Hawks bring back Cullimore and others...

[roshinaya]

While Cullimore is bad, he would indeed be a good candidate to take the Sopel spot. He has tons of experience and should be a good PKer, the #6/7 guy. I wouldn't pencil in Scott as getting any sort of regular minutes or games. He is strictly for goon duty and I would be very worried if he would start turning up regularly in the lineup as that would mean something is seriously wrong with the rest of the D-core.

And Bowman said he was still looking for a vet D-man for the bottom pairing, so possible Cullimore wont be seeing any action in the show.

 

[LordKOTL]

[quote name="TJD"]



Let me put it this way...



Same price, whom do you use as your 6th defenseman; Scott or Cullimore?[/quote]

A road pylon...but we already had Zyuzin.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="roshinaya"]While Cullimore is bad, he would indeed be a good candidate to take the Sopel spot. He has tons of experience and should be a good PKer, the #6/7 guy. I wouldn't pencil in Scott as getting any sort of regular minutes or games. He is strictly for goon duty and I would be very worried if he would start turning up regularly in the lineup as that would mean something is seriously wrong with the rest of the D-core.

And Bowman said he was still looking for a vet D-man for the bottom pairing, so possible Cullimore wont be seeing any action in the show.[/quote]



According to Q or Bowman (forgot which mentioned it to Sassone) they see Scott having more of an impact then just a goon.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="E Runs"]

Points!? C'mon you know Cullimore doesn't score points.



He was +21 however in '07-08.



Let's see everyone said Matt Walker sucked and Brent Sopel sucked yet Q & staff sure got a lot of of them. Now it's Scott and Cullimore who are supposedly useless.



I'll wait and see.[/quote]





Exactly what I was talking about. If he can play, and I mean ANY servicable 6-7, 8-10 minutes a game, we are all set. Most of that or a majority will be on PK.



I'll wait and see too, but am NOT worried at all.



Philly lost the SC primarily because of their D. Other than Pronger and Timmonen they were non existant. Those guys were near 30 minutes per game, every game.



Our defense has FOUR guys that CAN skate more than 25 minutes a night. The 5-6 just need to be servicable at that point.



I still think Cullimore is around to work with the Kids in Rockford. Leddy and Lalonde.

 

[MassHavoc]

This is just ridiculous, are we so afraid of this team/roster that we are trying to justify the addition of Cullimore somehow?! He BLEW harder than Lohan in prison for meth from a guard, during his 08-09 season. Didn't play a single game in the big boy league last year, and now all of a sudden he could be serviceable? THIS IS CULLIMORE people, no way he touches this roster if the hawks are even remotely successful. I can't believe I'm even seeing this discussion from someone who was run out of town and made the butt of jokes the likes of a Russian ending in V. What a sad and disturbing day.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="MassHavoc"]This is just ridiculous, are we so afraid of this team/roster that we are trying to justify the addition of Cullimore somehow?! He BLEW harder than Lohan in prison for meth from a guard, during his 08-09 season. Didn't play a single game in the big boy league last year, and now all of a sudden he could be serviceable? THIS IS CULLIMORE people, no way he touches this roster if the hawks are even remotely successful. I can't believe I'm even seeing this discussion from someone who was run out of town and made the butt of jokes the likes of a Russian ending in V. What a sad and disturbing day.[/quote]





I can't believe I'm defending him, but AGAIN the Hawks had him in a ROLE he never should have been in. Had they NOT had him in that role his game would not have been as bad as it was. He and Aucoin were NOT A GOOD TOP PAIR in the new NHL. Bottom pair, sure.



It's all where the team played them.

 

[MassHavoc]

[quote name="R K"]





I can't believe I'm defending him, but AGAIN the Hawks had him in a ROLE he never should have been in. Had they NOT had him in that role his game would not have been as bad as it was. He and Aucoin were NOT A GOOD TOP PAIR in the new NHL. Bottom pair, sure.



It's all where the team played them.[/quote]

The plus 21 you point at 3 SEASONS AGO, is easily wiped away by his -10 the next season and his AHL SEASON last year. He's done. Let him teach the kids in Rockford, but he's worse than Chelios probably and no one wants him. INCLUDING ME.

 

[E Runs]

[quote name="MassHavoc"]

The plus 21 you point at 3 SEASONS AGO, is easily wiped away by his -10 the next season and his AHL SEASON last year. He's done. Let him teach the kids in Rockford, but he's worse than Chelios probably and no one wants him. INCLUDING ME.[/quote]

FYI, he was -22 when Tampa won the Cup.

