GOON WATCH: John Scott To The Hawks

[PatrickSharpRules]

[quote name="R K"]



Burrows? You need Scott to beat the shit out of Burrows? Seriously?



so you have him playing against the Blues, because dude Carcillo and Hartnell are in teh EASTERN CONFERENCE. We play them twice and in the last EIGHT games against them there were NO FIGHTS! Nor were there any CHEAP hits![/quote]

Well Carcillo on Carter :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:



Maybe Scott would have taken exception to that hit and fought Carcillo.

 

[roshinaya]

[quote name="Ton"]

Plenty of holes in this line-up... as of right now Brouwer and Kopecky line up as our top two LW... YIKES![/quote]



I'm actually not that worried about that. Brouwer managed to score 20 goals the past year and will probably improve knowing that he'll be the most likely candidate to man the top line. Kopecky showed in the playoffs that he has skills and can manage a top line position and he's got chemistry with Hossa. Maybe it's all wishful thinking. And with the cap situation, I don't see how LW could improve any more. Beggars can't be choosers.

 

[phranchk]

I do find it humerous that we're 8 pages into this thread on a free agent that probably won't play much.

 

[Guest]

I'm sorry I just don't get it. I really don't. Nor does this move excite me. In the slightest. The one time this guy gets his ass kicked by Jansson and I'll laugh.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="phranchk"]I do find it humerous that we're 8 pages into this thread on a free agent that probably won't play much.[/quote]





I don't. It means they have yet to do a fucking thing for this team in a positive manner.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="Ton"]I agree Ron, I don't like the Scott signing. I hope Bowman does better today because yesterday truly was a downer. Disappointing to see Ladd go (although if Bowman was confident that he was going to get an offer sheet that would be hard to match perhaps its better this way)... and then seeing Scott signed, makes me scratch my head.



Plenty of holes in this line-up... as of right now Brouwer and Kopecky line up as our top two LW... YIKES![/quote]





I'm not too worried about that either. I'm more worried about our shut down line and losing Ladd to be honest. Bolland-Ladd were one giant fucking pain in the ass. Ask the Sedin sisters, Thornton, or Carter-Richards.



Kopecky from the Olympics on was one of this teams best forwards. Brouwer other than the family issues had a break out year. Those two I feel will continue to improve.



The Checking line concerns me. Big time.

 

[Ton]

Can't argue with that Ron... right now you have Stalberg (if he even is good enough for it), who was a whoopin' -13 (albeit on Toronto) last season in 40 games... and Bolland.

 

[Guest]

I'm wondering if they try Bickell there or they go out and find some cheap experience that wants to win.



Either way Ladd is the hardest cog to replace right now. Sucks losing him big time.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

[quote name="R K"]I'm wondering if they try Bickell there or they go out and find some cheap experience that wants to win.



Either way Ladd is the hardest cog to replace right now. Sucks losing him big time.[/quote]



That was a head scratcher for me... I thought after Versteeg was off the books (as long as we could dump Huet) we were fine with the Cap? Was Ladd demanding too much or was I just off base thinking the Cap was fine?

 

[Guest]

[quote name="Stu Grimson"]



That was a head scratcher for me... I thought after Versteeg was off the books (as long as we could dump Huet) we were fine with the Cap? Was Ladd demanding too much or was I just off base thinking the Cap was fine?[/quote]



Cap apparently is 4.5 mil less. Kane and Toews bonuses killed it. I don't think they had a choice. Unless Ladd was going to take the 1.6 and if my names on the Cup twice and I have a chance to make a mil or more, more, I do it.

 

[roshinaya]

[quote name="Stu Grimson"]



That was a head scratcher for me... I thought after Versteeg was off the books (as long as we could dump Huet) we were fine with the Cap? Was Ladd demanding too much or was I just off base thinking the Cap was fine?[/quote]



I am guessing that there was a risk he was getting offer sheeted to a price they could not match and thought better to deal him and get a decent return. He would have probably asked for too much any way.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="roshinaya"]



I am guessing that there was a risk he was getting offer sheeted to a price they could not match and thought better to deal him and get a decent return. He would have probably asked for too much any way.[/quote]





I'm pretty sure an offersheet would have given the Hawks the same return as they got. Over a Mil gets compensation.



