Mark Stuart

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

    Mark Stuart

    Hopefully the organization recongizes him and gives him a ring, any thoughts? 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    Doubt it - he only played 30 games or so, less than the required 41, and then was traded away. I like Stuart though, and am glad he's now on the Whatevers.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    No way.  I mean, I loved the guy, but he got traded, not injured.  He played less than 41 games with the team, and wouldn't meet any of the other criteria.


    To be fair, he didn't really have anything to do with the Cup run.

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

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    No way.  I mean, I loved the guy, but he got traded, not injured.  He played less than 41 games with the team, and wouldn't meet any of the other criteria. To be fair, he didn't really have anything to do with the Cup run.
    Posted by Fletcher1


    To be fair...oh you know what I'd say here.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Mark Stuart:
    Hopefully the organization recongizes him and gives him a ring, any thoughts? 
    Posted by BigBadBear


    Certainly not.  First of all, the players don't care as much about a ring they'll never wear as much as having their name on the Cup.

    Second, he was dealt for the guy who helped the team win the Cup.  He didn't directly help them win anything.

    This isn't little league basebal where everyone gets a trophy. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from huntbri. Show huntbri's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    I agree with NAS on this one.  Savard is a different story with his history with the team, his injuries and the fact he is still with the organization.  I like Mark Stuart but no to the ring and no to having his name on the Cup.  He wouldn't want them anyway as he will want to feel like he earned them.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart : To be fair...oh you know what I'd say here.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    Yes I do.  I even thought of it as I was typing it...
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    I miss caveman but he simply got passed on the depth chart. Too bad up until then he was an iron man up until last year bad timing on those injuries. Glad to see him get that extension and hope he does well on the "whatevers".
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    Savard I'll argue but Stuart got traded, and it was the players traded for that won the cup, not him.

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

    Re: Mark Stuart

    NAS hit it right on the head. We may very well not have won the cup without Peverly.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jacobspleasesell. Show jacobspleasesell's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    I've been saying since game 7 that the only thing that is disappointing is knowing that Kaberle gets his name on the Cup and Stuart doesn't. The way Kaberle was such a disappointment from the day he got here he really didn't have anything to do with the Bruins' Cup run either. They sort of won it in spite of his presence.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    I've been saying since game 7 that the only thing that is disappointing is knowing that Kaberle gets his name on the Cup and Stuart doesn't. The way Kaberle was such a disappointment from the day he got here he really didn't have anything to do with the Bruins' Cup run either. They sort of won it in spite of his presence.
    Posted by jacobspleasesell


    I had no problem with the way Kaberle played against Tampa or Vancouver.

    Oh, and it's time to cancel this account and start a new one.  How about "Jacobsthanksfornotselling"?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jalvis. Show jalvis's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    I've been saying since game 7 that the only thing that is disappointing is knowing that Kaberle gets his name on the Cup and Stuart doesn't. The way Kaberle was such a disappointment from the day he got here he really didn't have anything to do with the Bruins' Cup run either. They sort of won it in spite of his presence.
    Posted by jacobspleasesell


    While Kaberle was a disappointment for sure, I still think he played pretty well in the ECF and the Finals. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from boborielly224. Show boborielly224's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    Kaberle if sign with Bruins would be a improved d man under Julien d coaching methods. If the Bruins can sign him for 2 years under 4.5 mill it is worth the shot. My reasoning for this he is now familiar with organization.Undecided
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    I've been saying since game 7 that the only thing that is disappointing is knowing that Kaberle gets his name on the Cup and Stuart doesn't. The way Kaberle was such a disappointment from the day he got here he really didn't have anything to do with the Bruins' Cup run either. They sort of won it in spite of his presence.
    Posted by jacobspleasesell


    11 assists in 16mins TOI/G isnt bad for your 5th/6th defenseman he was also a +8. He made some gaffs early in the PO's but I think with a year in the system he could pick up 50+ points. Supposing the PP improves next year that is.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from StanleyCuptotheBruinsin2011. Show StanleyCuptotheBruinsin2011's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    B's should send him a postcard with the following logo on it
    Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013
    Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013
    Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013
    Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013
    Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013
    Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013


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

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    B's should send him a postcard with the following logo on it Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013 Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013 Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013 Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013 Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013 Stanley Cup to the BRUINS in 2011-2012-2013
    Posted by StanleyCuptotheBruinsin2011
    Thank you Stanley for the chuckle. You finally have a use for your weird signature.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from mxt. Show mxt's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    People need to lay off the Kaberle sucks talk. He got better as the playoffs went and still can make the first pass better than most. He'll never shoot enough but makes alot of good plays with the puck at the point. He can't help it that he had to play for a team that hasn't had anything to play for the past few years. I say we offer him a total of 6 mil for 2 years. If he doesn't accept, we move on.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from fishfinger. Show fishfinger's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart

    IIn Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    If this is what you think you do not know much about hockey..He was not that bad..Everyone thought he was going to make the PP better and he didn't..He pretty much played the way most people had said he would..I think he was the
    leading scorer amoung the Bruins defence in the playoffs.




    I've been saying since game 7 that the only thing that is disappointing is knowing that Kaberle gets his name on the Cup and Stuart doesn't. The way Kaberle was such a disappointment from the day he got here he really didn't have anything to do with the Bruins' Cup run either. They sort of won it in spite of his presence.
    Posted by jacobspleasesell

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

    Re: Mark Stuart

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart:
    I've been saying since game 7 that the only thing that is disappointing is knowing that Kaberle gets his name on the Cup and Stuart doesn't. The way Kaberle was such a disappointment from the day he got here he really didn't have anything to do with the Bruins' Cup run either. They sort of won it in spite of his presence.
    Posted by jacobspleasesell

    Absurd statement. Kaberle led the Bruins D in playoff scoring and did many things that didn't show on the scoresheet. Stuart was traded because he was a hinderance to the transition game. Kaberle was not.For you to begrudge Kaberle and his contribution to a Cup winner makes no sense. Neither does thinking a guy with less than 40 games played(0 playoffs) should have his name etched on the Cup.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share