Ratelleitlikeitis
Registered User
Taking a page out of the Romans bread and battles entertainment handbook, except now we'll have pugilism and Papa Johns ... Maybe.
You couldn't pick a worse example than the Kings game. Not only did we already have a fighter in the lineup, he was the one who received the head shot.
Hasn't really been AV's modus operandi in the past.Would've much rather just flipped a 7th to TBL for JT Brown before they waived him.
Not a big fan of the move, unless McLeod somehow makes the 4th line so poor that it forces AV to shorten the bench more often.
Hayes is coming back into the lineup, so I’m not sure who McLeod will be subbing in for after the all-star break. He sucks either way, and the team is already on a downward trend so does it really matter? This one move won’t bring Kreider/Shatty back, and AV still doesn’t know what defense isHey so they sent down Catenacci, so if it's McLeod over Catenacci, who cares? They both suck, so it's nothing. I honestly don't care about this move, the team is going nowhere, shuffle the deck chairs on the sinking ship, whatever. I'll only be bothered by this if he ends up playing over someone like Lettieri as the season swirls down the drain. And as far as the "Why not call up someone?" goes, other than Nieves, there's really not anyone down there deserving of a call (I'm excluding Chytil and Andersson for various reasons). Tambellini sucks, Gropp has been garbage, and the guys that haven't been total cesspools like Fogarty, Fontaine, and Leedahl either aren't ready or are fringe players in their own right.
It was a rhetorical question, although based on some of the posts I wonder!No. Most of us never watched hockey before these past few weeks.
Smith will fight, but he’s not a fighter. He’s a defender first and one that ideally moves the puck. This guys JOB is to fight and defend his teammates.You couldn't pick a worse example than the Kings game. Not only did we already have a fighter in the lineup, he was the one who received the head shot.
So you think the only explanation for people being unhappy that the Rangers added an objectively bad hockey player to their team is that they don't watch hockey and thus are less informed?It was a rhetorical question, although based on some of the posts I wonder!
This isn't real right?
sorry, i cant get all bent out of shape over the 11th or 12th F while Hayes and Kreider are out; yes i do prefer playing the kids
what does make me smile is waiting for AV to tell the world Patrick Roy called him and said NYR were getting his best winger ....
So you think the only explanation for people being unhappy that the Rangers added an objectively bad hockey player to their team is that they don't watch hockey and thus are less informed than you and your galactic brain opinion?
Have you ever watched hockey?I agree that it would be very helpful to have the opposition so afraid that they don't touch any of our players. I wonder why Nashville got tired of that.
So this is an argument that has been had on HF for at least 15 years that I can remember, and while there is SOME validity to the idea that these guys embolden other players (players themselves will say so), there's still the fact that they suck, and are demonstrably and quantifiably detrimental to putting pucks in the net and keeping them out. And you gotta understand you're in an infinitesimal minority and are about to get sucked deep into a chasm of hell that you want no part of.My problem is there is more to hockey than just skill. There’s an element of physicality and intimidation. The Rangers have neither. Cody Mc is not a great hocke6 player, but every Ranger will now feel tougher and maybe play a little better and bigger knowing someone has their back
So this is an argument that has been had on HF for at least 15 years that I can remember, and while there is SOME validity to the idea that these guys embolden other players (players themselves will say so), there's still the fact that they suck, are demonstrably and quantifiably detrimental to putting pucks in the net and keeping them out, and you gotta understand you're in an infinitesimal minority and are about to get sucked deep into a chasm of hell that you want no part of.
Once. On a dare.Have you ever watched hockey?
So this is an argument that has been had on HF for at least 15 years that I can remember, and while there is SOME validity to the idea that these guys embolden other players (players themselves will say so), there's still the fact that they suck, and are demonstrably and quantifiably detrimental to putting pucks in the net and keeping them out. And you gotta understand you're in an infinitesimal minority and are about to get sucked deep into a chasm of hell that you want no part of.
My problem is there is more to hockey than just skill. There’s an element of physicality and intimidation. The Rangers have neither. Cody Mc is not a great hocke6 player, but every Ranger will now feel tougher and maybe play a little better and bigger knowing someone has their back
IMO, if Wilson or Reaves are going to take runs at them, they're going to do it with or without McLeod. It's been shown time and time and time again - fighters do not deter dirty players from playing dirty. It just doesn't happen.
If we want someone out there to do that kind of thing anyway, I have to imagine we could get someone who can play passable hockey for a pretty low price rather than continuing to insist on playing guys who really struggle with the actual game in order to have someone who can punch someone else on the ice.