Now that Calgary has Ivannans and St. Louis still with Janssen I see 10 games where Scott will be dressed.

 

[Rdrhwke]

[quote name="Stu Grimson"]God I can't wait for him to beat the living shit out of Jackman/Janssen/Burrows/Carcillo/Hartnell. If I see any of you giving any inkling of props to Scott, you're banned.



**** YOU.



Man... some people are so dumb.[/quote]



Stu, if memory serves correctly, the last Jackman got brave he didn't fare all that well vs Eager. And I think you probably remember what happened the last time Burrows dropped the gloves against the Hawks. I believe he had to resort to hair pulling to keep from getting beat to a pulp??? And who broke Kesler's nose with ONE punch? Ladd maybe? The point to those references is that none of the above Hawks were outright goons but used their toughness when the situation called for it.



But you really did make everyone's point with your reference to one guy.



How many games did Carcillo play in the finals?? I think his biggest contribution was blowing up his own teammate instead of Kopecky. That and being verbally ***** slapped by Burish. So basically their designated goon did nothing to help them.



Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having players who can be tough when the time calls for it. But if their hockey skills are for shit, they are going to help the team about as much as Carcillo helped the Flyers.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

[quote name="Rdrhwke"]



Stu, if memory serves correctly, the last Jackman got brave he didn't fare all that well vs Eager. And I think you probably remember what happened the last time Burrows dropped the gloves against the Hawks. I believe he had to resort to hair pulling to keep from getting beat to a pulp??? And who broke Kesler's nose with ONE punch? Ladd maybe? The point to those references is that none of the above Hawks were outright goons but used their toughness when the situation called for it.



But you really did make everyone's point with your reference to one guy.



How many games did Carcillo play in the finals?? I think his biggest contribution was blowing up his own teammate instead of Kopecky. That and being verbally ***** slapped by Burish. So basically their designated goon did nothing to help them.



Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having players who can be tough when the time calls for it. But if their hockey skills are for shit, they are going to help the team about as much as Carcillo helped the Flyers.[/quote]



I understand I didn't use very solid references outside of Jackman/Janssen etc...



But you never know game in and game out whether there is either a young kid trying to make a name for himself or a Todd Fedoruk out there who is pissed his team sucks and wants to do a flying elbow to our goalie.



The fact is... you're paying him peanuts to insure your 5-6 mil guys. If there's no Fraser/Eager/Byfuglien/Burish out there and no John Scott... I'm feeling a little easier taking a run at someone when I'm only going to have to answer to a Patrick Sharp/Troy Brouwer as opposed to John Scott.



Could nothing happen all year and the Scott signing be completely useless? Yes. Or am I going to see a chat during every Blues game similar to last year about how we wished "Player X" was dressed to beat the living shit out of everyone on the talentless hack Blues again?



During the Playoffs goons are completely UNNECESSARY AND USELESS. But there are 4920+ minutes to be played leading up to that where they serve a dying purpose... until the league completely pussifies the game, goons serve an ever so slight purpose.



If they signed him for anything over the 515,000 he's getting I would be up in arms... but I'll take him for league minimum.

 

[Rdrhwke]

[quote name="Stu Grimson"]



I understand I didn't use very solid references outside of Jackman/Janssen etc...



But you never know game in and game out whether there is either a young kid trying to make a name for himself or a Todd Fedoruk out there who is pissed his team sucks and wants to do a flying elbow to our goalie.



The fact is... you're paying him peanuts to insure your 5-6 mil guys. If there's no Fraser/Eager/Byfuglien/Burish out there and no John Scott... I'm feeling a little easier taking a run at someone when I'm only going to have to answer to a Patrick Sharp/Troy Brouwer as opposed to John Scott.



