Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 201 to 211 of 211

Thread: Tony DeAngelo's Holdout

  1. #201
    Russian Meddling BSBH Rookie
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    28,426
    Rep Power
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    The problems he had in the past before he got here you referenced are problems and why he has his label. His “maturity” issues Quinn references is not him abusing an official, using racial slurs or anything like that. The maturity issues from the games that led to his benching was bad discipline during those games. was it not? Maybe I’m wrong but I’m not being lazy. But here you go again taking a conversation past what it needs to be. About the substance of the topic not about what you perceive me to be. Maturity issues can mean a lot of things. And they like the offer that he’s been made is based upon assumption. The offer has been reported as $875m by Larry Brooks. The maturity issues from that article does not say what they are. Kreider, Miller, Hayes, chytil, etc have all seen street cloths in recent years due to maturity issues of some sort. They do t have his history of course but deangelo is still a young kid trying to learn what it takes to be a pro. Maturity issues could be as simple as that
    Quinn came out and said he benched him for saying something after a goal against. He made a comment during camp last season, too.
    Other than that, I dont recall serious "problems". Its essentially a clash in personalities. Like Buch getting benched for having a look on his face during practice.
    Lias Andersson for #AJT2019

  2. #202
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,641
    Rep Power
    38
    “poor tony”? Not at all what I’m saying. He has a point. Players have contract disagreements all the time. Its pathetic how every single conversation has to take these childish turns. The rangers have the leverage and their reasons which are valid. DeAngelo has his valid reasons too. It’s a negotiation. This is not an example of his prior off ice issues. It’s a fucking contract disagreement about money. Disagreeing with his stance has some validity. So why not keep it there instead of trolling?

  3. #203
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,641
    Rep Power
    38
    And no his prior problems shouldn’t effect him making $1.25m a year for 1 season. The rangers demanded him be in the trade when they got him. They wanted to give him another chance. For the most part he’s been a solid citizen here outside of a comment here and there. Young players get benched all the time for all hosts of reasons. He has a past no doubt. The rangers though gave him a clean slate when he came here. Now you want to hold his past in other organizations against him? I get it if you’re talking long term or big money. But you’re talking 1 year less than $2m. Its a joke

  4. #204
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    77,941
    Rep Power
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    And no his prior problems shouldn’t effect him making $1.25m a year for 1 season. The rangers demanded him be in the trade when they got him. They wanted to give him another chance. For the most part he’s been a solid citizen here outside of a comment here and there. Young players get benched all the time for all hosts of reasons. He has a past no doubt. The rangers though gave him a clean slate when he came here. Now you want to hold his past in other organizations against him? I get it if you’re talking long term or big money. But you’re talking 1 year less than $2m. Its a joke
    What in this post is factual?

    Where's the link to the Rangers "demanding" him?

    His prior problems are clearly carrying over here.

    He's had no issues here... Except the ones he got benched for.

    You're going in circles. That's the joke.

  5. #205
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    jsrangers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    844
    Rep Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    The rangers have the leverage.
    correct and in the end nothing else matters.

  6. #206
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,641
    Rep Power
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    What in this post is factual?

    Where's the link to the Rangers "demanding" him?

    His prior problems are clearly carrying over here.

    He's had no issues here... Except the ones he got benched for.

    You're going in circles. That's the joke.
    It was widely reported they insisted on him just like they did Hajek in the trade with Tampa. I’m not going back and looking it up because quite frankly you aren’t worth the time. You would argue the sky being blue.

    “Problems clearly carrying over,” is that fact? According to you nobody knows what they offered or why. Yet “clearly” it’s fact that his past is the problem here.

    I’m not going to circles. My post has not changed. Yours has from No leverage, not needed or missed, off ice problems, to finally when you clearly don’t have a valid point, tell him it will be ok sport. You antics are clear and old. Somehow you’re allowed to daily spew you’re disrespect and your arrogance (kind of like deangelo) towards numerous people on this board.

    On blue shirt banter right this minute there is an article written by joe Fortunato that is basically saying exactly what I’ve been for days here. It’s not some crazy opinion that I’m offering. Both parties have a point here. The only negativity is directed at the player.

