Not a big fan of ol’ Bernier, eh? Heh. I can totally understand that. When he first came up from the minors he did that one-armed muscle-around maneuver a couple of times and I liked that, then it worked to brilliant effect on that one goal last year. He continues to insist on pulling that move even though it hasn’t worked much at all ever since.
I guess I just assumed that since the Sharks seem so set on using him that he might as well sit on a line he fits in (I never understood the Michalek-Marleau-Bernier combo), but yeah. If he can make way for better guys like Pavelski and Smith, all the better.
And as for Schaefer, it was a bummer but at least they didn’t have to lose one of their top guys the way everyone figured they would. The kid looked really sharp in those ten or so games last year but I’m more comfortable heading into the playoffs with Nabby and Toskala than one of them backed up by a guy who looked solid in a few games early last year.
You know, I think if they were considering making a deal for Schaefer, they should have let him play a couple of games this season. Pick some losers (like the Blackhawks) and start him at home against them so other teams can see what he’s capable of (still?). Maybe then they could have gotten something for him. I have a feeling the trade negotiations went like this:
Sharks: “He’s a great goalie.”
Interested Party: “He’s only played like nine NHL games.”
Sharks: “But he’s really good.”
Interested Party: “That was last year.”
Sharks: “He’s so awesome.”
Interested Party: “We’ll give you a bag of potato chips for him.”
Sharks: “He’s very solid technically. Make it Pringles?”
Don (a.k.a. Dad):
March 14th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Hi, guy! I agree with most all of your points. However, that 3rd line combination should be:
Brown, or Pavelski when he’s healthy, instead of Bernier.
The 4th line should be:
Brown (if Pavelski’s on the 3rd line), Goc, and Smith if he’s healthy, otherwise Bernier.
Also, I hated that they gave up Schaefer for next-to-nothing.
ironsoap:
March 15th, 2007 at 10:17 am
Not a big fan of ol’ Bernier, eh? Heh. I can totally understand that. When he first came up from the minors he did that one-armed muscle-around maneuver a couple of times and I liked that, then it worked to brilliant effect on that one goal last year. He continues to insist on pulling that move even though it hasn’t worked much at all ever since.
I guess I just assumed that since the Sharks seem so set on using him that he might as well sit on a line he fits in (I never understood the Michalek-Marleau-Bernier combo), but yeah. If he can make way for better guys like Pavelski and Smith, all the better.
And as for Schaefer, it was a bummer but at least they didn’t have to lose one of their top guys the way everyone figured they would. The kid looked really sharp in those ten or so games last year but I’m more comfortable heading into the playoffs with Nabby and Toskala than one of them backed up by a guy who looked solid in a few games early last year.
You know, I think if they were considering making a deal for Schaefer, they should have let him play a couple of games this season. Pick some losers (like the Blackhawks) and start him at home against them so other teams can see what he’s capable of (still?). Maybe then they could have gotten something for him. I have a feeling the trade negotiations went like this:
Sharks: “He’s a great goalie.”
Interested Party: “He’s only played like nine NHL games.”
Sharks: “But he’s really good.”
Interested Party: “That was last year.”
Sharks: “He’s so awesome.”
Interested Party: “We’ll give you a bag of potato chips for him.”
Sharks: “He’s very solid technically. Make it Pringles?”
Interested Party: “You have a deal.”