bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 19:30 pm
No I’m literally asking you which players in the league bring it all? Name them.
I’ll name them after you name the players in the league where a cup winning coach said he doesn’t care about the game or his teammates … and that he makes too much money. Or saying rude things about his coach publicly and then crying … showing immaturity. And getting feedback from another coach and GM
Wait…I can’t really think of any comps recently. You?
Again, please show where Berube said anything about Kyrou.
You serious? You follow this team? Try not waste people’s time. Armstrong talked about Berube/Kyrou later on and addressed it. Berube later talked about it.
Are you gonna ask for links because you’re in left field. Get on google … laughing
Try again. Berube said Kyrou was a very hard worker and he loved the kids energy. He said that Kyrou probably regretted what he said, but that was just his passion speaking through and he had not hard feelings.
You are flat out making stuff up and lying as usual. Total loser. There is a reason nobody like you…..nobody.
It’s a waste of time.
You realize you are arguing with someone who thought Kyrou was a stud and referred to him as “the tongue” regularly on this forum.
Now the winds have changed direction again…and Kyrou is a horrible player and a horrible teammate….
Pronger44 doesn’t know much about hockey….and if you actually take him to the woodshed….he cries to the mods.
Real mature…..don’t waste your time….unless you want to do it for an easy laugh or two.
Kyrou said this below in 2019 after rehabbing his knee. It's been 6 years now I say your little things are your big things to work on
"I think I've matured a lot and the little things that I've got to do, like the little things along the walls," Kyrou said. "Really it's like the little things and competing harder.
"Last year playing in the 'A,' I learned a lot and also last year being here, I learned a lot. I've learned a lot watching the guys and practicing with them. I think I'm ready to go this year."
Bubble4427 wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 21:24 pm
It’s a waste of time.
You realize you are arguing with someone who thought Kyrou was a stud
Never once called him a stud. Talented yes…never called a stud.
You lie a lot and talk about me a lot for a guy who publicly stated I was on ignore.
I’ve hurt you. I’m not sorry.
To be fair, you did have posts about Kyrou and his tongue sticking out, which portrays you as riding that wagon. And I do not mind your posts. Many have been informative, but I wonder if it is still a "group" effort as was stated way, way back as an "experiment", as there are what seems different inflections, grammar, and at times immature vs. mature posts. The one consistency is that I have never, and I mean never seen you post a "solve" type of post, as in - what is your personal opinion to solve "X". You continually deflect, except for your views on Petro. Sure, he was a fine player but left the Blues long ago. He was not my favorite D-man, as he could not hold the puck at the point so very often - it would jump over his stick, or go under. I cannot count the times I said " Ahh come on, man"... As good as as he has been, his ability to stop and control the puck at the point was weak.
chuckt wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 14:51 pm
Do people think Kyrou's contract is bad value? He would get 9 in free agency. His age related decline will be outpaced by the rising cap. I bet his contract looks even better than it does now in two years.
I also am surprised no one believes Holloway's performance is not partially due to his chemistry with Kyrou. They, together, elevated Schenn to a serviceable number two center.
Because that doesn’t fit the agenda.
It's hilarious that people who act like they understand the game, especially on the business side, actually think his contract is bad. The few hockey illiterates here change their position on such things nearly everyday to ensure it fits whatever delusional narrative they are spinning at that time. It's quite comical.
chuckt wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 14:51 pm
Do people think Kyrou's contract is bad value? He would get 9 in free agency. His age related decline will be outpaced by the rising cap. I bet his contract looks even better than it does now in two years.
I also am surprised no one believes Holloway's performance is not partially due to his chemistry with Kyrou. They, together, elevated Schenn to a serviceable number two center.
Because that doesn’t fit the agenda.
It's hilarious that people who act like they understand the game, especially on the business side, actually think his contract is bad. The few hockey illiterates here change their position on such things nearly everyday to ensure it fits whatever delusional narrative they are spinning at that time. It's quite comical.
