Bacchus Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 We lost one of our D prospects ... one that many thought would be battling for a spot on the roster for number 6-7 D next season. http://www4.sportsnet.ca/nhl_signings_2007/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 We lost one of our D prospects ... one that many thought would be battling for a spot on the roster for number 6-7 D next season. http://www4.sportsnet.ca/nhl_signings_2007/ I could be wrong, but I vaguely remember Gainey saying he expected him to sign elsewhere... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfposi Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 I don't know if he can be considered a prospect...we didn't draft him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 I don't know if he can be considered a prospect...we didn't draft him. we didnt draft beauregard, cote, or danis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfposi Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 I don't know if he can be considered a prospect...we didn't draft him. we didnt draft beauregard, cote, or danis. Ok...let me clarify...Aside from the point that we didn't draft him, it was always my impression that he was picked up mainly to help develop the younger guys in Hamilton. I don't think anyone expected him to crack the lineup (with the exception of injury call-ups). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 that was generally my understanding as well. Essentially I agree with your restatement insofar that drafting is not dispositive of prospect status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Yeah, they only briefly considered him as an injury fill-in and nothing more. TB probably thinks he'll be their #7 d-man because they have a couple of openings there. Battling Rogers and Janik for a top 6 spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfposi Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 that was generally my understanding as well. Essentially I agree with your restatement insofar that drafting is not dispositive of prospect status. Lol...I agree, lets notarize and move on to the next topic. well-put Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 Oh well too bad time to move on. He did help the devlopment of Obryne very much for this I am happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 Oh well too bad time to move on. He did help the devlopment of Obryne very much for this I am happy. Yeah but he was getting old anyway. Won't miss him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.