Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]My mistake. I knew he was a goalie fan, but had no idea he was a Canadiens troll on this Bs board. Why are we stuck with trolls from rival teams so much on these boards. I rarely, if ever see Boston fans on other teams' boards.
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    Not a Habs fan. Carey Price fan. Get over it.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]Nash is not a top 5 player in the NHL.  I would agree with top 10, but no way is he better than Stamkos Malkin Crosby Datsyuk Perry
    Posted by KrayzieJoe[/QUOTE]

    Name the players on your list linemates. Now name the players Nash plays with. Have any of the above mentioned players switch places with Nash and get back to me.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    kelvana... what's up with price not moving a muscle for the seguin shootout? not a twitch, nothing. completely fooled? expecting him to dangle like he has in the past couple shootouts, and not ready for a shot? he had a "what just happened" look. is this overthinking, and not reacting. which brings me to another interesting thing said by TT last night after the game. he said he asked the coaches to not have to take penalties in practice, and he's 6-0 in shootouts this season. is there something to not thinking about tendencies, and just reacting to what's happening? interesting stuff 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    I find this thread fascinating.  I'm glad most of those posting on it are not running the Bruins. My two cents:

    Rick Nash it not a power forward.  He is a big forward.  He is not especially physical or nasty, he is not a fighter.  The term was brought over from basketball to describe Cam Neeely's style of play.  The best power forward in the league today?  You could argue that is Milan Lucic, the only player in the league right now with 20 goals and 100 pims.  But not Nash.

    Nash is not a 'top-5' player in the league.  That one baffles me.  He's not even close to top 5.  Good player, sure, but think of the awesome, dominant, all-around players out there.  Crosby, Datsyuk, Malkin, Chara, Lidstrom, Thomas, Ovechkin, Stamkos... I could list 20 or 30 more productive, more effective players before I got to Nash.

    Rick Nash is a one-dimensional goal-scorer.  He is good at it.  He routinely scores 30 and has topped 40 a couple of times.  He is fast and has good finish.  But that's it.  He is not an outstanding two-way player, not a guy who makes outstanding plays and makes his linemates better. He is not a point-per-game type player.  For me, his game matches most closely with Phil Kessel, only Kessel is better at it.

    The big argument that people keep making is that Nash has had lousy linemates. That one doesn't hold true for me. It certainly doesn't prove anything.  The most you could say is that he MIGHT be better with better linemates.  There is nothing to say he actually would be.  The great players don't need great linemates to be successful.  Malkin this year will take anyone you give him, put them on his back, and score 100 points. The scoring leaders list is full of players who play for lousy teams.  Again, look at Kessel.  Did anyone think of Joffrey Lupal as an All-star before he went on Phil's line?  Their center is an undrafted College pick-up who wouldn't be able to make most teams.  But Phil still scores lots of goals. Bad linemates might be holding Nash back, but it doesn't hold back other players, so I question his resolve.

    The idea of trading younger, more affordable, more productive players like Lucic or Krejci for Nash is simply amazing.  There is another thread about Krejci struggling with his modest point total of 39. That happens to be the same number that Nash has in more games, and he would somehow make the team dramatically better?  So much better that it would be worth paying more money and giving up DK's all around skill and defensively play... not to mention his proven playoff production?  So much better that we would include the League's statistically best young goalie and a top pick or prospect?  If we are going to give that up, I would say trade for Kessel.  Similar style but with much better production, younger, and a lower cap hit.

