Witch Hunt

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

    Witch Hunt

    Recently a poster ( let's call him 'God's gift to hockey' ) on this board proclaimed Mark Stuart to be a #2 defenceman. Stuart was a healthy scratch yesterday basically putting him #7 on the depth chart for the moment . Do you agree with God's gift to hockey's ranking of Stuart and where would you put him ( #2 through #7 ) ?

    Personally, I like Stuart, but a #2 ? C'mon ! BTW , earlier in the year God's gift to hockey suggested for Stuart to be on the PP.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TommyCrockett. Show TommyCrockett's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Anyone paired with Chara looks like a great # 2 defenseman...his partners always look good...but NO ..talent wise..Stuart is the # 5 guy at best....if you compare him individually to Kampher, Boychuk  or Seindenberg , he comes up short every time...Ference should be the 7th
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheGuyWithDaThing. Show TheGuyWithDaThing's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Sorry, but Ference is sitting at a +18 right now. As a defenseman, that's all we can ask of him. Seems like he's not making bonehead decisions like he was last year.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from CarolinaClamMan. Show CarolinaClamMan's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    A question--   If two opposing forwards are breaking on one Bruins D-man, who would you want that D-man to be?


     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]A question--   If two opposing forwards are breaking on one Bruins D-man, who would you want that D-man to be?
    Posted by CarolinaClamMan[/QUOTE]
    Honestly... McQuaid. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    IMO Stuart is still a 3rd pairing d-man. He is better than Boychuck in many areas; he is better than McQuaid in experience; he is about even with Ference.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from CarolinaClamMan. Show CarolinaClamMan's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    To answer my own question, it would be Ference.  He is the most skilled skater of the bunch, and has the best timing and innate instinct to make a split second move.  Could be that's why he has such a high plus minus.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Who said Mark Stuart is a #2 defenseman?

    If it was me, that was nothing more than a typo.

    Can you supply a link to the post.  I'd be surprised if I had stated that.  When I saw the headline, I thought, "No, he isn't."  I should have expected a dig coming my way.  LOL

    Post the link to the thread, please.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Post script:  I voted #4.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    I voted #5, but I think he is more of a 4/5 guy, can play in either pair.  I don't feel the same about Ference and McQuaid, who are 5/6 guys IMO, and shouldn't play in the 2nd pair. 

    Boychuk seems like the wild card here, as he played much like a 2/3 last year, but more like a 4/5 this year.  Boychuk needs to be better.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    The more I think about this, the more I wonder where the mistake has been made.  I've made plenty of posts calling for a #2 defenseman on the Bruins.  Why would I do that if I believed that Stuart was just that?

    My guess is either a typo from me, an unintentional misinterpretation by Chowda or an intentional misinterpretation by Chowda.

    No matter:  I do not believe Mark Stuart is a #2 defenseman, so this thread is useless.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Oh I forgot the disclaimer. Any similarity to the fictional character 'God's gift to hockey' is purely a coincidence.

    Anyone answering this thread thinking I was referring to them as  'God's gift to hockey'.......you are in love with yourself.

    Now back to the vote. I voted #5.

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

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Like many of your posts, this was clearly directed at me.

    Put up the link to the thread that suggests Stuart is a #2.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from No4BobbyOrr-GOAT. Show No4BobbyOrr-GOAT's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    NAS
    I guess Chowda drew you out, you really do think you are God's gift to hockey, I didn't see your name mentioned, it might have been Stanley he was talking about.

    Chowda you have to back it up with proof now if it was NAS you were talking about.

    2 on 1 TTis #1, then Chara, Ference then the rest, Seid last in this one. Seid is great at blocking shots, but to me does not look as comfortable 2-1.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]NAS I guess Chowda drew you out, you really do think you are God's gift to hockey, I didn't see your name mentioned, it might have been Stanley he was talking about.
    Posted by No4BobbyOrr-GOAT[/QUOTE]

    If you've been following this poster, you've seen many backhand threads dedicated to me, along with backhand slights in his sig line aimed at me.

    This one is no different.

    He's simply trying to cover his tracks because I don't believe I ever suggested Stuart is a #2 defenseman.  A man would stand up and say, "Darn.  My mistake.  I was just giving it to you, but looks like I missed the mark."  Not this guy, however.  Instead, he pulls this foolishness.

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

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]Chowda you have to back it up with proof now if it was NAS you were talking about.
    Posted by No4BobbyOrr-GOAT[/QUOTE]


    Yes.

    Let's see that thread.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from habssuck09. Show habssuck09's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    He is coming off a injury...when at full speed he is a very good defensively and a great hitter on this team I would put him behind Chara, Sidy and Bouchuk.... I thought he was our best defensemen at the beginning of the year
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]Who said Mark Stuart is a #2 defenseman? If it was me, that was nothing more than a typo. Can you supply a link to the post.  I'd be surprised if I had stated that.  When I saw the headline, I thought, "No, he isn't."  I should have expected a dig coming my way.  LOL Post the link to the thread, please.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    How do you know he was talking to you ?  LOL was it because he said "God's gift .... ?

    For the record I put him no5 .   Maybe if he got hurt a little less and with consistency he could move up on that chart.
    Once SanDog mentioned how good Stuart was in the WJC.  I think another injury slowed him down before jumping to the pros.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    "Stuart is the # 5 guy at best" and that's all folks expendable with an expiring contract which is not a slight just a reality.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman? : How do you know he was talking to you ?  LOL was it because he said "God's gift .... ? For the record I put him no5 .   Maybe if he got hurt a little less and with consistency he could move up on that chart. Once SanDog mentioned how good Stuart was in the WJC.  I think another injury slowed him down before jumping to the pros.
    Posted by BsLegion[/QUOTE]

    Because I know his style of posting. 

    Let's see him produce the thread that states this and we'll see.


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

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman? : Because I know his style of posting.  Let's see him produce the thread that states this and we'll see.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

     Did I mention your name at all in this post ? What are you a mind reader now ? You know nothing about my style of posting .Talk about being paranoid.

    Stick to the topic or get lost .
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Right now I feel like its

    Chara-Siedenberg-Ference-Boychuck-Kampfer-Stuart


    But I voted for 5th because Stuart Ference and Boychuck can all play like #4-5-6 D on any given night. McQuaid plays at his best a #5 game but he is solid in most situations and tough as nails. But no Stuart is not even close to a #2 infact Siedes is more of a 3-4 guy just plays like a #2 here. Still that is a roster gap that PC should fill before teh deadline if you ask me.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    I'm interested in seeing the proof that someone suggested Stuart is a #2 defenseman.

    Post it.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BruinsFanInPenTerritory. Show BruinsFanInPenTerritory's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]"Stuart is the # 5 guy at best" and that's all folks expendable with an expiring contract which is not a slight just a reality.
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]Where is the "like" button for this forum? Well said SanDog.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]I'm interested in seeing the proof that someone suggested Stuart is a #2 defenseman. Post it.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    So did you actually say Stuart should be used on PP?  Because who ever said Stuart was a number 2 also said he should be used on the PP according to the first post.  You are arguing the #2 aspect but not the PP part when both are silly.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share