For those that don't manipulate the past to try and fit their agendas, Kyrous contract is an interesting case study. The reality is that when Kyrou got his contract, it was probably a bit too early. He hadn't really "earned" that and it caused strife in the locker room immediately. Others thought they should be getting paid and it turned into a distraction. He scuffled with consistency further questioning the contract. And for the past 2 seasons his play has risen. Currently his contract is at market value. And his contract with the growing cap projects to be a team friendly contract assuming same level of play. Those are all realities and facts. Anyone disputing that has an agenda.
The reason Kyrou's name pops up in trade talks is because he's an expendable asset. But it's also because other teams see that contract and would like to lock it down because they see it as being cost prohibitive as opposed to signing lesser players in free agency to similar deals. Kyrou has a high value contract and his name was floated out there a couple years ago. Army has always been open for business but you have to pay a high price for players he values. He has REPEATEDLY said that he doesn't understand why Kyrou became the lightning rod but that happens, similar to Parayko. Parayko is a great case study for Kyrou because he has one of the most valuable defensive contracts in the NHL. Every single team in the league would bend over backwards to have Parayko's contract on the books for the next 5 years.
Army gets an A++++ for Parayko's contract and Thomas contract. Right now he gets a B+ for Kyrou's and we will see how it plays out. My guess is that it is an A+ contract as well. And this is coming from someone who dogged Kyrou's play for a couple seasons.
chuckt wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 14:51 pm
Do people think Kyrou's contract is bad value? He would get 9 in free agency. His age related decline will be outpaced by the rising cap. I bet his contract looks even better than it does now in two years.
I also am surprised no one believes Holloway's performance is not partially due to his chemistry with Kyrou. They, together, elevated Schenn to a serviceable number two center.
Because that doesn’t fit the agenda.
It's hilarious that people who act like they understand the game, especially on the business side, actually think his contract is bad. The few hockey illiterates here change their position on such things nearly everyday to ensure it fits whatever delusional narrative they are spinning at that time. It's quite comical.
For those that don't manipulate the past to try and fit their agendas, Kyrous contract is an interesting case study. The reality is that when Kyrou got his contract, it was probably a bit too early. He hadn't really "earned" that and it caused strife in the locker room immediately. Others thought they should be getting paid and it turned into a distraction. He scuffled with consistency further questioning the contract. And for the past 2 seasons his play has risen. Currently his contract is at market value. And his contract with the growing cap projects to be a team friendly contract assuming same level of play. Those are all realities and facts. Anyone disputing that has an agenda.
The reason Kyrou's name pops up in trade talks is because he's an expendable asset. But it's also because other teams see that contract and would like to lock it down because they see it as being cost prohibitive as opposed to signing lesser players in free agency to similar deals. Kyrou has a high value contract and his name was floated out there a couple years ago. Army has always been open for business but you have to pay a high price for players he values. He has REPEATEDLY said that he doesn't understand why Kyrou became the lightning rod but that happens, similar to Parayko. Parayko is a great case study for Kyrou because he has one of the most valuable defensive contracts in the NHL. Every single team in the league would bend over backwards to have Parayko's contract on the books for the next 5 years.
Army gets an A++++ for Parayko's contract and Thomas contract. Right now he gets a B+ for Kyrou's and we will see how it plays out. My guess is that it is an A+ contract as well. And this is coming from someone who dogged Kyrou's play for a couple seasons.
Great recap, and spot on! And thanks for not injecting some [nonsense] opinion stuff that some on here do to further their agenda. None of us know truly what's going on inside, yet some act like their drivel is fact. Appreciate you sticking to actual facts.
Inglewood Jack wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 22:04 pm
To be fair, you did have posts about Kyrou and his tongue sticking out, which portrays you as riding that wagon. And I do not mind your posts. Many have been informative, but I wonder if it is still a "group" effort as was stated way, way back as an "experiment", as there are what seems different inflections, grammar, and at times immature vs. mature posts. The one consistency is that I have never, and I mean never seen you post a "solve" type of post, as in - what is your personal opinion to solve "X". You continually deflect, except for your views on Petro. Sure, he was a fine player but left the Blues long ago. He was not my favorite D-man, as he could not hold the puck at the point so very often - it would jump over his stick, or go under. I cannot count the times I said " Ahh come on, man"... As good as as he has been, his ability to stop and control the puck at the point was weak.
