Page 2 of 2

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:05 pm
by Sweetred95ta
Mellanby_equals_grit wrote:Can you guys follow one post to the next without quoting? He asked me what had Bishop done in the NHL. I told him. The end.
I asked you that, because you were making an argument that Bishop should be the "go to" guy. He simply referenced Brent Johnson to show you that almost having (or getting) a SO at the NHL level means nothing. Seems like it was an "on topic" post.

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:09 pm
by Mellanby_equals_grit
Sweetred95ta wrote:
Mellanby_equals_grit wrote:Can you guys follow one post to the next without quoting? He asked me what had Bishop done in the NHL. I told him. The end.
I asked you that, because you were making an argument that Bishop should be the "go to" guy. He simply referenced Brent Johnson to show you that almost having (or getting) a SO at the NHL level means nothing. Seems like it was an "on topic" post.
When was this?

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:20 pm
by Sweetred95ta
Mellanby_equals_grit wrote:When was this?
You made a counter-statement to me saying that the man-crush for Bishop drives me nuts. I just assumed from that post and your argument about how much Bishop has done at the NHL level, you were on that band wagon. If you're part of the Bishop man-crush crowd, then, you probably think that he needs to be the "go to" guy. Did I assume too much? I apologize if I put words in your mouth if that's not the case.

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:12 pm
by Mellanby_equals_grit
Sweetred95ta wrote:
Mellanby_equals_grit wrote:When was this?
You made a counter-statement to me saying that the man-crush for Bishop drives me nuts. I just assumed from that post and your argument about how much Bishop has done at the NHL level, you were on that band wagon. If you're part of the Bishop man-crush crowd, then, you probably think that he needs to be the "go to" guy. Did I assume too much? I apologize if I put words in your mouth if that's not the case.
I don't think either has done much to be put above the other. You could make an argument for either being higher on the depth chart (and possibly moreso for Holt even). Being as I've only seen both of them a handful of times, I'll defer to the brass' judgment on this one being as they've watched both more and have more expertise than both of us put together. I would like to see Bishop succeed since he is the hometown guy, but I don't see either as the next Patrick Roy or anything.

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:05 pm
by dmiles2186
Who is throwin' the party? Ears is back!

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:20 pm
by blueline
what a kick in the teeth for Holt. Could of used this money to sign Whitfield or a couple of key veterans to start putting bodies in the seats and mentor the youth. The Goalie merry go round continues....

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
by Leedog
Since when does having too many prospects become a problem?

Re: hannu toivonen signs with blues?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:08 pm
by section319
Leedog wrote:Since when does having too many prospects become a problem?

This. Especially, when it comes to goalies in this organization.