Jump to content

Permanent Rumour Thread


Fanpuck33

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

I’ve seen nothing other than McGroarty and that was close to happening at the draft but obviously didn’t.

It appears that McGroarty was Plan B in case they were unable to pick Demidov or another top forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Commandant said:

Seems the Habs are looking at offering  a short term deal to Patrick Kane

 

 

Seravalli created the Gibson drama.  Wouldn't believe much he has to say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Commandant said:

Seems the Habs are looking at offering  a short term deal to Patrick Kane

 

I-M-O, this makes no sense for EITHER side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

I-M-O, this makes no sense for EITHER side.

 

The Habs have been speculated to be open to doing a short-term, above-market contract for the right fit for a veteran.  A player like that would help in the short term, allowing some prospects a bit more time to develop and then ideally still be useful when the time comes to actually try to make the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

Everyone can make a mistake, hes been write way, way more than hes been wrong.

 

Hes not eklund or jummy murphy where they are always wrong.

I completely agree everyone can make a mistake and he has been right more than he's been wrong.  The difference is he fabricated a story and reported it, there's nothing to support that it wasn't completely made up by Seravalli.  That's no difference than Eklund, who fabricates rumors to be relevant.  At least Eklund's rumors don't put a player, agent and team in damage control. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

The Habs have been speculated to be open to doing a short-term, above-market contract for the right fit for a veteran.  A player like that would help in the short term, allowing some prospects a bit more time to develop and then ideally still be useful when the time comes to actually try to make the playoffs.

I guess that makes sense to why it's rumored Montreal are also in on Stamkos.  Utah seems to be the front-runner still.  Tampa getting Guentzel's rights is signaling they're probably out on Stamkos.  Anything could happen though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

 

I-M-O, this makes no sense for EITHER side.

Yeah, I don't get it either. You'd think he would want to go for another cup, or play closer to home???

 

i guess there may be other factors and there may be some truth about players wanting to play for St. Louis??? He likes the atmosphere in Montreal??? Wants to play with Dach?? Lots of reasons, but on a 2-3 year deal, I just don't know why he'd want to - chances of making the playoffs are extremely thin next year, and even if everything lines up, we'd probably be bubble team the year after. You'd think at his age winning again would be the most important factor???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

I guess that makes sense to why it's rumored Montreal are also in on Stamkos.  Utah seems to be the front-runner still.  Tampa getting Guentzel's rights is signaling they're probably out on Stamkos.  Anything could happen though.

I had read Nashville would probably be the front runner for Stamkos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I had read Nashville would probably be the front runner for Stamkos.

It probably depends on the source.  The last time I saw a Stamkos rumor was pre-draft, so anything could of changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

I completely agree everyone can make a mistake and he has been right more than he's been wrong.  The difference is he fabricated a story and reported it, there's nothing to support that it wasn't completely made up by Seravalli.  That's no difference than Eklund, who fabricates rumors to be relevant.  At least Eklund's rumors don't put a player, agent and team in damage control. 

 

He fabricated it? Do we have proof of that? Or he has a source who fed him bad info?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

He fabricated it? Do we have proof of that? Or he has a source who fed him bad info?

He said it, the player, agent and team said it wasn't true, and he's never cited it coming from a source. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

He said it, the player, agent and team said it wasn't true, and he's never cited it coming from a source. 

 

Oh come on... these guys dont have boardrooms and homes of players and GMs and agents bugged.  Everything they report comes from a source in the organization or players agency.

 

This is just getting silly now.

 

This is the rumour thread... take the weird hate for Seravelli elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

 

Oh come on... these guys dont have boardrooms and homes of players and GMs and agents bugged.  Everything they report comes from a source in the organization or players agency.

 

This is just getting silly now.

So you agree, no source was ever cited, so the only other place it could of come from is Seravalli himself.  It came from him, it wasn't true, so he fabricated it.  I'm all ears if there's proof it came from a source, other than speculation of where he got it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

So you agree, no source was ever cited, so the only other place it could of come from is Seravalli himself.  It came from him, it wasn't true, so he fabricated it.  I'm all ears if there's proof it came from a source, other than speculation of where he got it. 

 

Insiders dont always say it came from a source.  Its assumed....  so no i dont agree and dont put words in my mouth.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Insiders dont always say it came from a source.  Its assumed....  so no i dont agree and dont put words in my mouth.

That's fair, any proof it came from a source, other than an assumption? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

Kane wouldn't be that bad of an idea on a 1 yr or max 2 yr deal.

If Kane is looking for another Cup, I could see him considering a Monahan-like contract ... term not $$$$ ... one year with a promise to deal him to a contender at the deadline ... it would allow Kane to see how the season plays out rather than tying himself to a "contender" based on best guesses tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TurdBurglar said:

That's fair, any proof it came from a source, other than an assumption? 

Proof no

 

But i dont assume that Seravelli is the type of guy to make up stuff based on one mistake.

 

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt 

 

If it was a regular thing... then ill change my mind.  But im not going to assume the worst about the guy for one thing in like 10-15 years of doing this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...