend his contract in 1974 or 1975 before he even went to FA!

    Only with Jacobs logic does he completely botch the handling of an exit strategy with an dinged up HOF player.  All they had to do was blow away the Blackhawks to keep Orr, which they weren't willing to do.

    Just deal it. Jacobs sucks and always has.

     

     



    I really don't want to kill my holiday evening time doing research on Eagleson to re-site stuff I learned a decade ago, but my points are contained in the court records, which are available open to the public and are easily obtainable.

     

    As for getting nothing back for Orr - he was a free agent and they were entitled to nothing. As for Eagleson making money off commission - the contract commission was not how Eagleson made his money - it was the kick back from Wirtz and Zeigler - according to court, the Bruins could have offered him 10 times the Hawks did, Eaglson would still have made more  money personally by refusing the Bruins offer. As for not trading him? He won the Art Ross that season. They always intended to resign him. What part of "Alan Eaglson is a convicted criminal who stole millions from Orr" do you not understand?

    As for Jacobs not extending his contract in 74 - well Jacobs didn't own the team yet.

    In 75?  The most lucrative contract in the history of hockey (up to that point) was offered to Orr as an extension. It would have more than doubled Hull's Jets' contract. Eagleson convinced Orr to not take it because he told Orr he could get more on the open market (years later it was revealed Zeigler got Eagleson to stop the deal in order to keep NHL salaries down).  Due to knee surgery after the contract offer, the offer went down and Eagleson blew the deal.

    Every question you have is easily answered by the historical record and legal records. And I will say this one negative thing about Orr - he was naive. He "thought of Alan as his brother " to quote Don Cherry. Eagleson stole him blind and Orr did nothing out of loyalty (until years later).

    The fact you don't know these answers, which are common knowledge to most die-hard hockey fans, leaves me to believe you are blinded by Jacobs hatred and not willing to look at the actual facts.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hanrahan1. Show Hanrahan1's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to red75's comment:

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     



    Can you source that paperwork?  I am not saying what you are saying isn't correct, but even if it is, how does that explain them getting nothing back for Orr? Why they didn't they just resign him?

     

    Why didn't they trade him the year before if they were never intending to resign him.   They didn't have the balls? Apparently, that's the case or they thought he would retire. Or, they were flat out too cheap.  If Eagleson wanted a higher commission, all they had to do was blow away the Hawks offer to Orr. Simple.  It's not like his knee problems came out of nowhere.

    Any way you slice it Jacobs was to cheap to immediately extend his contract in 1974 or 1975 before he even went to FA!

    Only with Jacobs logic does he completely botch the handling of an exit strategy with an dinged up HOF player.  All they had to do was blow away the Blackhawks to keep Orr, which they weren't willing to do.

    Just deal it. Jacobs sucks and always has.

     

     



    I really don't want to kill my holiday evening time doing research on Eagleson to re-site stuff I learned a decade ago, but my points are contained in the court records, which are available open to the public and are easily obtainable.

     

    As for getting nothing back for Orr - he was a free agent and they were entitled to nothing. As for Eagleson making money off commission - the contract commission was not how Eagleson made his money - it was the kick back from Wirtz and Zeigler - according to court, the Bruins could have offered him 10 times the Hawks did, Eaglson would still have made more  money personally by refusing the Bruins offer. As for not trading him? He won the Art Ross that season. They always intended to resign him. What part of "Alan Eaglson is a convicted criminal who stole millions from Orr" do you not understand?

    As for Jacobs not extending his contract in 74 - well Jacobs didn't own the team yet.

    In 75?  The most lucrative contract in the history of hockey (up to that point) was offered to Orr as an extension. It would have more than doubled Hull's Jets' contract. Eagleson convinced Orr to not take it because he told Orr he could get more on the open market (years later it was revealed Zeigler got Eagleson to stop the deal in order to keep NHL salaries down).  Due to knee surgery after the contract offer, the offer went down and Eagleson blew the deal.

    Every question you have is easily answered by the historical record and legal records. And I will say this one negative thing about Orr - he was naive. He "thought of Alan as his brother " to quote Don Cherry. Eagleson stole him blind and Orr did nothing out of loyalty (until years later).

    The fact you don't know these answers, which are common knowledge to most die-hard hockey fans, leaves me to believe you are blinded by Jacobs hatred and not willing to look at the actual facts.




    Thanks for all your input Red. This forum is so much better when you're posting.

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    In response to BassFishingII's comment:

     

    Funny, let me know when I initiate anything.  Focus on the source. NAS is a good start.

     

     

    Lately?  Perhaps not, but most of this feud is recent, and is a result of the bed you yourself made.

    People have countered your statements with their own arguments.  You come back with "dorks!" and "pinkhats!" instead of any kind of discussion.  Perhaps others have insulted inbetween - but instead of responding to the debates, you you counter the insults.  Almost every time.  I will say you've at least toned it down a bit these past couple of days.

    So, going to answer my question? 



    The reason why I've put him on ignore........that and putting posters under age classifications followed by a generalization of how they live their lives. 

