micheal leighton

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

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]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.
    Posted by Seabasshole[/QUOTE]

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

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]BBR, take nitemare with a grain of salt, when i was saying that if a good deal was available for thomas to do it this off season he went crazy, got absurdly angry, and i'm sure he considered tracking me down and sending death threats to my house. Nitemare, I said "I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas was moved." I also wouldn't be surprised if the Bruins won the cup, but I'm not going to bet 500 dollars on it. You NEED to relax. All i did was state my opinion the same that you do.
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]

    No PB I'm treating you the same way you treat others on here! That's all! Anytime someone has an opinion you don't like you response it's full of disdain! And anybody who reads this & knows you, will say the samething.  I didn't yell at BBR did I? No I yell at you, because you think you know it all! I have a new way handling people who talk in absolutes like BB was. If you're so smart & think your opinion is an absolute to happen then put money on it! If you're talking in possibilities that's different, but that's not what BB was saying. He was talking like he can see the future. So when you piped up I snapped because IT WAS YOU! In case you didn't notice. I don't like you! You're a liar for one & I don't like liars! And if you have to ask what you lied about? Then that just makes your character even less. EVERYBODY knows what you lied about! You may have a chance to get looked at differently if you'd be man enough to admit it!
     
  3. 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 : 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]


    Why is my opinion perceived as a fact?

    Could it be you don't want to happen what I feel/predict might happen, so you are angry about that?

    Oh, I think that's the reason!

    Of course it's my opinion, Einstein.  Everyone has one. Or, at least should.

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

    Re: micheal leighton

    These are your quotes!

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

    This maybe your opinion, but you're talking in absolutes & making them facts. There's other ways to word things without talking in absolutes.  I'm not saying I don't appreciate your opinion, but if you're going to make bold predictions & believe them. Then be willing to back up what you're saying.
    I will be angry if what you say is true. I think the B's are set for a few more years in the goalie position & firmly believe PC realizes this now & unless a deal comes along for a bonafide goal scorer neither guy will be going anywhere in July! That's MY opinion & I'll bet money on it! See the difference here?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    I had no idea by prefacing a statement with "IF" that it meant it was an absolute.

    Where did you go to school, son?

    No, there is no difference. You apparently are just  looking to be combative.

    By using the word "if", it clearly shows that's my opinion of what Chia will do.  Just an opinion. It's certainly what I would do.

    There is no way on god's green earth Rask is going to sit on the bench for another year. He's either a great trade chip or your starter.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    Stop it, or I'm turning this car around right now.

    There is no reason for Leighton to come anywhere near this team...just as there is no reason to break up the best goaltending tandem in the NHL.
    Down the road PC may listen to offers for TT or TR but that is offseason fodder.
     
  7. 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 had no idea by prefacing a statement with "IF" that it meant it was an absolute. Where did you go to school, son? No, there is no difference. You apparently are just  looking to be combative. By using the word "if", it clearly shows that's my opinion of what Chia will do.  Just an opinion. It's certainly what I would do. There is no way on god's green earth Rask is going to sit on the bench for another year. He's either a great trade chip or your starter.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    Another Absolute! Where did you go to school? How do you know this? Are you clairvoyant? Again? I'll bet you a $100 he & TT are both Bruins at the start of the 11-12 season.
    And yes when you say "IF" this happens this will happen! That's making an absoulte statement! You're talking in facts like what you say is gospel! It's like you saying IF the Bruins win the cup TT will be traded & you're making it the same as saying.  If you put your finger to a flame it'll get burned! What is so hard about changing your wording. You're the one who's being combative here bud! I'm making a FACTUAL STATEMENT as to what you're doing!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    That is an absolute, but my premise about one of them being moved isn't.  There is a difference.

    My premise is one will be moved.  I could easily be wrong and it would only prove that Chiarelli doesn't get it as much as he thinks he does.

    You don't sit two #1 goalies side by side. It's why Chicago dealt Hasek in the early 90s. They had Belfour and moved on.

    You've gone retarded if you think Rask is sit and watch Tim Thomas for another season.