 

[Kerfuffle]

Also Cullimore will be 38 years old this December. And suddenly he's being described as the solution around here to fill a role. Has to make you wonder about the depth of this team going into the season. We have half a team of superstars and half a team of unproven kids or aging vets. That may or may not work out - we'll just have to see I guess.

 

[MassHavoc]

[quote name="E Runs"]

FYI, he was -22 when Tampa won the Cup.[/quote]

Congratulations, you just said that he's still good because he was +21 3 years ago, but that +/- don't matter because he was -22 10 years ago when they won the cup...

 

[noon]

[quote name="Kerfuffle"]Also Cullimore will be 38 years old this December. And suddenly he's being described as the solution around here to fill a role. Has to make you wonder about the depth of this team going into the season. We have half a team of superstars and half a team of unproven kids or aging vets. That may or may not work out - we'll just have to see I guess.[/quote]



I really don't see him on the big boys team. He will play in Rockford. Settle down.

 

[E Runs]

[quote name="MassHavoc"]

Congratulations, you just said that he's still good because he was +21 3 years ago, but that +/- don't matter because he was -22 10 years ago when they won the cup...[/quote]

Yeah I did didn't I, though I wasn't aware Tampa won the Cup in 2000.



Regardless if the Hawks season hinges on the 6/7th D, whomever that is, they have much larger problems.



It's amazing what gets this place's panties in a bunch.

 

[MassHavoc]

[quote name="E Runs"]

Yeah I did didn't I, though I wasn't aware Tampa won the Cup in 2000.



Regardless if the Hawks season hinges on the 6/7th D, whomever that is, they have much larger problems.



It's amazing what gets this place's panties in a bunch.[/quote]

Not wearing any panties... But yes, the highlighted above was to my original point of " I can't believe that we are so scared of who the 6/7th d-man is on this team, that we are trying to justify in our heads that if it's Cullimore, we are still ok." If Cullimore is with the big boys, we have more problems than the 6/7th d-man.



Honestly I don't care who it is as long as he's not a liability. They aren't going to get much time as the top pairs will be sucking it down as always, so I'd rather see a young cheap prospect there than a well-done old man.

 

[E Runs]

Well the rest of the post wasn't directed at you but now that I know you're sans undergarments....

 

[MassHavoc]

[quote name="E Runs"]Well the rest of the post wasn't directed at you but now that I know you're sans undergarments....[/quote]

Haha, testing out some policies at the new workplace... I keeeed I keeed.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="noon"]



I really don't see him on the big boys team. He will play in Rockford. Settle down.[/quote]





I agree. I'd be shocked if he were on the Hawks at any point. I was shocked he was traveling with them as a Black Ace in the playoffs too.



Nothing ever really suprises me though. We have enough depth to NOT have to use Cullimore.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="Kerfuffle"]Also Cullimore will be 38 years old this December. And suddenly he's being described as the solution around here to fill a role. Has to make you wonder about the depth of this team going into the season. We have half a team of superstars and half a team of unproven kids or aging vets. That may or may not work out - we'll just have to see I guess.[/quote]



I don't think anyone thinks he's the "solution" for anything. Could he play if needed, sure. Should he be depended on for an every day role, probably not.



Could I compare him and Scott, I don't know one of them is 38 years old.



If EITHER of those guys is consistently counted on we are in trouble.

 

[roshinaya]

Some people seem to want Jay McKee as the Sopel replacement. He could come cheap, made only $800k last year with the Pens. He is still getting paid $1.3m for next year from the buyout.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="Kerfuffle"]Also Cullimore will be 38 years old this December. And suddenly he's being described as the solution around here to fill a role. Has to make you wonder about the depth of this team going into the season. We have half a team of superstars and half a team of unproven kids or aging vets. That may or may not work out - we'll just have to see I guess.[/quote]



Well, when you spend 3/4 of your salary cap space on star players you have to fill the voids with cheaper guys, whom are usually rookies or aging veterans.



I think we have plenty of depth, except for goalies now, it's just we need to make sure our younger players develop at their own pace and we make sure we're obviously not over the cap.

 

[CLWolf81]

[quote name="TJD"]



Twice.[/quote]



Scary thought, isn't it?