Around the NHL Lucky #13 - A Sign of Things to Come?

[tmurfin]

For those that enjoy the Canucks Misery:

I just feel bad for Horvat , when we played them in the playoffs, Horvat was one of their only bright spots, I thought for sure he was destined for 50-60 pts a season.. That idiot of a coach and GM they have are gonna ruin all their up and coming talent.

 

[Kipper933]

Maybe the Kings try reaquire Berube from the Isles, he's sitting in their pressbox and they're familiar with him.

 

[FlamerForLife]

Apparently the leafs are having a 90 minute ceremony before their home opener tonight

 

[Lunatik]

Apparently the leafs are having a 90 minute ceremony before their home opener tonight

Inducting Matthews into the Hall of Fame?

But seriously, it is their 100th anniversary season, for something that special it is acceptable IMO.

 

[FlamerForLife]

Inducting Matthews into the Hall of Fame?

But seriously, it is their 100th anniversary season, for something that special it is acceptable IMO.

Also, I believe it's starting at 3:30 MT which is 90 minutes before the actual game time so it's not like it's delaying the game in any way, which is what made the Oiler's one unbearable.

 

[Lunatik]

Also, I believe it's starting at 3:30 MT which is 90 minutes before the actual game time so it's not like it's delaying the game in any way, which is what made the Oiler's one unbearable.

that and it was 45 minutes to celebrate a piece of concrete and 5 seasons

 

[Haatley]

Colborne hat trick.... yikes.

 

[DFF]

It would be huge disappointment if Coborne goes on to become a star

 

[Calculon]

 

[Lunatik]

Thanks Brad.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Guys, he only scored those goals because it's the season opener and the Avs have nothing to play for.

 

[Mobiandi]

Can you say "flash-in-the-pan"

Don't miss him, we're better off without him

 

[Flames Fanatic]

The laundry list of players that scored at least one hat trick in their career is quite long. I can think of a handful that were even out of the NHL shortly after.

Congrats to Joe, never was my favorite, but I don't wish him ill.

 

[Lunatik]

Can you say "flash-in-the-pan"

Don't miss him, we're better off without him

yeah we couldn't use even a little more scoring right now

Colborne would be a much better asset than Vesteeg, they will produce similar numbers but Joe is better in shootouts and is more physical

 

[Mobiandi]

Just took a look at his goals. Only special one is his second, where he shockingly uses his size for once to create a goal-scoring chance, while the first is him hacking away at a loose puck in front of the crease, and the third is a lucky redirection he wasn't even expecting.

C'mon now

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

yeah we couldn't use even a little more scoring right now

Colborne would be a much better asset than Vesteeg, they will produce similar numbers but Joe is better in shootouts and is more physical

I don't know about scoring. 8 goals for in 3 games is decent, but allowing 13 goals in 3 games is what's killing us. If we need scoring, that should be telling.

We wouldn't be able to afford Colborne anyways.

We have $8000 in free cap. That's actually kinda funny.

 

[Anglesmith]

Just took a look at his goals. Only special one is his second, where he shockingly uses his size for once to create a goal-scoring chance, while the first is him hacking away at a loose puck in front of the crease, and the third is a lucky redirection he wasn't even expecting.

C'mon now

This is a rational comment.

That said, I do think we could use Colborne's services right now.

 

[Calculon]

Do remember that Colborne wanted 3.5M+ from the Flames. It was either re-sign him or sign Brouwer. Only way to get both would have been to buyout Wideman or Stajan.

Regardless, Colborne wouldn't change anything. The problem with the Flames has been that the top two lines and top defensive pairing are largely no shows thus far.

 

[Lunatik]

Just took a look at his goals. Only special one is his second, where he shockingly uses his size for once to create a goal-scoring chance, while the first is him hacking away at a loose puck in front of the crease, and the third is a lucky redirection he wasn't even expecting.

C'mon now

Who cares if they were special? A goal is a goal, banging in a bouncing puck counts just the same as a pretty goal and even a lucky deflection only happens because you are in the right position.