    Yes he’s been benched. Him, Staal, skeij, buch, hank, and ever player not named mikka or Jesper has been benched last year. He’s a you a player, a defenseman no less. They get benched all the time. You don’t know the facts about why he was benched. Two games in February due to maturity issues. What the hell does that mean. Buch had the same problem yet he just got $3m.

  7. #207
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    77,941
    Rep Power
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    It was widely reported they insisted on him just like they did Hajek in the trade with Tampa.
    So it shouldn't be an issue to find the links? Because I looked, and nothing said they "insisted on him". What I found is Yotes insisting on Raanta, and the Rangers acknowledging the character issues that you seem to gloss over.

    I’m not going back and looking it up because quite frankly you aren’t worth the time. You would argue the sky being blue.
    "But here you go again taking a conversation past what it needs to be. About the substance of the topic not about what you perceive me to be."

    “Problems clearly carrying over,” is that fact? According to you nobody knows what they offered or why. Yet “clearly” it’s fact that his past is the problem here.
    His past isn't the problem. It's his current maturity issues. Like the coach is fucking telling us why ADA got benched and you're like "No one knows, young guys get benched for many reasons." It's deliberately obtuse.

    I’m not going to circles. My post has not changed. Yours has from No leverage, not needed or missed, off ice problems, to finally when you clearly don’t have a valid point, tell him it will be ok sport.
    OK, you have one point. ADA is "allowed" to hold out. You're right, I don't have a valid point. I have more than one. And I've backed them up. Something you fail to ever do.

    You antics are clear and old. Somehow you’re allowed to daily spew you’re disrespect and your arrogance (kind of like deangelo) towards numerous people on this board.
    But here you go again taking a conversation past what it needs to be. About the substance of the topic not about what you perceive me to be.

    But keep taking shots. You're clearly annoyed because you're kind of getting owned, not by me, but just by the actual links that I'm posting to support my argument...Something you can't do because there's no facts supporting yours.

    On blue shirt banter right this minute there is an article written by joe Fortunato that is basically saying exactly what I’ve been for days here. It’s not some crazy opinion that I’m offering. Both parties have a point here. The only negativity is directed at the player.
    Could not care less what a blogger thinks.

    Yes he’s been benched. Him, Staal, skeij, buch, hank, and ever player not named mikka or Jesper has been benched last year. He’s a you a player, a defenseman no less. They get benched all the time. You don’t know the facts about why he was benched. Two games in February due to maturity issues. What the hell does that mean. Buch had the same problem yet he just got $3m.
    I actually do know the facts, MATURITY ISSUES. Someting "Staal, skeij, buch, hank, and ever player not named mikka or Jesper" are not guilty of.

    Buch got paid because he's a better player. Something that, you know, matters when you're negotiating a contract.

  8. #208
    Senior Member Mite Division tphilly5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    127
    Rep Power
    1
    DeAngelo will sit, miss out on good money, and possibly a long term opportunity. Time for him to fold his bad hand and get a new deal.

  9. #209
    Banned Junior Division
    CCCP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    5,362
    Rep Power
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by tphilly5 View Post
    DeAngelo will sit, miss out on good money, and possibly a long term opportunity. Time for him to fold his bad hand and get a new deal.
    ...in russia

  10. #210
    Currently in the Quinn-Bin Bantam Division
    Ozzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Suffolk County, NY
    Posts
    1,316
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by CCCP View Post
    ...in russia
    Actually I was thinking that he may get traded for...
    Then go to Oakland, where he'll get frostbite on his feet....
    Then have a problem with the regulation jock he's wearing...and lose his appeal to wear it....TWICE!
    Then his contract will get voided out for being an ass hat, and sign with New England to play with Tom Brady.


    Oh wait, I think I've I seen this somewhere before???

  11. #211
    Senior Member BSBH Prospect
    Blue Heaven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Queens
    Posts
    10,473
    Rep Power
    104
    Tony D is back according to NYR Facebook Page

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •