Hawkaholic
Registered User
Another excuse..
No 2nd line NHL C would look bad on the 4th line, regardless of the role.
Obviously my mindset is different than others, whatever, i'm done.
Recalled/Assigned: Pirri Recalled, Hayes Sent Down
- Thread starter Cullksinikers
- Start date
Another excuse..
No 2nd line NHL C would look bad on the 4th line, regardless of the role.
Obviously my mindset is different than others, whatever, i'm done.
Kurtosis
GHG
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Hawkscap
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2007
- 2,614
- 29
Kurtosis
GHG
Sure thing. Only Pirri lovers and not anyone else think that different players excel in different roles.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
And Toews looked like an NHLer in that role. Nice try.
Because that's what I said.
Different players do excel in different roles, but those are the players that have shown they can handle the NHL in any capacity, regardless of the role they are in.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
To me, Pirri is just another Luke Adam. I really hope I'm wrong, but that's all I see out of him.
Why do you think playing with better players wouldn't help make him look better in return? There is a difference between 4th liners and Sharp/Hoss/whatever our latest invention by Q on the second line is.
Of course Pirri will do better with good linemates.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Of course he would be better, doesn't mean he would be suitable. Those 2 can make anyone look good, but if you don't look good in sheltered mins on the 4th line, how are you going to handle the 2nd line C position playing against the best in the game on a nightly basis?
Ace Rothstein
Aces High
- Mar 13, 2012
- 6,230
- 849
Considering he's played all of 8 games in the NHL over 4 years, that isn't all that surprising.
I'm fine with Kruger being on the 4th line but he was gifted a spot on the 2nd line two years ago and he still has no business on the 2nd line. I don't think it is a big deal for people to question the different treatment.
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Hawks!
It's not 'only Pirri lovers'. In fact, pretty much the only ones opposed to Pirri being given a look at 2c are you, Bubba, and HockeySensible.
Kurtosis
GHG
crazyhawk
Registered User
You clearly are having trouble in not being able to see the forest for the trees. But hey you hail from the Forest City so what gives.
Hmmmm we have yet to find that 2LC anywhere ... but here is this one guy Pirri ... Can't deny there is potential there .... Hmmmmm what to do, what to do ...
Put in 4LC Kruger? LW Saad? The aging Zeuss? Hmmmmmm.
Give the guy a friggen chance .. It's getting silly now.
massivegoonery
Registered User
When what looks like the absolute obvious thing to do doesn't actually happen, it's time to start thinking that you might be missing something.
DisgruntledHawkFan
Blackhawk Down
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Hawkaholic
Registered User
He was sheltered, not sure how anyone can argue that. It may be because of the linemates he played with, but he was still sheltered. And he did nothing against weak compeition, I mean, did he even get a scoring chance? Smith and Bollig did.
DisgruntledHawkFan
Blackhawk Down
Smith and Bollig got scoring chances playing with a playmaking center. That center sucks.
Hell of an argument.
Hell of an argument.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Except that C had nothing to do with their chances. I cant recall one set up or scoring chance initiated by Pirri. And for this supposed #2C, thats pathetic considering his linemates, who are barely NHLers, had more of an impact.
Marotte Marauder
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2008
- 8,587
- 2,442
Hammer is right back, thankfully, where he came into the league after some down periods in between.
Kruger has progressed from a weak player with very little offensive game to...
Stalberg was so effectively groomed by Q, now that's a dumb comment.
Bickell almost was run out of town last 2 years until he had the monster playoff/contract push.
Saad is playing like a 1st rounder should. (I know he slipped to the 2nd round, relax)
I'll give you Shaw.
Kane? He's been a superstar since he was 15, his maturing and his game maturing is because of Q, not that he's been in the league for 6 years?
Oduya is the same player as when we acquired him. What changes do you see in his game, is he suddenly a monster in the corners?
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Laughable, those players themselves would point to Q as the first person that has helped them become who they are. You're just a Q hater.
Just like last year when you said he was the most overrated coach, hasnt done anything in the playoffs..etc. But you wont give him credit for that, but blame him first when things go wrong (2011-12)
Just like last year when you said he was the most overrated coach, hasnt done anything in the playoffs..etc. But you wont give him credit for that, but blame him first when things go wrong (2011-12)
Marotte Marauder
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2008
- 8,587
- 2,442
Bring on the quotes from the players you listed where they attribute their development to Q.
He is one of the most overrated coaches and proved it again by effing up the lineup last playoff season. When he backed off and left well enough alone, the team was able to come through.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Hammer is better than he's ever been.
Kruger was barely an NHLer and is now a key PK guy for us.
Stalberg went from a scrub, to a 20G scorer
Bickell was good all of last year, and no matter what is much better than he was when he entered the league.
Saad is better than when he came into the league, he'd be the first to thank Q for helping him
Kanes defensive game has improved,
Oduya was struggling in Winnipeg, getting bottom pairing minutes, and comes to Chicago and didnt play well at first, Since Q has got a hold of him and had time with him, he is playing much better all around.
Keith, Seabrook, Leddy, Hjalmarsson, Oduya have all improved since Q joined. Funny how players go from our team to being other teams better players. Like Andrew Ladd, he waskt much when we got him, when he leaves he becomes WPGs leading scorer. Froliks all around game didnt improve, or his PK ability? On and on.
You can't physically prove that he has, unless you ask the players. But I guarantee if you did they would say he is a big part of who they are as a player.
It's just a dumb comment, its like saying no player has regressed under Q, they all just suck because they were going to suck anyway.
Kruger was barely an NHLer and is now a key PK guy for us.
Stalberg went from a scrub, to a 20G scorer
Bickell was good all of last year, and no matter what is much better than he was when he entered the league.
Saad is better than when he came into the league, he'd be the first to thank Q for helping him
Kanes defensive game has improved,
Oduya was struggling in Winnipeg, getting bottom pairing minutes, and comes to Chicago and didnt play well at first, Since Q has got a hold of him and had time with him, he is playing much better all around.
Keith, Seabrook, Leddy, Hjalmarsson, Oduya have all improved since Q joined. Funny how players go from our team to being other teams better players. Like Andrew Ladd, he waskt much when we got him, when he leaves he becomes WPGs leading scorer. Froliks all around game didnt improve, or his PK ability? On and on.
You can't physically prove that he has, unless you ask the players. But I guarantee if you did they would say he is a big part of who they are as a player.
It's just a dumb comment, its like saying no player has regressed under Q, they all just suck because they were going to suck anyway.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Because hes the first coach to change his line up because of a pretty fair opinion. Going against Chara, he didnt want his eggs in one basket, like he did in 2010 with Toews, Kane, and Buff. Eventually he split those lines up and it helped us win a cup. He realized he needed to change it up against BOS and did.
Q makes mistakes, no denying it, but there are few things I disagree with. Even golden boy Paul MacLean makes mistakes..plays tough guys over skill guys that are even worse than Bollig. You get over the mistakes when you win.
