southern_cross_116
New member
- Joined:
- May 24, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,748
- Liked Posts:
- 1,012
- Location:
- Australia
So you would rather give up goals then have someone coming at our guys? Carcillo can play and enforce. That's why we got him.
How many goals against was Scott on the ice for? If a guy pulls about 3 minutes max of ice time in a game -there isn't much chance for flubs that end up costing goals.
Frankly 3 minutes of ice time per game might be a slight exaggeration -as it may have been 5 on a good night - but less than 3 many nights.
__
Hossa: well this being a messageboard- and like a lot of messageboards - you will always find someone willing to cry about anyone at any time for any reason. So I can see people loading up their diapers if Hossa (or frankly, fill in the blank) doesn't perform to that person's "expectations" - whatever the hell those end up actually being some times...
E.G.: Wah - -play X suxxorz becuz hiz stick is curved to the left and not made out of lazerbeamz.
If you get my point.
___
Ice has it right - Carcillo wasn't signed to be an Enforcer - he was signed to be an agitating jerk; I'm sure he's a nice enough guy when not working for a paycheck (most of those guys are), but on the ice, when on the clock he is paid to be a total douchebag, albeit one with a sometimes present scoring touch.
The man knows his role, and -well - frankly that is the direction that the front office wanted to take the team. To make it more douchey -which is fine when it works, but awfully embarassing if it doesn't.
Take Dennis Rodman's time with the Bulls, there was an example of when it worked.
Last edited: