• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Leaf Rumours

hockeylover said:
I think if there's a first round exit, it'll be because of our D and that 6 minute mental breakdown we seem to have every game... not our goalies.

But we've got an ideal situation here, IMO. There's no pressure this postseason. Who expects us to do anything? Go with the kids, get them some experience.
Click to expand...

I don't want to make any excuses..I used to say that before(it's our bad d and not goalies) and people never wanted to hear about it. These guys are good enough so i expect them to get it done.
 
PKForce81 said:
I don't want to make any excuses..I used to say that before(it's our bad d and not goalies) and people never wanted to hear about it. These guys are good enough so i expect them to get it done.
Click to expand...

That's because you were wrong before. Our goalies before had sub .900 SV%. Now we're getting .920 goaltending.
 
BeLeafer said:
Again, I'm not thrilled about Kiprusoff but he was excruciatingly clear that he wanted him as a depth guy behind Reimer and Scrivens. No surprise Kiprusoff didn't want any part of it.
Click to expand...

Again, I don't know how you keep a 3rd man next year at 5.8 and then the year after that. You can't carry three goalies really and Scrivens can't be waived. So how the hell does that work exactly?
 
As for the O'Byrne pick up? Yeah, don't care either way. Depth defenseman UFA, fourth rounder is nothing. I was thinking before the deadline that if the Leafs did nothing, I'd still be happy and the O'Byrne deal is close enough to nothing. :lol
 
hockeylover said:
Again, I don't know how you keep a 3rd man next year at 5.8 and then the year after that. You can't carry three goalies really and Scrivens can't be waived. So how the hell does that work exactly?
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm not the guy trying to do it, but my assumption is that he goes to the Marlies. I got killed for saying that but it is the logical conclusion.

Now, if you think Nonis is being disingenuous, that's another matter that I care not to debate. Proof of the eating is in the pudding: by far the most youth friendly GM I've seen in my lifetime and he has done nothing but support Reimer and Scrivens, including turning down multiple attempts from the Canucks to unload Luongo. If I'm concerned with Reimer and Scrivens getting a fair shot to establish their careers - which I am - I can't think of a GM I would rather have in charge of the Leafs.
 
Soundd like the only reason a deal didnt get done was becauee kipper said no.

thqnk you kipper, shame on you nonis.
 
BeLeafer said:
Hey, I'm not the guy trying to do it, but my assumption is that he goes to the Marlies. I got killed for saying that but it is the logical conclusion.

Now, if you think Nonis is being disingenuous, that's another matter that I care not to debate. Proof of the eating is in the pudding: by far the most youth friendly GM I've seen in my lifetime and he has done nothing but support Reimer and Scrivens, including turning down multiple attempts from the Canucks to get Luongo. If I'm concerned with Reimer and Scrivens getting a fair shot to establish their careers - which I am - I can't think of a GM I would rather have in charge of the Leafs.
Click to expand...

You're suggesting that in order to have Kiprusoff as the THIRD goalie THIS playoffs, he's going to promise him an extension til 2014-2015 just to send him to the Marlies in 2013-2014?

There's no logic to that whatsoever.
 
hockeylover said:
You're suggesting that in order to have Kiprusoff as the THIRD goalie THIS playoffs, he's going to promise him an extension til 2014-2015 just to send him to the Marlies in 2013-2014?

There's no logic to that whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I'm taking Nonis at his word. That's all I'm doing. And if you do that, that is the logical conclusion.

Pardon me for not thinking he's lying through his teeth when he says he wanted him for depth and that Reimer and Scrivens are the guys.

There is a clear reason to want to do this: Reimer is injury prone.
 
What is he supposed to say? 'Yeah Reimer and Scrivens suck, I don't have any faith in them. we wanted to bring in a super awesome starter like Kipper"
 
BeLeafer said:
I'm taking Nonis at his word. That's all I'm doing. And if you do that, that is the logical conclusions.

Pardon me for not thinking he's lying through his teeth when he says he wanted him for depth and that Reimer and Scrivens are the guys.

There is a clear reason to want to do this: Reimer is injury prone.
Click to expand...

It's not a logical conclusion at all. You don't give a guy an extension for a year beyond when you're planning on sending him to the AHL. It doesn't make any sense.
 
Nonis re Bozak: "If we were worried about losing Tyler Bozak for nothing, we would have moved him today." #Leafs

Nonis on Bozak's pending UFA status: "If both sides want to be here, it's my experience that things will work out." Leafs
 
hockeylover said:
It's not a logical conclusion at all. You don't give a guy an extension for a year beyond when you're planning on sending him to the AHL. It doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see his comments in full. I'm not Dave Nonis. I'm not sure how he reconciles it but I'm not going to sit here and accusing him of lying when he said he was after Kiprusoff for depth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top