Witch Hunt

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

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]Thornton might sit because he can't fight.  I don't think they'd scratch Stuart because he can't. The idea of giving him the extra rest makes sense. Oh, and when is Chowda going to post the link to the thread?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    If he can't fight then that obviously means he doesn't feel like he's at 100%.He said himself that he wanted to fight with Bodie and had to catch himself.By no means am I saying he has to fight but intimidation is certainly a part of Stuart's game.I would think he should already be well rested.
     
  2. 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]I wonder when Chowda is going to reveal the identity of the mystery poster by giving us a link to the thread.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Just let it go NAS, let it go.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from saultont. Show saultont's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Amazing how fast a player can go from hero to bum on this forum....before Stuart broke his hand and had it turn to cellulitis many were accolading his toughness and championing his wearing of the C....same with Boychuck..the broken forearm has affected his play...give a guy time to get back his game...both solid D men in my estimation...on a whole the Bruins have a good defensive unit!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Saul,
    boychuk is typical of the bruins fan love, whoever the hot young prospect is, he makes veterans replacable, boychuk was set to replace stuart, now kampfer makes ference expendable etc..

    I agree on the stuart side til he got hurt this year, he was the solid d man, then while he was hurt and kampfer played well, all of a sudden stuart had a bad first half of the season, and isnt trade bait..
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    I actually think that the Bruins have 7 capable d-men right now which is great, and I would oppose trading any of them (without bringing back an equal or better d-man).  We'll need all 7 by the time the season is over.

    Hunwick was the guy who drove me nuts and was hurting the team, IMO.  And, they sent him packing.  Well played once again, Mr. Chiarelli.
     
  7. 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]Just let it go NAS, let it go.
    Posted by callodthedom19[/QUOTE]


    As soon as the mystery poster is revealed (or shortly after), I will happily let it go.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1'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? : As soon as the mystery poster is revealed (or shortly after), I will happily let it go.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    I don't think it's gonna happen...
     
  9. 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? : I don't think it's gonna happen...
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]


    Because the mystery poster doesn't exist, and Chowda has made a fool of himself here?

    If that's the case, he can admit he was either wrong or just completely made it up...and then I'll let it go.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:[QUOTE]   When people start comparing the offensive prowess of Stuart and McQuaid, it would appear that the people posting here, are officially out of things to talk about. Everyone, just walk away from your keyboards, and go read a book. Posted by biggskye[/QUOTE]

    ^Post of the Thread!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    I wonder if tomorrow will be the day that the mystery poster is unmasked.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pauly1. Show pauly1's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]I wonder if tomorrow will be the day that the mystery poster is unmasked.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE] If you are 1 day older than 12 years of age, I truly feel sorry for you.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from bigbfan. Show bigbfan's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    I have been watching lots of B's games this year and Stuart is better any night than Boychuck.  To the point I think Boychuck is playing hurt as he really looks like a totally different player that the last half of 2010. Let's get caveman back in for the stretch run!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bruins6. Show Bruins6's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?:
    [QUOTE]I actually think that the Bruins have 7 capable d-men right now which is great, and I would oppose trading any of them (without bringing back an equal or better d-man).  We'll need all 7 by the time the season is over. Hunwick was the guy who drove me nuts and was hurting the team, IMO.  And, they sent him packing.  Well played once again, Mr. Chiarelli.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    I agree 100%
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Well, Chowda, I completely debunked your other attack thread.  Now it's time for you to save face (if even possible) by posting a link to the thread where the mystery poster called Stuart a #2 defenseman.

    C'mon!  Stand up for yourself.  The embarrassment from the other thread can be wiped away a bit (just a bit) by coming clean here.

    Link, please.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from screw-cindy-and-ovie. Show screw-cindy-and-ovie's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    ok NAS, you won. Chowda can and will not prove it. You won this battle NAs, can you please let this thread die now
     
  17. 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]ok NAS, you won. Chowda can and will not prove it. You won this battle NAs, can you please let this thread die now
    Posted by screw-cindy-and-ovie[/QUOTE]

    Nope.  I'm waiting for him to return and address this.  If he'll ever come out of hiding, I don't know.  If I had started two attack threads, one with false info and one with totally misleading stats, and got taken to the mat, I don't think I'd come back.


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

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Stuart is a #2 defenceman, behind only Z on the B's team.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Hey Chowda,

    Now that you're back from your fantastic voyage to the Humble Pie Factory, will you now reveal the identity of the mystery poster? 

    (Keep in mind that I will bring this up every time you post here until you come clean one way or another.  No need to cry about stalkers.  Stalkers are interested in their subject.  I'm not interested in you.  I want you to go away and never come back because you are a fraud.  Man up or get out.)
     
  20. 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]Hey Chowda, Now that you're back from your fantastic voyage to the Humble Pie Factory, will you now reveal the identity of the mystery poster?  (Keep in mind that I will bring this up every time you post here until you come clean one way or another.  No need to cry about stalkers.  Stalkers are interested in their subject.  I'm not interested in you.  I want you to go away and never come back because you are a fraud.  Man up or get out.)
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    If you don't stop stalking him he is going to leave again.
     
  21. 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? : If you don't stop stalking him he is going to leave again.
    Posted by callodthedom19[/QUOTE]

    If I posted stuff like this, got caught and called out and was too chicken to response or too much of a woman to admit my intention, I would leave and never come back.

    He can man up here and make it all go away or he can go away.  Either is fine with me.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    Or he can stay because most of the posters on this board don't have a problem with Chowdah at all. He doesn't attack or belittle posters like some.
     
  23. 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]Or he can stay because most of the posters on this board don't have a problem with Chowdah at all. He doesn't attack or belittle posters like some.
    Posted by callodthedom19[/QUOTE]

    He doesn't attack posters?  What do you think this thread is?  He tried and he failed and now I want him to admit it.

    I'll keep bringing this up until he does.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman?

    In fact, the more I think about it, he should change his name to:

    Chowda-Cooke-Kid
     
  25. 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]In Response to Re: Is Mark Stuart a #2 defenceman? : He doesn't attack posters?  What do you think this thread is?  He tried and he failed and now I want him to admit it. I'll keep bringing this up until he does.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    This wasn't an attack thread at all. He said someone who thought they were Gods' gift to hockey. He was asking if we thought Stuart was a #2 d-man. You highjacked the thread and made it into what it is beacause you thought he was talking about you. Which no one but Chowdah will ever know. He doesn't need to respond to your goading.
     

Share