    These trade proposals for Nash = Mind Blown.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]I find this thread fascinating.  I'm glad most of those posting on it are not running the Bruins. My two cents: Rick Nash it not a power forward.  He is a big forward.  He is not especially physical or nasty, he is not a fighter.  The term was brought over from basketball to describe Cam Neeely's style of play.  The best power forward in the league today?  You could argue that is Milan Lucic, the only player in the league right now with 20 goals and 100 pims.  But not Nash. Nash is not a 'top-5' player in the league.  That one baffles me.  He's not even close to top 5.  Good player, sure, but think of the awesome, dominant, all-around players out there.  Crosby, Datsyuk, Malkin, Chara, Lidstrom, Thomas, Ovechkin, Stamkos... I could list 20 or 30 more productive, more effective players before I got to Nash. Rick Nash is a one-dimensional goal-scorer.  He is good at it.  He routinely scores 30 and has topped 40 a couple of times.  He is fast and has good finish.  But that's it.  He is not an outstanding two-way player, not a guy who makes outstanding plays and makes his linemates better. He is not a point-per-game type player.  For me, his game matches most closely with Phil Kessel, only Kessel is better at it. The big argument that people keep making is that Nash has had lousy linemates. That one doesn't hold true for me. It certainly doesn't prove anything.  The most you could say is that he MIGHT be better with better linemates.  There is nothing to say he actually would be.  The great players don't need great linemates to be successful.  Malkin this year will take anyone you give him, put them on his back, and score 100 points. The scoring leaders list is full of players who play for lousy teams.  Again, look at Kessel.  Did anyone think of Joffrey Lupal as an All-star before he went on Phil's line?  Their center is an undrafted College pick-up who wouldn't be able to make most teams.  But Phil still scores lots of goals. Bad linemates might be holding Nash back, but it doesn't hold back other players, so I question his resolve. The idea of trading younger, more affordable, more productive players like Lucic or Krejci for Nash is simply amazing.  There is another thread about Krejci struggling with his modest point total of 39. That happens to be the same number that Nash has in more games, and he would somehow make the team dramatically better?  So much better that it would be worth paying more money and giving up DK's all around skill and defensively play... not to mention his proven playoff production?  So much better that we would include the League's statistically best young goalie and a top pick or prospect?  If we are going to give that up, I would say trade for Kessel.  Similar style but with much better production, younger, and a lower cap hit. These trade proposals for Nash = Mind Blown.
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]

    How many times have you seen Rick Nash play?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : Name the players on your list linemates. Now name the players Nash plays with. Have any of the above mentioned players switch places with Nash and get back to me.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]

    I'll understand if you TL:DR my last post, so I'll repeat only this - the linemates argument might hold water if Nash was a top 30 scorer instead of a top 10, but he's currently 70th.  Great players may not always make those around them better, they may not be good enough to win single-handedly, but they generally tend to do their jobs and get their points. 

    I've seen lots of Rick Nash.  I think you over-rate him without evidence to show he's significantly better than he's produced over the last three or four years.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Hockey News "Bests" special issue: Best Power Forward - Milan Lucic, Boston Bruins.  Nash wasn't on the list.  I believe it was a player poll.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : How many times have you seen Rick Nash play?
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
    I've seen him play a lot. If you think Malkin or Datsyuk or Stamkos wouldn't produce in Columbus then I think you're mistaken.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : I've seen him play a lot. If you think Malkin or Datsyuk or Stamkos wouldn't produce in Columbus then I think you're mistaken.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Did I say they wouldnt produce in Columbus?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Many times. I watch a lot of hockey, and watch all teams. Good player. Fast, goal-scoring winger.

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : How many times have you seen Rick Nash play?
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Bookboy, you would have more of a point if Rick Nash was a center, but he's a wing. A big, hulking, and ridiculously skilled wing (OatesCam, a power forward is more about body position and physical presence than it is about penalty minutes and fights, saying lucic is a better power forward than Nash is a complete joke, just as calling him a 30 goal scorer is when he pots 6 empty netters).

    Just imagine if Milan Lucic didn't have Krejci/savard/Horton with him... just imagine in fact, if Lucic not only didn't have Krejci or Horton, but didn't have the bergeron line behind them, didn't have the defense to keep the puck out of the defensive zone, and didn't have the goaltender to keep the puck out of the net. What you would get is a player that was easy to shut down because his style of play relies on other players to make up for his shortcomings (quickness and passing). One player can't do it all, and that's a fact. Anyone who has played the game of hockey knows that they will have more opporunities for goals when they play with better players, and when you aren't forced to play defense or from behind all the time. It's the same reason why Seguin didn't make sense on the 4th line, you put talent with talent.

