micheal leighton

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

    micheal leighton

    bruins should go after mike leighton of the flyers they waived him a few months back  he has the playoff experience an good put the stanley cup in the hands of the bruins  would have 2 starters thomas an leighton  an send rask to new jersey for clarkson
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    I like the idea of Leighton for a third stringer since we don't have one right now. But keep Rask
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from screw-cindy-and-ovie. Show screw-cindy-and-ovie's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    It's a little to soon for april's fools joke, dont ya think?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    Leighton has a bad back, is just coming off surgery, and could barely walk which is why he was sent to the AHL for the rest of the season.....not a stellar pickup.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    Leighton blows.  Consider his horseshoe up the rectum run last year catching lightning in a bottle.

    All of a sudden Clarkson is a hot commodity for this team and Rask is the chip?  lol

    I would have moved Rask for Patrick Sharp or a legit winger who can pop in 30 goals here annually, but not for a solid two way winger like Clarkson.

    Silly.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Dave24. Show Dave24's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    The B's have no goaltending prospects in the pipeline. Can't even think of trading Rask given TT's age unless this gets addressed.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    Well, to be realistic, they have Toronto's 1st rd pick.  So, that's more than a prospect. If they were to deal Rask, that's easily a direction that would make sense to develop one in the next couple years.

    However, this does appear to be a dead issue now, but trading Rask to acquire a cornerstone scorer for years to come would have been a logical possibility to consider. No doubt there.

    If Thomas was on the cusp of tailing off and getting worse instead of better with age, I'd agree with you, but it appears his contract will only be less attractive as the years go by and this only creates MORE of an issue for Rask to see pucks here.

    Don't be shocked if this kind of a move is made in the offseason, folks.

    In fact, it might be Thomas who is dangled with commitment to the younger and cheaper Rask.

    Either way, one of them is wasted on the bench.

    My prediction is:

    If Boston is somehow good enough to win a Cup, Thomas is traded.

    If Boston does not win a Cup this year, Rask will be moved in July.   By moving Rask, Boston rolls the dice with an aging Thomas who still appears to be great even at his age, and commits to a goalie in the draft.

    John Gibson is one who would go in the first round:

    "John has great net coverage and size and is very strong," NHL Central Scouting's Al Jensen told NHL.com. "He's sound technically, moves very well laterally and is controlled. He's calm, not busy."

    I, like everyone else here, sees Rask's development and potential, but he or Thomas has to go.

    This is inevitable.  They aren't going to have Thomas/Rask here sharing duties in 2011/2012.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from john6345. Show john6345's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    My sentiments rocket7 on another dumb post.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Dave24. Show Dave24's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    But would you use Toronto's pick on a goalie?  The careers of goalies selected in the first round is very spotty. 

    TT is going to be 37 soon. You have to have a "Plan B" somewhere.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from boborielly224. Show boborielly224's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    OK lets just keep trading the whole team. And I thought I was starting stupid post but now I feel confident about myself. I watch the Ottawa gm. look to me he played alright. Goalies job is to stop the puck and not worry about anything else.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]But would you use Toronto's pick on a goalie?  The careers of goalies selected in the first round is very spotty.  TT is going to be 37 soon. You have to have a "Plan B" somewhere.
    Posted by Dave24[/QUOTE]

    Depends.  I am just saying, it's an option.

    Regardless, one of these goalies will be dealt in the offseason.  That's my only point here.


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: micheal leighton : Depends.  I am just saying, it's an option. Regardless, one of these goalies will be dealt in the offseason.  That's my only point here.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    I'll put $100 down that you're wrong! I think just by the way this season went  down. PC will be keeping both. The only thing you will see if Bos makes an early exit? Is TT's games will decrease & Rask's will increase before they move either. If a Patrick Sharp, Jeff Carter or a Bobby Ryan type becomes available? Then MAYBE PC takes a stab. Any GM who wouldn't kick those tires should'nt have a GM job!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from LoyalBlackNGold. Show LoyalBlackNGold's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]bruins should go after mike leighton of the flyers they waived him a few months back  he has the playoff experience an good put the stanley cup in the hands of the bruins  would have 2 starters thomas an leighton  an send rask to new jersey for clarkson
    Posted by anddebbv[/QUOTE]

    haha wow i cant believe how dumb all of that is, but if u look alittle closer anddebbv has had a membership to this site since 2006 and has only 74 post now its starting to make sense. which has just really made me want to go back read some of his older post to see were this retardedness is coming from and let me save u guys some time its alot more of micheal leighton type stuff so if u need a good laugh check it out. i was especially cracked up by his post for chiarelli to trade back with toronto. it was seguin rask and wheeler for kessel giguere and kaberle. good stuff
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]It would't surprise me one bit if Thomas was dealt in the off season....bobo, you are starting stupid threads, don't be confident
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]

    Then put your money where your mouth is! If you're so confident (like last year) & KNOW IT ALL when it comes to Boston's goaltending! I'll put $500 that unless PC gets a big name like I mentioned above, or due to reasons beyond control. BOTH goalies will be a Bruin when the 11-12 season starts. Comon MOUTH PIECE! LETS DO IT!!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    I am not wagering based on Chiarelli's good or boneheaded moves.  Sorry.

