serp
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 20,545
- 12,391
As if there something in the contract that says he’s the #7 d lol
Well its not a two-way deal so the owner would have to eat some extra money if Hanley is send down but other than that .
As if there something in the contract that says he’s the #7 d lol
As if there something in the contract that says he’s the #7 d lol
Hanley is perfect as the extra defenceman. Honestly we should let Gleason (and Honka) walk. Opens up two slots for younger guys to come in maybe a couple CHL signings. Dallas has historically had success in this category (Benn, Dillion)
Isn’t Gleason already like the youngest defender in Texas not named Harley?
Dawson Barteaux is 2 years younger and there's two guys named Martin ( Max and Luke , not related ) but they're not signed with Dallas.
But yes Gleason is still young enough that there's no reason to let him go just yet. He's been at least good enough to play big minutes in the AHL .
nOt ExPeCtInG bOuRqUe To PuT uP aNy NuMbErS iN tHe AhLNot expecting Bourque to put up any numbers in the AHL, but its cool he's getting some gametime
nOt ExPeCtInG bOuRqUe To PuT uP aNy NuMbErS iN tHe AhL
View attachment 434027
Wish Mavrik was coming back to Texas next year, not much left to do in the Q. Birthday is January 8, so he just misses the transfer agreement cutoff date by 9 days.
Wish Mavrik was coming back to Texas next year, not much left to do in the Q. Birthday is January 8, so he just misses the transfer agreement cutoff date by 9 days.