    Your argument about him not being a top 5 player in the league is reasonable; certainly if I were building a team I would start with a center iceman the likes of Toews, Malkin, Datsyuk, Sedin, Kesler, Crosby, etc. Centers are more important because they touch the puck more. When they have the skill to go with the added responsibility, they tend to score more points. But the top wings in the league almost always are paired with a top center and top talent. Ovechkin has Backstrom, Sedin has Evil Sedin, St. Louis has Stamkos, Hossa has Toews or Sharp, Perry has Getzlaf etc. Only a few players have really bucked this trend as far as I'm concerned, igninla in calgary, and one season of Kovalchuk in ATL.

    However, you've merged onto silly street by comparing Rick Nash to Jason Pominville, Michael Ryder, or Vanek just as OatesKam has with the Phil Kessel comparison. These comparisons are disgraceful.. Exactly why has Rick Nash been a beast in international competition? Why is he consistently placed on Canada's top lines even when Team Canada is as stacked as they are? The reason is, when you put him with good players, his style of play can really thrive. This has been obvious to Team Canada, just as Phil Kessel's horrific dimuntive selfish style is enough to keep him on the bench for Team USA. When teams can simply load up on one line (like they have been doing for years in columbus) it's a miracle that he can even score goals as consistently as he has.

    I keep re-reading your points trying to find something reasonable, but it's almost like you don't understand the difference between a center and a wing. OatesKam is talking about Malkin... clearly a different kind of player, and a center....


    The truth is, Rick Nash could be the most productive player the bruins, and take Seguins game as a center to the next level. The best part about this potential trade is, we actually have the supporting talent around Nash for this guy to really thrive.  He's young, in his prime, we have the cap space, and we wouldn't have to subtract anything that would compromise our depth (except at goaltender... yet only 1 can play at a time)


    Another frusterating thing is you all either didn't read my post about how horrendous CBJ has drafted, or apparently didn't think it's significant. I mean, how can you defend their draft record and say it hasn't had an effect on Rick Nash's production??? How can you seriously say that???
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : Did I say they wouldnt produce in Columbus?
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
    Yeah, you said to swap any of them for Nash and "get back to you". The implication is that they wouldn't produce as much (or am I not getting your point)?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from mannyortez3424. Show mannyortez3424's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Rick Nash is easily one of my top 5 favorite non-Bruins, but PC would be insane to make a move for him...

    He scores as much as, or a little more than Looch, yet it would supposedly take Looch, a 1st rounder, and Dougie to obtain a 7.8 mil-a-yar cap hit?

    I'll keep the prospect, the pick, and the guy that scores 30 and is just about the best fighter in the league...
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : Yeah, you said to swap any of them for Nash and "get back to you". The implication is that they wouldn't produce as much (or am I not getting your point)?
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Are you telling me that if those players played for Columbus theyre production would not dip? If so, then I feel your wrong.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : Are you telling me that if those players played for Columbus theyre production would not dip? If so, then I feel your wrong.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]
    I don't think they'd dip down to where Nash presently is (39 points in 57 games for 7.8/year)
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Kel and Dez, you both make valid points. You're also again swapping centers in for a wing.

    If you take a top line winger on a top tier team and put him in Columbus his production will dip. Top wingers rely on a center and good puck-moving d-men to get them the puck. Those don't exist in Columbus.

    The argument is useless unless it happens and we can compare what actually happens. Who knows what Nash would do in Boston? Who knows what Datsyuk would do in Columbus or Boston? For all we know Datsyuk could come to Boston and be the next Scott Gomez. Ok ok, maybe going a little far there, but you get the idea. Good players don't always stay good after a trade. It can impact their play.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    It will be interesting to see what Columbus eventually does get for Nash when the trade happens. Don Waddell didn't get asked to join the Jets probably because in big part of what he got in return for Kovalchuk amongst other bad returns for stars.

