BKGooner
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2017
- 785
- 547
I don't want any of you youngsters out there getting the idea that this is the way to play hockey
You mean we.re going to play old time hockey coach?
I don't want any of you youngsters out there getting the idea that this is the way to play hockey
You mean naming my kids Aegon, Visenya and Rhaenya was a bad idea? But the dragon must have 3 heads?Yeah, Braden, Kaden and Jaden are the male equivalent of Kayleigh, Ashleigh and Ryleigh.
But what's more disturbing is that in 50-60 years, kids will have grandmothers named Arya and Khaleesi![]()
All those parents that named their kids Khaleesi and Daenerys in 2012 sure do look like idiots now, don’t they?You mean naming my kids Aegon, Visenya and Rhaenya was a bad idea? But the dragon must have 3 heads?
All those parents that named their kids Khaleesi and Daenerys in 2012 sure do look like idiots now, don’t they?
Just as good as "Apple" or "Moroccan"All those parents that named their kids Khaleesi and Daenerys in 2012 sure do look like idiots now, don’t they?
All those parents that named their kids Khaleesi and Daenerys in 2012 sure do look like idiots now, don’t they?
Just as good as "Apple" or "Moroccan"
I'm on Season 6 of Game of Thrones, please no spoilers.
Yeah, hate when threads go sideways, but thats "pretty much my fault", in that I was trying to catch up with this thread but took the easy way out, going right to the last page. Haha, jokes on me.Well looks like this thread about Braden's hockey abilities has turned into one about his name.
...it was pretty much all my fault.
I always remember a quote that Elliot Freidman reported from a GM around the trade deadline: "If you have D to trade, that puts you in position 'A'" I also remember a GM (can't remember but it might have been Rutherford or Shero) saying that he liked drafting defensemen because people always ask for Dmen in trades. Having these guys as trade assets is a good thing.Earlier in the thread, people were complaining about having an overload in RHD's. So what? Written in stone? We are so fortunate to have Fox, Tony D. and Trouba already but
The way I look at it.......and we all KNOW you can never have enough defenseman. With the offensive firepower we almost assuredly will have......Tony D. AND Fox are absolutely a luxury.
We actually NEED this type bad ass player. Even though we already have Trouba, he is NOT enough. Things pan out, he will be one of the reasons as to WHY we will be harder to play against.
Dumbledore dies at the endI'm on Season 6 of Game of Thrones, please no spoilers.
Don't think it would have been Rutherford, as he said in Carolina he didn't like drafting defensemen in the first round because they took longer to develop so you were getting fewer pre-UFA years.I always remember a quote that Elliot Freidman reported from a GM around the trade deadline: "If you have D to trade, that puts you in position 'A'" I also remember a GM (can't remember but it might have been Rutherford or Shero) saying that he liked drafting defensemen because people always ask for Dmen in trades. Having these guys as trade assets is a good thing.
Right, that's what I was thinking with him. Stand corrected. I think it was Shero then.Don't think it would have been Rutherford, as he said in Carolina he didn't like drafting defensemen in the first round because they took longer to develop so you were getting fewer pre-UFA years.
Like Eddie Shore!!You mean we.re going to play old time hockey coach?
It's almost kind of funny (though understandable) how Schneider is probably going to fly under the radar a bit.
It's almost kind of funny (though understandable) how Schneider is probably going to fly under the radar a bit.
This post will still look as great in 2034 as it does today.They looked like idiots in 2012