Could nothing happen all year and the Scott signing be completely useless? Yes. Or am I going to see a chat during every Blues game similar to last year about how we wished "Player X" was dressed to beat the living shit out of everyone on the talentless hack Blues again?



During the Playoffs goons are completely UNNECESSARY AND USELESS. But there are 4920+ minutes to be played leading up to that where they serve a dying purpose... until the league completely pussifies the game, goons serve an ever so slight purpose.



If they signed him for anything over the 515,000 he's getting I would be up in arms... but I'll take him for league minimum.[/quote]



Let me ask you something and give me your honest opinion.



If Scott is on the ice do you honestly believe Ovechkin doesn't send Campbell flying into the boards?



Do you honestly think Wiz doesn't run Seabrook?



My point being that players who are "goons" or players who play a physical game are not going to concern themselves with the fact that maybe a goon will try and exact revenge on them for running a guy. They know full well that retaliation comes with the territory for how they play.



If they were pussies, they'd have more no hit games than Nolan Ryan.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

[quote name="Rdrhwke"]



Let me ask you something and give me your honest opinion.



If Scott is on the ice do you honestly believe Ovechkin doesn't send Campbell flying into the boards?



Do you honestly think Wiz doesn't run Seabrook?



My point being that players who are "goons" or players who play a physical game are not going to concern themselves with the fact that maybe a goon will try and exact revenge on them for running a guy. They know full well that retaliation comes with the territory for how they play.



If they were pussies, they'd have more no hit games than Nolan Ryan.[/quote]



No to Ovechkin because I don't think he was trying to injure Campbell. And no to Wiz also... Wiz would have his face rearranged and know NEVER to do something like that again (although his 8 game suspsension was enough for that).



There were countless times this year and the year previous in GDTs and chats where people were wishing "Player X" was dressed to put an end to whatever shenanigans was going on the ice. And there will be those games this year and I am pretty sure Q is going to choose his spots wisely when he has Scott dress.



Obviously you aren't going to see Scott play against the Wings/Panthers/Kings etc...

 

[phranchk]

[quote name="R K"]





I'm pretty sure an offersheet would have given the Hawks the same return as they got. Over a Mil gets compensation.



Now that Calgary has Ivannans and St. Louis still with Janssen I see 10 games where Scott will be dressed.[/quote]

Pretty sure for Ladd we would have gotten a 2nd round pick. Instead we got a 2nd round pick and a prospect.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="phranchk"]

Pretty sure for Ladd we would have gotten a 2nd round pick. Instead we got a 2nd round pick and a prospect.[/quote]



semantics.

 

[Rdrhwke]

[quote name="Stu Grimson"]



No to Ovechkin because I don't think he was trying to injure Campbell. And no to Wiz also... Wiz would have his face rearranged and know NEVER to do something like that again (although his 8 game suspsension was enough for that).



There were countless times this year and the year previous in GDTs and chats where people were wishing "Player X" was dressed to put an end to whatever shenanigans was going on the ice. And there will be those games this year and I am pretty sure Q is going to choose his spots wisely when he has Scott dress.



Obviously you aren't going to see Scott play against the Wings/Panthers/Kings etc...[/quote]



Stu, you're focusing solely on what John Scott can do with his gloves off. I believe it's been established he can hold his own in that regard.



What I am more concened about is how he fares when his gloves are on and his stick is in his hands.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

[quote name="Rdrhwke"]



Stu, you're focusing solely on what John Scott can do with his gloves off. I believe it's been established he can hold his own in that regard.



What I am more concened about is how he fares when his gloves are on and his stick is in his hands.[/quote]



He's been compared to Matt Walker by a lot of folks... and we did OK with him as our #6. No I am not saying Walker was good, but being able to play Scott in 10-20 games this year for peanuts is fine by me. Will make some games a lot less nerve racking for me and many others when teams start getting out of hand.



I reserve judgement on most things in life until I see how they play out. Halfway through the season I might eat crow and say what a worthless signing this guy is. But then again, he might win a lot of fans over when he puts an end to hackjob players trying to **** around.