For Lucic. Eriksson for Lucic.
- MaximumBone

Was that it?

Regardless I thought it a bit squiffy. Thus you have posted one thing I did not like in my entire tenure as a poster on HockeyBuzz. Shame on you sir.

It's funny... I work in a position where I have to help people get jobs sometimes. A lot of the online applications now ask you to participate in an online equity survey... I always tell the males to click the block saying female. They rarely get interviews unless they do these days.
- laughs2907

May as well... It is 2018 after all

May as well... It is 2018 after all
- saskoil21

Really they shouldn't be asking that sh1t on surveys. It's disgusting that people can't get hired based on qualifications alone these days...

I love the hyperbole of these guys. The emergence of Nurse. Larsson/Nurse killed it.

These are massive exaggerations.
- Iggysbff

In 431 minutes played against top pairings (because who else is playing them?), Nurse- Larsson rocked a 53.3% CF, 53.57% GF (+9.9% relative to the team average) and had the 2nd highest xGF/60 of 2.66 without riding hot percentages. All those numbers represent either the best or second best totals among pairings used in a top-4 role.

Gonna nitpick using your interpretation of what "killing it" means?

Was that it?

Regardless I thought it a bit squiffy. Thus you have posted one thing I did not like in my entire tenure as a poster on HockeyBuzz. Shame on you sir.
- Wildschwein

I'd still make the trade

I'd still make the trade
- MaximumBone

Finally, something we don’t agree on.

That too. I'm 90% sure it was him. Hold on, just to protect any amount of honour he has left, I'll go check. brb.
- EdmHockeyMan

Yeah... no way in hell am I going to go through 1000's of comments to double check that...

Yeah... no way in hell am I going to go through 1000's of comments to double check that...
- EdmHockeyMan

Slacker.

In 431 minutes played against top pairings (because who else is playing them?), Nurse- Larsson rocked a 53.3% CF, 53.57% GF (+9.9% relative to the team average) and had the 2nd highest xGF/60 of 2.66 without riding hot percentages. All those numbers represent either the best or second best totals among pairings used in a top-4 role.

Gonna nitpick using your interpretation of what "killing it" means?
- MaximumBone

Rocked? Lol.

We still lost the vast majority of those games. And 431 minutes isn’t a lot.

Did he really?

Then again, he doesn’t think Hedman is very good. If I recall correctly, he didn’t think Tampa would protect him in the expansion draft.
- Wildschwein

No it wasn’t Hallfan. As you said he thought Hedman could be gotten in trade for peanuts since TBay wouldn’t be protecting him in expansion. I think it was Edmhockeyfan. He made a bunch of other wild proclamations as well.

There were plenty of proclamations about what Larsson would be and what Nurse would be. Not “could” but would.

People back track pretty quickly.

Rocked? Lol.

We still lost the vast majority of those games. And 431 minutes isn’t a lot.
- Iggysbff

And lack of scoring/squiffy goaltending had nothing to do with said losses?

431 minutes isn’t a lot, but it’s enough to see there is some definite chemistry between the two.

Rocked? Lol.

We still lost the vast majority of those games. And 431 minutes isn’t a lot.
- Iggysbff

But, as evidenced by the stats I posted, the pairing contributing more to winning than they did to losing; more so than any other pairing (excl. statistically insignificant pairings) we've played this season.

And 431 5-on-5 minutes is like 25 to 30 games worth.

No it wasn’t Hallfan. As you said he thought Hedman could be gotten in trade for peanuts since TBay wouldn’t be protecting him in expansion. I think it was Edmhockeyfan. He made a bunch of other wild proclamations as well.

There were plenty of proclamations about what Larsson would be and what Nurse would be. Not “could” but would.

People back track pretty quickly.
- Iggysbff

Definitely don't remember saying that Larsson could be Hedman. Even I noted that trading Hall for Larsson was an overpayment.

Definitely don't remember saying that Larsson could be Hedman. Even I noted that trading Hall for Larsson was an overpayment.
- EdmHockeyMan

I definitely recall you saying Larsson could find his offensive game and see a Hedman-like rise. You or someone with a very similar name and the same propensity for long posts.

I definitely recall you saying Larsson could find his offensive game and see a Hedman-like rise. You or someone with a very similar name and the same propensity for long posts.
- MaximumBone

Ah, f it, I'ma go back and reread the posts. brb.

I definitely recall you saying Larsson could find his offensive game and see a Hedman-like rise. You or someone with a very similar name and the same propensity for long posts.
- MaximumBone

I figured Larsson had some untapped offensive potential but not like Hedman.

- laughs2907

The next

The next


- AdamFrench

The next


- AdamFrench

Imagine

Imagine
- laughs2907

I'm imagining Frenchie getting power bombed through a table.

I'm imagining Frenchie getting power bombed through a table.


- LittleRicky

Is Polak the one doing said power bombing, or Larsson?

Is Polak the one doing said power bombing, or Larsson?
- Wildschwein

Larsson

Larsson
- LittleRicky

That would be beautiful.

That would be beautiful.
- Wildschwein