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

Leaf Rumours

Pronger84 said:
Sorry but gotta disagree with you on this: The ducks would have been just fine without him. They had guys like Selanne, Mcdonald, Perry, Pronger, Niederymeyer, Giguere, Phalsson playing at full blast, the ducks would have likely won the cup without beauchimen in the lineup.
Click to expand...

No, the Ducks would not have been fine.

They rode their top three defencemen more than any other Stanley Cup champion in recent memory due to the lack of depth on the blueline after their Big Three unit of Pronger, Nidermayer, and Beauchemin. Without Francois they are being forced to give additional minutes to such household names as Joe DiPenta and Kent Huskins.

It would have had a tremendously deleterious impact on their chances for success that year sans Beauchemin.
 
Beacuhimen is fine one/one (without the puck), hes got decent positioning. However, he has disgustingly brutal lapses in judgment (without the puck) as well, many times he'll screen his goalie (a big no-no in hockey) or he'll forget to pick up his man in front. I'm not even going to get into how brutal he is with the puck. My point is he's OK as a #5 guy, but he has no business being in the top 4, let alone the top pairing.
 
You know its really amazing how good the D looked for those 5 games Reimer played. Weird that the overnight magic just ended as soon as he was sent down.
 
Pronger84 said:
Sorry but gotta disagree with you on this: The ducks would have been just fine without him. They had guys like Selanne, Mcdonald, Perry, Pronger, Niederymeyer, Giguere, Phalsson playing at full blast, the ducks would have likely won the cup without beauchimen in the lineup.
Click to expand...

Not if you're picking the puck out of your net every third shift. You think they would have been fine running a pairing of Ric Jackman and Joe DiPenta?

Pronger/Beauch/Neids/O'Donnell, was their top four, rounded out by O'Brien/Jackman/DiPenta. You think any of those guys could have filled Beauchemin's skates? I'll give you the answer....NO
 
Pronger84 said:
Beacuhimen is fine one/one (without the puck), hes got decent positioning. However, he has disgustingly brutal lapses in judgment (without the puck) as well, many times he'll screen his goalie (a big no-no in hockey) or he'll forget to pick up his man in front. I'm not even going to get into how brutal he is with the puck. My point is he's OK as a #5 guy, but he has no business being in the top 4, let alone the top pairing.
Click to expand...

Poor Pronger.
 
leafman101 said:
I know you're gay for Bourque, but Lidstrom is way better. In the last 12 seasons he has 11 year end all star team selections, 6 norris trophies, 4 cups and a conn smyth. Plus he has put up insane stats for a dman in his era. He just didn't start getting the cred he deserved until later on, unlike Bourque.
Click to expand...

Bourque played in without question the toughest era ever with respect to Norris competition and he de facto won the Hart Trophy in 1990 (a group of Edmonton writers left him off their ballots entirely to ensure Messier won that year), something that Lidstrom has never come close to.

12 First All-Star Team selections to Lidstrom's 8. And Lidstrom could never beat names like Leetch, MacInnis, Chelios, Coffey, Stevens, or Ray for the Norris until they were all in the twilight of their careers or retired. The fact that Bourque won five Norrises during the best period in league history for elite defencemen is astonishing.

Lidstrom has literally no competition. Mike Green? **** off.
 
JaysCyYoung said:
No, the Ducks would not have been fine.

They rode their top three defencemen more than any other Stanley Cup champion in recent memory due to the lack of depth on the blueline after their Big Three unit of Pronger, Nidermayer, and Beauchemin. Without Francois they are being forced to give additional minutes to such household names as Joe DiPenta and Kent Huskins.

It would have had a tremendously deleterious impact on their chances for success that year sans Beauchemin.
Click to expand...

I get bonus points for mentioning fan favourite, Ric Jackman.
 
leafman101 said:
You know its really amazing how good the D looked for those 5 games Reimer played. Weird that the overnight magic just ended as soon as he was sent down.
Click to expand...