    I still stand by my opinion.  Rask sitting on the bench is ludicrous.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]I am not wagering based on Chiarelli's good or boneheaded moves.  Sorry. I still stand by my opinion.  Rask sitting on the bench is ludicrous.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    Good cop out!
    Then what you're saying is your opinion. Not a fact & stop trying to make your opinion a fact if you're not willing to back it up! I don't think Rask sitting on the bench this much is right either, but the the question is. How could you NOT play TT more this season? Rask is 23 & has lots of time to play & he will. My money is he'll be a Boston Bruin for a long time. My money is that both TT & Rask will be Boston Bruin at the start of the 11-12 season. I stand by what I say & willing to pay if I'm wrong because I'm more sure about MY OPINION then yours.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]You Are An Idiot!
    Posted by rockett7[/QUOTE]

    Some advice. I used to resopond this way, but found out that when I did. I sounded more, or just as idiotic as the one I was calling one.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from screw-cindy-and-ovie. Show screw-cindy-and-ovie's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    Both goalie's are Bruins next year IMO, unless PC is completely blown away with a Kessel type offer thats unrefusable
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    wow
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]wow
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]

    Speaking of idi...I mean hello Kelvanna33! Innocent
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: micheal leighton : Good cop out! Then what you're saying is your opinion. Not a fact & stop trying to make your opinion a fact if you're not willing to back it up! I don't think Rask sitting on the bench this much is right either, but the the question is. How could you NOT play TT more this season? Rask is 23 & has lots of time to play & he will. My money is he'll be a Boston Bruin for a long time. My money is that both TT & Rask will be Boston Bruin at the start of the 11-12 season. I stand by what I say & willing to pay if I'm wrong because I'm more sure about MY OPINION then yours.
    Posted by nitemare-38[/QUOTE]

    Let me get this straight:

    You can tell me your opinioin is "better" than mine, yet pretend my take on this situatioin is not my own opinion, but I stated it as a fact?

    I am not willing to wager on such a wild card situation, but if I had to, I would HOPE that Chia wouldn't waster another year of a potential Rask or Thomas return for a trade. Is this really hard for you to understand?

    You only need 1 starter and there is no way both Thomas and Rask need to go through with that for another year.

    Maybe Chia feels they do, but I don't.  My opinion.

    Good grief.

    If you could deal Thomas/Rask for a 30 goal+ scorer, you absolutely have to consider it.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: micheal leighton : Let me get this straight: You can tell me your opinioin is "better" than mine, yet pretend my take on this situatioin is not my own opinion, but I stated it as a fact? I am not willing to wager on such a wild card situation, but if I had to, I would HOPE that Chia wouldn't waster another year of a potential Rask or Thomas return for a trade. Is this really hard for you to understand? You only need 1 starter and there is no way both Thomas and Rask need to go through with that for another year. Maybe Chia feels they do, but I don't.  My opinion. Good grief. If you could deal Thomas/Rask for a 30 goal+ scorer, you absolutely have to consider it.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    Where did I say my opinion is "better" than yours? Again your taking your opinion & making it a fact without being able to back it up. You're not willing to wager on your opinion because you don't have faith in your own opinion! I never said that PC shouldn't consider trading TT or Rask for a 30 goal scorer. I said that I bet money that at the start of the 11-12 season both goalies will a Bruin. Unless a situation beyond anyone's control happens, or one of the other players I mentioned earlier or equivlent becomes available.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: micheal leighton : Where did I say my opinion is "better" than yours? Again your taking your opinion & making it a fact without being able to back it up. You're not willing to wager on your opinion because you don't have faith in your own opinion! I never said that PC shouldn't consider trading TT or Rask for a 30 goal scorer. I said that I bet money that at the start of the 11-12 season both goalies will a Bruin. Unless a situation beyond anyone's control happens, or one of the other players I mentioned earlier or equivlent becomes available.
    Posted by nitemare-38[/QUOTE]
    I agree Nite.I expect both goalies to return and I don't mind it at all.TT has NTC and Rask is the future so trading either anytime soon is unlikely at best.I said earlier in the year that we have the league's best goaltending at a cap hit of 6.25m which is reasonable in todays cap driven NHL.This time next year I'll expect the rumours to heat up considerably more than this.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: micheal leighton : I agree Nite.I expect both goalies to return and I don't mind it at all.TT has NTC and Rask is the future so trading either anytime soon is unlikely at best.I said earlier in the year that we have the league's best goaltending at a cap hit of 6.25m which is reasonable in todays cap driven NHL.This time next year I'll expect the rumours to heat up considerably more than this.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]
    Without a doubt the rumors will be running rampant! When James Murphy gets bored this summer???? Look out!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Neecic. Show Neecic's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    philly didnt make the finals because of leighton, is was despite him.  suggesting the team with the best goalie tandem in the league (stat wise) pick up a goalie that a team with awful goaltending waived just doesnt make any sense.  I'll hold back on the insults as i'm not as perfect as some of the posters here that never say anything stupid, but no way dude.

    And Rask for Clarkson is worse than Rask for Raycroft.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share