Mark Stuart.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Mark Stuart.

    Signed a three year extension with the Thrashers today. Good for him. Hope he excels under Ramsay.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from LoyalBlackNGold. Show LoyalBlackNGold's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]Signed a three extension with the Thrashers today. Good for him. Hope he excels under Ramsay.
    Posted by callodthedom19[/QUOTE]

    agreed! the only real down side to adding all the new guys on bruins was the loss of mark stuart. i know he was not exactly happy about being traded away from the bruins a team that he felt should do well as they go forward towards the playoffs but he was a true bruin and hope he does well in Atlanta with his new deal.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jpBsSoxFan. Show jpBsSoxFan's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    Good luck Mark!!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    No matter what city the Thrashers are in Mark will do fine.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    Good for him. Always liked him bu McQaid made him expendable and he is too expensive to sit in the press box. Glad he has found a home....
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from abra-cadaver. Show abra-cadaver's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    Great signing for the Thrashers.  A 3 year extension at basically the same exact price per year that he was making this season.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]for 1.7 million? i almost want him back now
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]

    Actually, that is a little pricy for a third-pairing defenceman. McQuaid is only on the books for 525k.....
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from huscroft28. Show huscroft28's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    Good for Mark Stuart - a warrior gets justly rewarded.  I didn't like seeing him go but if he was the price for taking Wheeler off our hands and also making $ room for Kaberle, it had to be paid.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from LordByron77. Show LordByron77's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]for 1.7 million? i almost want him back now
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]
    No kidding. Thought the price would have been high as well. Maybe PC could have done this signing but with Kaberle and the rooks on D, no money left in the cap era.
    A Red and White who bleeds Black and Gold
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Griswal65. Show Griswal65's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    yar, good for Stuey....
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    Let's hope Stuart's frequency of lengthy injuries are a thing of the past.  Best of luck to him.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    That signing tells you that PC didn't want to commit to him.  Very reasonable contract for a pretty good player and a great signing for Atl.  PC should take note...that's how you extend a contract.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]That signing tells you that PC didn't want to commit to him.  Very reasonable contract for a pretty good player and a great signing for Atl.  PC should take note...that's how you extend a contract.
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]
    I wouldn't want to pay him 1mil + to ride the pine either.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    I'd take Stuart over Ference, especially at a savings of $500k annually over the next three years.  Not a knock on Ference, I like Stuart's game more, and is ultimately a better value from a cap perspective.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Mark Stuart. : the thing with him is, hes dependable and hes been doing it for a long time. darth quader has looked good this year, but its been what? like 50 games. I would have taken Stuart at 1.7 for the third pairing along with Ference at 2.25. A little pricey for the third pairing, but it is what it is
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]
    Ference brings a lot more to this team than anyone on these boards gives him credit for. I don't know what else he needs to do. McQuaid and Ference have been the most stable d pairing all year in not only Boston but (one of them at least) in the league. +/- 24 doesn't lie with those guys. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    Stuart and Ference are similar players, with similar injury history.  Stuart was +8 in 31 games this year and was a +20 in 2008-09.  Ference was +7 in 47 games in 2008-09.  Leadership? Again seem like similar players, just that Stuart is $550k cheaper per year.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]Stuart and Ference are similar players, with similar injury history.  Stuart was +8 in 31 games this year and was a +20 in 2008-09.  Ference was +7 in 47 games in 2008-09.  Leadership? Again seem like similar players, just that Stuart is $550k cheaper per year.
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]
    That's great except for at the time of the trade I wouldn't of wanted to split up the pairing of Ference/McQuaid. That's exactly why Stuart was still sitting up high.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Mark Stuart. : i have no problem with the trade, just saying in a perfect world i would prefer stuart at 1.7
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]
    In a perfect yes. But the hands the Bruins were dealt and how everything was going? No. PC did him a solid by sending him to a team where he is known and will be on the ice.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    PC also did Ference a solid when he gave him a 3-year extension that included a better than 50% raise, after missing over 30% of the games from 2007-08 to 2009-10. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]PC also did Ference a solid when he gave him a 3-year extension that included a better than 50% raise, after missing over 30% of the games from 2007-08 to 2009-10. 
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]
    Yep he did. For 3 seasons.
    1. Good Defensive D-man play when healthy
    2. Leadership in the lockerroom
    3. The record the B's had when he was healthy vs. the record when he was hurt.
    B's are always a better team statistically when Ference is in the lineup.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    The Bruins are statistically better with Ference in the line-up as compared to Stuart?  I'd like to see that data, please share.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]The Bruins are statistically better with Ference in the line-up as compared to Stuart?  I'd like to see that data, please share.
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]
    Did I say that? No, They are a lot better as a team when Ference is in the lineup i.e. healthy. They're a different team statistically when Ference is out of the lineup i.e. injured.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    The argument I am making is between Ference and Stuart, so I assumed you were trying to differentiate between the two.  I also assumed that your points 1 & 2 were true for both players:

    1. Good Defensive D-man play when healthy
    2. Leadership in the lockerroom

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]The argument I am making is between Ference and Stuart, so I assumed you were trying to differentiate between the two.  I also assumed that your points 1 & 2 were true for both players: 1. Good Defensive D-man play when healthy 2. Leadership in the lockerroom
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]
    No I wasn't I was saying that's why Ference got his contract. That doesn't mean I don't think Stuart has the same abilities or capabilities so don't say that's what I think.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from LUCICmilan17. Show LUCICmilan17's posts

    Re: Mark Stuart.

    In Response to Re: Mark Stuart.:
    [QUOTE]for 1.7 million? i almost want him back now
    Posted by pbergeron37[/QUOTE]



    Expecialy when you see P/C gave to ferrence for a contract
     

Share