Page 2 of 5

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:09 am
by Jovocop
Fred wrote:Listening on 1040 today they mentioned that Arnott's attitude leaves a lot to be desired which I guess is why St L didn't re-sign him. I've heard that before but honestly thought age would have knocked the corners off his attitude, well apparently not
Arnott's attitude? What about it? I have never heard of that before.

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:22 am
by clem
Arnott didn't leave St Louis on good terms.

He was upset about being pulled from the playoffs (after an injury slowed him - further - according to coaches).

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:53 pm
by Strangelove
Mondi wrote: Arnott had 17 goals...Doan 22.
Riiiiight, you're the Goals Are The Only Thing That Matters Guy! :crazy:

Well Arnott had 6 goals in his last 37 games with St Lou: put THAT in your hookah pipe and smoke it Mustafa! :evil:

(this was due to the fact his icetime decreased as his game devolved in his party-hard old-age...)

And Doan scored 5 more goals in the PLAYOFFS versus Arnott's 1.
Mondi wrote: And yet you're thinking Doan at 4 times the price?
Actually a number of NHL GMs are thinking that (prolly cuz they do more than just scan the goals category). :roll:

Doan hits 10 times as often as Arnott and twice as hard, Doan checks/blocks-shots, Arnott doesn't, Doan....

wait a minute... find another teacher or just stick to your Goals Scored stats for all I care!! :twisted:

... but think about WHY Mr Doan is in fact going to get 4 times what Mr Arnott gets.Image

BTW, just curious, is it a coincidence you only slag Christian players (Booth, Luongo, Doan)?

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 2:08 pm
by Todd Bersnoozi
If the Canucks go out and get Arnott, I think they'll have to buyout or waive Malhotra.

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:11 pm
by SKYO
clem wrote:Arnott didn't leave St Louis on good terms.

He was upset about being pulled from the playoffs (after an injury slowed him - further - according to coaches).
That explains it, and with Kesler gone till December http://bit.ly/OJLUiw, I'd rather sign Arnott on a cheap one year deal to help with the Canucks center loss for a few months, possibly longer! :o Rather than try to see how the diminutive Schroeder can hold up, I think that is a little too long of time for a rookie like JS to try to shoulder on for this contender.

That is unless MG acquires something like Matthias(2nd/3rd line center), Ellerby and Petrovic for RL. :look:

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:25 pm
by Jovocop
Mondi wrote:
I like that last sentence...very astute SL. Thank "God" you noticed.

If Arnott has a bad attitude, we don't want him on the team. Doan will help, just not enough and he will be a terrible value at ages 38 and 39.
Knowing what MG likes and dislikes, would he even bother talking to Arnott if he has a bad attitude? Is it safe to assume that a NHL GM would know more about players than us, hockey fans?

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:41 pm
by clem
Arnott started last season well, but got burnt out by about Christmas. If he could repeat last year's pre-Christmas performance, it would fit well with the requirement to cover for Kesler while he is out. After that, Arnott may need a break.

But only if Gillis is satisfied with the attitude check.

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:44 pm
by Strangelove
... yep it's all about attitude. :mex:

I could see them signing him and waiving him when Kess comes back, depending on the return for Lou.

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:47 pm
by Strangelove
Mondi wrote:
Strangelove wrote: BTW, just curious, is it a coincidence you only slag Christian players (Booth, Luongo, Doan)?
I like that last sentence...very astute SL. Thank "God" you noticed.
Well ever since you told us you are a you-know-wot in the old OF I've been keeping an eye on you. :wink:

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 6:38 pm
by Chef Boi RD
Here is the million dollar question, "is it important to the success of an NHL franchise to have a good percentage of it's line-up being members of the Christian Faith, i.e. 'having the lord on our side above others'? If not a good percentage, what percentage shall that be and why only the Christian faith? What about, for instance, Sikhs, Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists?

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 6:53 pm
by tantalum
No idea but I do know you probably don't want any Rastafarians....

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 8:43 pm
by Strangelove
RoyalDude wrote: Here is the million dollar question, "is it important to the success of an NHL franchise to have a good percentage of it's line-up being members of the Christian Faith, i.e. 'having the lord on our side above others'? If not a good percentage, what percentage shall that be and why only the Christian faith? What about, for instance, Sikhs, Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists?
To put it in your vernacular: It don't matter none!

However you DO need a good percentage of assholes imesho (ever so).

Personally I think christian assholes are the best because hey you just can't beat that Crusader attitude!

By the way, about half of those on your non-Christian list like to call themselves Christian! :lol:

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:30 pm
by The_Pauser
RoyalDude wrote:Here is the million dollar question, "is it important to the success of an NHL franchise to have a good percentage of it's line-up being members of the Christian Faith, i.e. 'having the lord on our side above others'? If not a good percentage, what percentage shall that be and why only the Christian faith? What about, for instance, Sikhs, Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists?
I would like to see more Jehovah's Witnesses on our team.

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:07 pm
by Hoss
The_Pauser wrote:
I would like to see more Jehovah's Witnesses on our team.
I take it you are not a fan of the goal celebration, the win celebration, or any celebration for that matter.

Re: Arnott

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:17 pm
by ClamRussel
Apparently there's an offer of $1.2 on the table for Arnott to ponder.