    Talk about GMs learing what not to do. Bergfors now in Nashville, Oduya serviceable but not spectacular, Cormier still in AHL and the #24 pick in the 2010 draft (flipped in another trade).

    Dean Lombardi could say "choose from either Quick or Bernier, Johnson or Doughty" without being hurt getting Nash back. I think the Kings should be the odds on favorite because they can afford to lose a goalie.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Olsonic, your points are all speculation, all entirely based on what Rick Nash could maybe possibly with the right mix of fairy dust and children clapping do.  Pretty foolish to say my points aren't reasonable and come back with fantasy land stuff.  Right now, Nash is producing like Michael Ryder does on a team that is only marginally more talented than the BJs.  If that hurts, well, it's also true.

    No one debated Columbus's awful draft record because, well, so?  It's just the same excuse - he doesn't have anyone to play with.  Call him a waaaaaambulance with a side car for his wallet.  In the same vein, I think it's ridiculous to give that excuse more credence just because he's a wing and not a centre.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    Enough: Rask for Nash only!  Here (below) is why the Blue Jackets will not make a trade outside the fact they owe Nash a gazillion dollars for several years.  Wait another year will be their motto, for next year some GM may lose his job trading for Nash.  

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

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]Olsonic, your points are all speculation, all entirely based on what Rick Nash could maybe possibly with the right mix of fairy dust and children clapping do.  Pretty foolish to say my points aren't reasonable and come back with fantasy land stuff.  Right now, Nash is producing like Michael Ryder does on a team that is only marginally more talented than the BJs.  If that hurts, well, it's also true. No one debated Columbus's awful draft record because, well, so?  It's just the same excuse - he doesn't have anyone to play with.  Call him a waaaaaambulance with a side car for his wallet.  In the same vein, I think it's ridiculous to give that excuse more credence just because he's a wing and not a centre.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Before I rip you, let's just establish that I said some of your points were reasonable, but since you didn't notice, let's just pretend  you know hockey; as you say, Rick Nash equals Michael Ryder. Forget that Michael ryder's career high is 30 and that Rick Nash has eclipsed Ryder's career high in six of his eight years in the NHL, including seasons of 38,40, and 41.

    I asked you to wonder why Team Canada had Nash on the 1st line and not Ryder... is this a dogmatic belief?... you just ignored it though. I asked you what Milan Lucic (who has never made team canada) would do without Krejci and Horton... you ignored it..... I asked you what a player would do without a goaltender and solid defense (like veznia winner Thomas and Norris winner Chara)... you ignored it.... I asked you to consider the relative role of wing vs center... you ignored it. I told you about CBJ's draft record, and all you did is say "yeah I heard you, but wahhhhhhh" instead of addressing it like a reasonable hockey critic.

    Pretend you know hockey all you want, but you're no better than N-A-S; you can google cap-space and think about the business side of things, but you have absolutely discredited yourself as a knowledgable hockey-mind by suggesting Nash is on the same page as Ryder, pominville and vanek.

    whatever though. he was 31st in the league last year, 37th the year before, 18th the year before

    I don't even feel like going on... stick by your stats all you want, but that just makes you a fantasy hockey-jockey rather than an honest hockey critic... just like N-A-S.. Just go ahead and read what people are writing about Rick Nash right now and ask yourself.... "Hmmm, why weren't they this excited for Michael Ryder???... Don't they know how good he is????" honestly... try making that point to anyone who knows the game and you will be laughed at, just like I am laughing at you now.


    These boards are a complete joke. Just need chowda-fu*kin "I know whats goin on in the OHL" to chime in and then we'd have a legit scouting convo on what isn't going on in the NHL..