It had nothing to do with how skilled the D is/isnt, it had to do with they had a competent goalie in net. When you have a competent goalie, your d is confident, and when your defence is confident, so are your forwards. I'm glad Riemer is back up, hope he's here to stay. I say ride him/giggy all the way to the end, and forgetta about the monster, he's done!
 
This is just getting stupid.

Beauch can be pretty risky with puck, and his give aways tend to really stand out. Fortunately, being prone to the odd give away, no matter how glaring, does not make him a bad player.

Anybody who ignores how good he is positionally, 1-on-1, in puck battles, along the boards, and the fact that he consistently plays the most minutes against the best players, in favour of evaluating him on the odd bonehead play, doesn't know how to evaluate a defenseman.

Its not surprising, happens all the time with this team. Go ahead and continue the campaign, maybe we can trade him to Florida for somebody who's one hit away from retirement.
 
Pronger84 said:
It had nothing to do with how skilled the D is/isnt, it had to do with they had a competent goalie in net. When you have a competent goalie, your d is confident, and when your defence is confident, so are your forwards. I'm glad Riemer is back up, hope he's here to stay. I say ride him/giggy all the way to the end, and forgetta about the monster, he's done!
Click to expand...

Oh wait, so what you're saying is shit goaltending makes the D look worse? I would have never thought that...
 
WellPlayed said:
This is just getting stupid.

Beauch can be pretty risky with puck, and his give aways tend to really stand out. Fortunately, being prone to the odd give away, no matter how glaring, does not make him a bad player.
- The odd giveaway, the guy is leading the NHL in giveaways, I'd say its a bit more then "odd giveaway"

Anybody who ignores how good he is positionally, 1-on-1, in puck battles, along the boards, and the fact that he consistently plays the most minutes against the best players, in favour of evaluating him on the odd bonehead play, doesn't know how to evaluate a defenseman.
- I'd have no problem if it was an "odd boneheaded play" but the fact he does this multiple times a game is a bit much.

Its not surprising, happens all the time with this team. Go ahead and continue the campaign, maybe we can trade him to Florida for somebody who's one hit away from retirement.
Click to expand...
- i hope he gets on the next bus and never comes back.
 
JaysCyYoung said:
Bourque played in without question the toughest era ever with respect to Norris competition and he de facto won the Hart Trophy in 1990 (a group of Edmonton writers left him off their ballots entirely to ensure Messier won that year), something that Lidstrom has never come close to.

12 First All-Star Team selections to Lidstrom's 8. And Lidstrom could never beat names like Leetch, MacInnis, Chelios, Coffey, Stevens, or Ray for the Norris until they were all in the twilight of their careers or retired. The fact that Bourque won five Norrises during the best period in league history for elite defencemen is astonishing.

Lidstrom has literally no competition. Mike Green? **** off.
Click to expand...

Lidstrom has no competition because he is way better than everyone else. Pronger, Chara, Neidermayer. Lots of great dmen.

Lidstrom is in a class by himself. Bourque was in a class with the rest of all star defensemen.
 
leafman101 said:
Lidstrom has no competition because he is way better than everyone else. Pronger, Chara, Neidermayer. Lots of great dmen.

Lidstrom is in a class by himself. Bourque was in a class with the rest of all star defensemen.
Click to expand...

So ignorant.

At the same age Bourque had won three of his five Norrises against seven or eight other of the greatest defencemen in history, Lidstrom was struggling to finish second to Rob Blake.

And I adore Nicklas Lidstrom. But you're being ridiculous here. 1980-1995 was the best era for defencemen in NHL history. It's not even close.
 
Lidstrom is def better then Pronger, Chara and Niederymeyer, not sure about Borque though (I'd put them on equal footing). The fact Lidstrom who is 40 years old, and is still playing like he did 10 years ago, is astoninshing. Lidstrom is my all time fave defensmen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top