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

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]BBR, take nitemare with a grain of salt, when i was saying that if a good deal was available for thomas to do it this off season he went crazy, got absurdly angry[/QUOTE]

    He did the same to me on whether Osgood was a Hall of Famer a while back. Still not sure what set that off.....
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]That is an absolute, but my premise about one of them being moved isn't.  There is a difference. My premise is one will be moved.  I could easily be wrong and it would only prove that Chiarelli doesn't get it as much as he thinks he does. You don't sit two #1 goalies side by side. It's why Chicago dealt Hasek in the early 90s. They had Belfour and moved on. You've gone retarded if you think Rask is sit and watch Tim Thomas for another season.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    Worked in Edmonton for 7 or 8 yrs with Moog & Fuhr!
    Worked here with Moog & Lemilen for 3 or 4 yrs!
    Worked here with Gilbert & Cheevers for 3 yrs!
    Worked in Ottawa with Rhodes & Tuggnut!
    Sure PC doesn't get it? Are you making an absolute again by saying I've gone retarded? I can prove that I'm not! Can you prove that I am?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    Pre cap era. Poor examples.

    Tugnutt was 40 years old when he was in Ottawa and a journeyman. Thomas is 6 million and Rask is a bonafide, cheap starter right now which means he is an incredible trade chip.

    Yes, I am sure Chia doesn't get it if he keeps both next year.

    My first choice would be to deal Thomas due to the salary and they fear of losing Rask.

    But, as I said, if Rask is the easier move, draft the best goaltending prospect in return for the 1st rd pick you'd get for Rask.

    He's going to need cash freed up for free agents, a top 5 pick (most likely), Kaberle and re-ups on others.

    Glad I could help.
     
  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 : hahaha. heres why you don't like me. I don't think Tim Thomas is the greatest goaltender in the history of the world. Fact. another fact, i haven't lied to a loser like you because theres no point. fact of the matter is i don't care enough to go look up the proof i needed, and you are too lazy to look it up. If you weren't lazy you could try to accuse me of being a liar, but now you just sound stupid. You are not related to tim thomas, you are not friends with him, stop getting so offended when people can "see a possibility of him getting traded in the future." seek help dude
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]
    I don't think TT is the greatest goalie in the history of the world. Marty Brodeur has that title to me & it'll take a lot to make someone change my mind.  
    I don't like you, because your nothing but an arrogant pompous punk & A LIAR! There's nothing to look up because you lied! If you held this unheard of distiction you'd have a paper clipping, or they'd be a write up that I'm sure your proud Daddy would've kept! You're a liar PB & everyone else whoever heard your lame story thinks you are too!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: micheal leighton

    In Response to Re: micheal leighton:
    [QUOTE]Pre cap era. Poor examples. Tugnutt was 40 years old when he was in Ottawa and a journeyman. Thomas is 6 million and Rask is a bonafide, cheap starter right now which means he is an incredible trade chip. Yes, I am sure Chia doesn't get it if he keeps both next year. My first choice would be to deal Thomas due to the salary and they fear of losing Rask. But, as I said, if Rask is the easier move, draft the best goaltending prospect in return for the 1st rd pick you'd get for Rask. He's going to need cash freed up for free agents, a top 5 pick (most likely), Kaberle and re-ups on others. Glad I could help.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]
    Poor examples for who YOU! Btw- Tuggnutt was 30-34 when he was with Ottawa. His prime yrs!

    Your choice maybe as you say. Doesn't mean it's the right one! That's why I'm glad PC is the GM & not you! 

    Btw- Post lockout- Luongo & Schneider, Quick & Bernier, Khabibulin & Dubnyk. Then you have Washington's situation!
     
  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]In Response to Re: micheal leighton : This was in the empire league....you would ahve to do some digging...I would be offended if you weren't a whiny old man. I really don't care what you think, but if you think i am a (this needs to be capitalized right) LIAR, then proof it....lazy old men
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]

    It's not just me that thinks it! It's young, middle, male & female! You lost all creditabilty on here when you said what you said by ALL who know! Btw- what team did you play for & year. I have sources that can find this out.
     

Share