 

[Lunatik]

Do remember that Colborne wanted 3.5M+ from the Flames.

There is absolutely no proof of this nor was there even a rumor of such. The Flames said they didn't qualify him because they were concerned he would be awarded too much. An arbitration ask is not the same as a contract demand since the arbitrator almost always picks a number in between the club offer and the player ask, so the players always asks for more than they are worth and the team always offers less than the player is worth.

 

[Lunatik]

This is a rational comment.

That said, I do think we could use Colborne's services right now.

How is it rational? There is absolutely no difference on the scoreboard when you bang in an ugly rebound or score a pretty goal. Besides he completely ignored where I pointed out where he would be an improvement.

 

[Mobiandi]

The "goals are goals" argument makes no sense when you consider that two-thirds of Colborne's hat trick came from the work of others and he was just the lucky benefactor who was at the right place at the right time.

There needs to be supply in the first place to create "garbage goals." Colborne is hardly a creative player, and we are struggling to create chances in the first place, so he would be a redundant addition to our line-up at the moment.

What physicality does he bring if he hardly uses it? I've only ever seen him use his large frame in that stupid maneuver he always does when he cycles around the boards shielding the puck and ends up playing a terrible pass mere seconds later.

I'll concede to the fact he's quite good at shootouts and breakaways in general, but this shouldn't be a huge deciding factor that sways your opinion on a player.

We need a good power forward to complement Johnny and Monahan. Yes, Versteeg will never be that, but neither will Colborne. And I'd rather take my chances on the former because the gentle giant act that Colborne played for the Flames was extremely annoying to watch

 

[Lunatik]

The "goals are goals" argument makes no sense when you consider that two-thirds of Colborne's hat trick came from the work of others and he was just the lucky benefactor who was at the right place at the right time.

There needs to be supply in the first place to create "garbage goals." Colborne is hardly a creative player, and we are struggling to create chances in the first place, so he would be a redundant addition to our line-up at the moment.

What physicality does he bring if he hardly uses it? I've only ever seen him use his large frame in that stupid maneuver he always does when he cycles around the boards shielding the puck and ends up playing a terrible pass mere seconds later.

I'll concede to the fact he's quite good at shootouts and breakaways in general, but this shouldn't be a huge deciding factor that sways your opinion on a player.

We need a good power forward to complement Johnny and Monahan. Yes, Versteeg will never be that, but neither will Colborne. And I'd rather take my chances on the former because the gentle giant act that Colborne played for the Flames was extremely annoying to watch

Players don't just end up in the right place at the right time that often dude, knowing where to be is a skill and one thing he did show in Calgary that you are blatantly ignoring was he would always go to the front of the net.

I never said Colborne was a creative player, but he's not an uncreative as you are making him sound and having someone to score some garbage goals probably would have helped a ton tonight.

What Physicality does he bring? In comparison to Vesteeg? TONS. Colborne had more hits last year than Versteeg has had in the last 3 years combined. He's soft and worse defensively than Colborne and much better along the boards.

 

[Anglesmith]

The "goals are goals" argument makes no sense when you consider that two-thirds of Colborne's hat trick came from the work of others and he was just the lucky benefactor who was at the right place at the right time.

Beneficiary. Benefactor would be a factor in his favour.

How is it rational? There is absolutely no difference on the scoreboard when you bang in an ugly rebound or score a pretty goal. Besides he completely ignored where I pointed out where he would be an improvement.

I think it adds good perspective to the conversation. "Small sample size" is the obvious argument, but this puts into perspective why it is a factor. If Colborne had scored on three end-to-end rushes where he dangled defencemen and the goalie, it's a completely different conversation.

 

[Lunatik]

I think it adds good perspective to the conversation. "Small sample size" is the obvious argument, but this puts into perspective why it is a factor. If Colborne had scored on three end-to-end rushes where he dangled defencemen and the goalie, it's a completely different conversation.

How so? He scored goals that are indicative of the game he plays. Three end to end rushes would be completely out of the norm for him, banging in rebounds, getting deflections and the odd pretty goal are exactly what he has brought to the table the last couple years.