He deliberately and purposely antagonizes this board in the most immature ways possible.
All the years of the Vlad posts were as bazaar and weird as all the Petro posts but both had the same driving purpose in common.
Whatever he could be and what he actually is by choice are two very different things.
dhsux wrote: ↑15 Jul 2025 11:56 am
All the years of the Vlad posts were as bazaar and weird as all the Petro posts but both had the same driving purpose in common.
Tarasenko ended up just like people said he would when he was young. A selfish wash up like Semin
Thanks for remembering
Last edited by theograce on 15 Jul 2025 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Inglewood Jack wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 22:04 pm
To be fair, you did have posts about Kyrou and his tongue sticking out, which portrays you as riding that wagon. And I do not mind your posts. Many have been informative, but I wonder if it is still a "group" effort as was stated way, way back as an "experiment", as there are what seems different inflections, grammar, and at times immature vs. mature posts. The one consistency is that I have never, and I mean never seen you post a "solve" type of post, as in - what is your personal opinion to solve "X". You continually deflect, except for your views on Petro. Sure, he was a fine player but left the Blues long ago. He was not my favorite D-man, as he could not hold the puck at the point so very often - it would jump over his stick, or go under. I cannot count the times I said " Ahh come on, man"... As good as as he has been, his ability to stop and control the puck at the point was weak.
He deliberately and purposely antagonizes this board in the most immature ways possible.
All the years of the Vlad posts were as bazaar and weird as all the Petro posts but both had the same driving purpose in common.
Whatever he could be and what he actually is by choice are two very different things.
chuckt wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025 14:51 pm
Do people think Kyrou's contract is bad value? He would get 9 in free agency. His age related decline will be outpaced by the rising cap. I bet his contract looks even better than it does now in two years.
I also am surprised no one believes Holloway's performance is not partially due to his chemistry with Kyrou. They, together, elevated Schenn to a serviceable number two center.
Because that doesn’t fit the agenda.
It's hilarious that people who act like they understand the game, especially on the business side, actually think his contract is bad. The few hockey illiterates here change their position on such things nearly everyday to ensure it fits whatever delusional narrative they are spinning at that time. It's quite comical.
For those that don't manipulate the past to try and fit their agendas, Kyrous contract is an interesting case study. The reality is that when Kyrou got his contract, it was probably a bit too early. He hadn't really "earned" that and it caused strife in the locker room immediately. Others thought they should be getting paid and it turned into a distraction. He scuffled with consistency further questioning the contract. And for the past 2 seasons his play has risen. Currently his contract is at market value. And his contract with the growing cap projects to be a team friendly contract assuming same level of play. Those are all realities and facts. Anyone disputing that has an agenda.
The reason Kyrou's name pops up in trade talks is because he's an expendable asset. But it's also because other teams see that contract and would like to lock it down because they see it as being cost prohibitive as opposed to signing lesser players in free agency to similar deals. Kyrou has a high value contract and his name was floated out there a couple years ago. Army has always been open for business but you have to pay a high price for players he values. He has REPEATEDLY said that he doesn't understand why Kyrou became the lightning rod but that happens, similar to Parayko. Parayko is a great case study for Kyrou because he has one of the most valuable defensive contracts in the NHL. Every single team in the league would bend over backwards to have Parayko's contract on the books for the next 5 years.
Army gets an A++++ for Parayko's contract and Thomas contract. Right now he gets a B+ for Kyrou's and we will see how it plays out. My guess is that it is an A+ contract as well. And this is coming from someone who dogged Kyrou's play for a couple seasons.
In the new NHL with the salary cap, if you are a GM you'd much rather gamble a poor contract on a 23-25 year old than a 30 year old.
With the 23 year old you have a really good chance, even if he's overpaid, that they will improve, and at least a solid chance of getting a good return on the investment. As for the 30 year old, when they fall of the cliff that's it, it's over, there's very little chance for that contract to improve.
Florida with the re-signing of Bennett, Marchand, and Ekblad will be dealing with this exact scenario in the very near future.
