spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 66,237
- 12,186
Wild GM said:
Dr_Chimera said:Actually, bad for Locke.
theo6060 said:I think Locke should be alright without Foy. From the games I saw it seemed a lot more like Foy needed Locke than Locke needed Foy. I guess we'll see this year if Locke can do it without Foy. Should be interesting to see....
I couldn't agree more. Foy's natural touch drew a lot of attention, but the reason I think Locke should be alright is because of his creativity. In the OHL East final against the Majors, Locke was being pounded on by bigger players every shift, and he still managed to put up the points.Hossa said:The thing is, Locke's going to be checked tighter now. He's not going to have a big, fast, talented winger to draw checkers away. He's going to be the guy everybody keys on.
theo6060 said:I couldn't agree more. Foy's natural touch drew a lot of attention, but the reason I think Locke should be alright is because of his creativity. In the OHL East final against the Majors, Locke was being pounded on by bigger players every shift, and he still managed to put up the points.
That's true. It would be difficult to match 151 points again this year after your linemate is gone, but i think it's a great test for Locke. This should show just how prepared he is to have other team's going after him (and not just partially because of Foy too). Last year I was kind of impressed by Jeremy Akeson. I don't think he can put up the points Foy did, but if he played with Locke then maybe he could have a career year?Hossa said:Defenitely. Locke is creative, and he's smart, and like many of the great natural scorers, he knows how to get open in the scoring areas. He's also not a soft player, and won't back down. He doesn't have the size or speed or strength to fight through checks, but he'll keep fighting. Many of his points come on the PP as well, although he might play the point I believe. He should be fine, just 151 points might be tough to duplicate.
i think this will help himDr_Chimera said:Actually, bad for Locke.