    Just for sh*ts and giggles I put together this chart of goals scored since 2002-2003

    Top 10 + Ryder Goals
    Ilya Kovalchuk 340
    jarome Iginila 310
    Alex Ovechkin 301
    Dany heatley 299
    Marian Hossa 281
    Vincent Lecavalier 270
    Martin St. Louis 260
    Patrick Marleau 260
    Rick Nash 259
    Teemu Selanne 238
    Michael Ryder* 162


    Feel free to tell me which of these guys, (other than Nash and Iginlia) has NOT had an all-star #1 center?? Honestly... the only response to this argument is "i'm sorry" Also... I'm not noticing anyone else who is 27 years old.... in their prime... Wow... just wow. Ryder.... just wow.
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : Before I rip you, let's just establish that I said some of your points were reasonable, but since you didn't notice, let's just pretend  you know hockey; as you say, Rick Nash equals Michael Ryder. Forget that Michael ryder's career high is 30 and that Rick Nash has eclipsed Ryder's career high in six of his eight years in the NHL, including seasons of 38,40, and 41. I asked you to wonder why Team Canada had Nash on the 1st line and not Ryder... is this a dogmatic belief?... you just ignored it though. I asked you what Milan Lucic would do without Krejci and Horton... you ignored it..... I asked you what a player would do without a goaltender and solid defense... you ignored it.... I asked you to consider the relative role of wing vs center... you ignored it. I told you about CBJ's draft record, and all you did is say "yeah I heard you, but wahhhhhhh" instead of addressing it like a reasonable hockey critic. Pretend you know hockey all you want, but you're no better than N-A-S, you can google cap-space and think about the business side of things, but you have absolutely discredited yourself as a knowledgable hockey-mind by suggesting Nash is on the same page as Ryder, pominville and vanek. whatever though. he was 31st in the league last year, 37th the year before, 18th the year before I don't even feel like going on... stick by your stats all you want, but that just makes you a fantasy hockey-jockey rather than an honest hockey critic... just like N-A-S.. Just go ahead and read what people are writing about Rick Nash right now and ask yourself.... "Hmmm, why weren't they this excited for Michael Ryder???... Don't they know how good he is????" honestly... try making that point to anyone who knows the game and you will be laughed at, just like I am laughing at you now. These boards are a complete joke. Just need chowda-fu*kin "I know whats goin on in the OHL" to chime in and then we'd have a legit scouting convo on what isn't going on in the NHL.. Just for sh*ts and giggles I put together this chart of goals scored since 2002-2003 Top 10 + Ryder Goals Ilya Kovalchuk 340 jarome Iginila 310 Alex Ovechkin 301 Dany heatley 299 Marian Hossa 281 Vincent Lecavalier 270 Martin St. Louis 260 Patrick Marleau 260 Rick Nash 259 Teemu Selanne 238 Michael Ryder* 162 Feel free to tell me which of these guys, (other than Nash and Iginlia) has NOT had an all-star #1 center?? Honestly... the only response to this argument is "i'm sorry" Also... I'm not noticing anyone else who is 27 years old.... in their prime... Wow... just wow. Ryder.... just wow.
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]


    1st line Team Canada. End of Argument.

    That sums it up.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash

    In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash : 1st line Team Canada. End of Argument. That sums it up.
    Posted by kelvana33[/QUOTE]

    yeah, those canadians clearly don't know what they are doin..... 

    Sigh, thanks for backing me up ipot and Kelvana... I just can't believe how little support Rick Nash is getting here considering how obvioulsy good he is. Nice to know some people are still awake.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobbyOrrAlumni. Show BobbyOrrAlumni's posts

    Re: Vegas: Bruins are 2nd most likely spot for Nash


     The last time the Bruins had a top scoring line in the league was with Thornton, Murray, Knuble...and during those years the Bruins never made it past the second round.

    Having said this,  I beleive the following lineup would give us a better chance at winning the cup than our current roster:

    Lucic       Seguin    Nash
    Marchand Bergeron Horton (Caron if Horton injured)
    Peverley   Kelly      Pouliot

    Paille       Campbell Caron (Thornton)




    Krecji  + 1 goalie  + first round pick  (if absolutely necessary  add Boychuck)

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share