    Very stupid and immature !

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from bgrif008. Show bgrif008's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    Yep several guys worked out ok, but I felt there was a stretch in the 90's and early 2000's that they picked up names that just didnt work out. Kevin Stevens, Brian Leetch, Paul Coffey & rick tocchet, like you mentioned. Im sure there are plenty more. For some reason if the wings had picked them up, they would be able to get more out of them than the B's did. Im just speaking of my own perception and what it seemed like.

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    How bout Mark Recchi, he was a relic who worked out okay, right?

    What about the play of Satan? He did pretty good in his playoff run.

    It's perception. The B's had Coffey over the hill, have Jagr at that stage (although his skills continue to create scoring chances), Rogie Vachon past his prime, Tocchett, but then they had guys who were gone too soon like a Ryder (who was harrassed severely for his long stretches of futility), Mike Knuble, Joe Thornton for that matter. Those Oates/Neely teams were top heavy--it was a big scoring line and then a lot of futility, especially in the playoffs against a good team. But the late 70s B's had several good lines and could go 4 deep even back then. I always felt goaltending was an achilles heel during the non-Cup stretch and that it would take a goalie standing on his head--Tim Thomas--to win a Cup. Well, Rask is doing a helluva job and is playing better than I've ever seen him--certainly more acrobatic in the playoffs and making highlight reel saves, which TT did every night. 

     




    Ah Hah.....Nice memory....

     

    I always felt the B's traded for washed up players, because it was a name thing. Why is it the RedWings always get the best out of the superstars that are considered over the hill. They always scrounge up these type players and end up getting out of them, what no other team could possibly do, given the chance. Im not saying the B's always did this with the older named player, but it seemed to happen more times than not. Same goes for the Russian player we picked up, whos name escapes me. He got hurt years back and we paid him forever.....Uhhhh brain fart....Someone help me out. I feel like he just came off the books several years ago....LTIR.




    [/QUOTE]


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from bgrif008. Show bgrif008's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to goodnewsbears' comment:

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

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

     

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

     

    I hated the Jacobs/Sinden era. I do feel Sinden was a chump and jacobs monkey. I always felt the B's were a couple players away from making a push for the cup, but it never happened. I feel management just rode the Neely/Bourque wave all the way until they called it quits. Always a day late and a dollar short with the B's organization.

    The team they currently have now is a masterpiece and has been for several years now. Ive relished the time watching this team for the past 5-6 years. Such a special group of players we have, which will come to an end some day.

     




    Do you think Sinden should have not done what his boss told him to do and gotten fired?

     

     




    No, not at all. I get it, its a business. It was just frustrating when other teams were having no problem doing more than the B's. But with Chirelli and Neely at the helms, it appears these two have more room to work with. Almost as if the reigns have been taken off the organization, in which they can do alot that Sinden couldnt do. Of course they have a cap to maintain, but I think with these two in charge, they have a better understanding of what players fit nicely with team. Also, they have done a great job keeping the players they have. Have you ever seen a team that is so solid all around. The only team the B's had that can sort of compare was the year Bill Guerin was on the team. The B's looked destined to win a cup that year and then lost in the first round. Thorton got hurt that playoffs and was awful. Sorry, I dont remember the year that was, its been a while.

     

     




    Alexy Zhamnov.....

     

     




    Yep, thats who I was thinking of. Thanks Bgriff. LOL

     

     



    Are you talking to yourself?

     




    Ya, it was a spur of the moment thing, where I actually remembered Zhamnov, so I thought I would have some fun with it.

     

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

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to bgrif008's comment:

    Yep several guys worked out ok, but I felt there was a stretch in the 90's and early 2000's that they picked up names that just didnt work out. Kevin Stevens, Brian Leetch, Paul Coffey & rick tocchet, like you mentioned. Im sure there are plenty more. For some reason if the wings had picked them up, they would be able to get more out of them than the B's did. Im just speaking of my own perception and what it seemed like.



    Tocchet played fine for the Bruins.  The Coffey pickup was miserable.  Leetch did was he was expected to do.  Stevens was never the same after the Pilon hit...and the crack.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bgrif008. Show bgrif008's posts

    Re: In Case You Missed It

    In response to lambda13's comment:

    Fair, but most of the people I know and associate with don't have the "gimme" attitude, but I know what you mean. I feel that the younger generation, whether it is actually split by these years or not, is far worse. I would say 1998 and up. Lebron is not exactly the pillar of a model citizen.




    I get where Bassfishing is coming from when he talks of society feeling entitled....Im not speaking for everyone, because there are a lot of hard working folks out there. But there are many who abuse the system and feel entitled to what they think they are owed or deserved. I understand people need help, but when you keep giving hand outs, where is the incentive to do anything. Ok Im done. I sort of got off track, but I had to comment.  One more thing to add. I see a lot of our youth working at places like restaurants and fast food, which is a good thing. Honestly I dont know how the highschool age kids get by without working now a days. It has to cost them a week or two worth of work, just to pay for one date. Gas alone has to put a huge damper on highschoolers driving.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share