fanaticV3.0

Are they doing this every year or two now? I think part of the reason I don't bother buying any jerseys anymore, besides the fact that we haven't really had anyone whose name I would wear my back, is they continually change them. And they are often ugly.

the new one looks naked.

So what? That's nothing more than bonus money. It's not not their sole source - or even primary - of income. They all get salaries and we all know they haven't gone down over the last decade. Let them wipe away their tears from the loss of league revenue with all the extra dollar bills from their inflated paychecks.

The cap isn't the issue, the players salaries are. Player greed, while not the only issue, is the biggest problem here. Guys want more money regardless of what level of player they are, their production, or their team's situation. The salary cap exists because of player greed.

I appreciate the apology. Lindros' personality, his parents, and all three of their relationship with Clarke has nothing to do with anything. It's the Hall of Fame, not Hall of Gossip. I think Pete Rose is a low-life who should never coach again, but the man deserves to be recognized for his on the field accomplishments. The same logic should be applied to Lindros. It should be about his stats, awards, cups (or lack thereof).

I agree it's cap-related, but I also think Chief wants a more disciplined/defensive player.

Don't let the fact that I'm talking with another poster - on this very thread no less - about how I think he had an ego, was not a great team player, and the first words that come to my mind when thinking of his career are disappointing, get in the way of your rant. By all means continue. Your entire argument for him not being in the hall is based the fact that you and others don't like him and you're "done with" (which lasted all of one post) me? Ha! That's rich.

It's more sincere than any of Carcillo or Rinaldo has done. Guys like that don't care what team they are playing for or who is in the locker room. They just want to hit somebody.

Nooo, you don't say? Being liked by you or anybody else has nothing to do with anything. The HOF is about recognizing the player, not the human being. Your dislike of him reaches the level of obsession when you come up with conspiracy theories like saying Clarke would never vote for him, despite his public support for the man.

Nobody said he was the only one. Name one player who does it more, especially amongst this core, which is roughly around the time the douche twins were shipped out of town.

Any guy who refuses to play for an organization before his first big league game has an ego. You can't pull a move like that and not have at least a little inflated sense of your own value. And if you are going to blame his parents for him being alienated, you gotta blame the grown man who allowed that to happen too. I do think he was given a lot of responsibility at a very young age, but you bring that kind of stuff on yourself when you think so highly of yourself you think you can dictate which team you play for before a single NHL game. I do think that he lacked talent around him and despite that, still did pretty well for himself. He could take over a game when the mood struck him. He also had legitimate injury issues. He was a force to be reckoned with, but also cracked very easily at times (but I freely admit he did a lot on his own as well).

Wait, you think the guy that fights the most is automatically the best teammates/protectors? Like, for real? You actually believe that? Who was Carcillo protecting when he fought Talbot in a game they were up 3-0? Or what about when he took on the raging lunatic Marion Gaborik? It's a good thing Carcillo took one for the team there, because there would have been a pile of bodies had he not stopped that situation. Most goons can't even control themselves. They just want to pound somebody's face.

It's stuff like this where your argument just completely falls apart. I have a lot of problems with him as a player and leader, but you take it to absurd levels. In what universe are Ron Hextall and Peter Forsberg the key to the Flyers woes? Ron Hextall, as a player, was the key to nothing. Let's just get that out of the way right there. Fiery guy, fan favorite, nice enough player, but outside of that run in 87, that man was not a cup caliber goalie (and the rest of his career showed that). Peter Forsberg here - at that time - is no different than Lindros here during the same time period. Both men are immediately thrust into the spotlight and expected to bring a dead organization back to life. Lindros did that. He took a pathetic franchise - and I can vouch for how bad attendance was during that era, because I used to walk up to the ticket window the night of games and get great seats - Forsberg did not. Forsberg had the benefit of playing with multiple all-time greats and when he did venture out on his own, he couldn't even create a fraction of that success. When I look back on his career the first word that comes to my mind is disappointing. It's the very first thing I think of and what I think defines his career. I also think he didn't play well with others. But I don't outright deny - like you - how dominant he was, his stats (ppg particularly), the fact that he single handily resurrected a whole franchise, had injury problems, did not have great talent around him (in part because of his ego).

That's funny, because one of my first reactions to the Hartnell trade was that maybe nobody is biting on VLC and they were looking for cap relief wherever they can get it.

Nobody on this team stood up for their teammates than Hartnell in recent years. Simmonds is the heir apparent in that department (as well as a few others). They were 3rd and 4th in points last year and did so while being 2nd and 3rd in PIM.

Yeah....just stop it right there. You make it sound like he had the hype - and disappointing numbers - of Falloon or Daigle. He didn't deliver ultimately, but his career was better than words like "stole his paycheck" or "squandered" indicate. I think you can criticize him - a lot of which I'd probably agree with - without saying something that dumb.

That's interesting to me, because for a while now I've thought that Schenn is not a center.

Guys who are that good offensively are always going to find work, even if they are a defensive liability. Goals win games and players who score them have more value. A lot more value. Guys like that have more value than a 4th line mucker and grinder. It's not an excuse or defense for the Kovalchuck's of the world, it's just a fact. If money was no object, nobody is picking Zac Rinaldo over Kovy.

I love a 4th line that serves an actual purpose - rather than to just kill time - but it doesn't have to be that purpose. It can/should be if that's what you need or the more likely scenario, all you can afford, but shouldn't have to be. The idea that line has to be just that is incorrect. That is my point. Especially when you take into consideration that most of the time the top PKers on the team are usually from the top 9 (which is all the more reason for a 4th line that can give the top 9 a break without being a liability).

Good offensive players that cannot maintain puck possession and not willing to take a hit are useless (defensively) regardless of what line they are one. The 4th line has nothing to do with it.

is for players who cost the least. It's got nothing to do with mucking and grinding, keeping the puck out of our own zone, or some other cliche hockey phrase meant to sugarcoat the fact that 4th liners are barely NHL players. Nobody goes out of their way to get guys like that because they need them.

He defintiely deserves the accolades for what he did in the POs, but I hate "would of, could have" crap, especially when it's based on nothing more than a guy's current production. I like the guy, but ain't nothing says exaggeration like talking up a 16-goal a year man like he's a perennial all-star.

Don't give me this "not intended to" crap. No player's job is to not score. It's BS for "not good enough" to score. You want to keep the puck out of your own zone? Get good offensive players. That includes the 4th line.

I'm not concerned with whether he's willing to accept a trade or not. I'm concerned about anyone actually wanting him.

Who says your 4th line has to be one that plays defense or pursues the puck with reckless abandon? Couturier is already the guy we're leaning towards matching up against other teams best players, so you don't need a guy on the 4th who plays D; and it's a completely misnomer that the 4th line has any impact on the game anyway. It's not like you throw RInaldo or Hall out there when you need the team to play a shutdown game. Just doesn't happen. Now that's dumb.