Sign in to follow this  
VinceCT

WhalerTalk, My Assessment

Recommended Posts

>>>So at least we're in agreement that the Ferraro trade got them less then what he was worth.

It took a while, but thanks Vince. It's about time you came around.<<<

Once again your attempts at wit are failures in execution.

 

>>>Vince is usually at one game per year whether he knows it or not...<<<

This has looooong since jumped the shark. Time to think about something else Liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off if you want to win the Ferraro debate you can have it, because it still doesnt change the main point, that the Whalers made lousy trades to dump salary and try and catch lightening in a bottle on has been players and never will be players, more than not, which is why attendance continued to drop in Hartford. Colonial Reality needed money to hide their scam.

 

Secondly if that issue has "jumped the shark" then you wouldnt need to address it. I am giving you good advice Vince.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"First off if you want to win the Ferraro debate you can have it"

 

No he can't. Ray Ferraro for Doug Crossman, who turned into Doug Houda, was a horrible trade. Now, had the Whalers kept Crossman around for more than 40 games, and he had turned into something remotely close to what he was with the Islanders, then Vince would at least have a legitimate argument. But he doesn't. Not like that is anything new. The Whalers didn't get close to market value for Ferraro. That is not, I repeat, N-O-T debatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once again ask how much value can you get for someone in a major slump as Ferraro was when he was sent away? You continually avoid the question. That does not surprise me since you are mentally incapable of handling a discussion with me.

 

>>>Secondly if that issue has "jumped the shark" then you wouldnt need to address it. I am giving you good advice Vince.<<<

No you are not. Sometimes I have to address this continuing lie. I do not do it all the time but when it gets a little much something needs to be said. Now SShut Up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have answered this question many times, Vince. You can't look at 50 games (or so) and just base his value on that. You have to look at everything. And when you look at EVERYTHING, it's a bad trade. Again, it's not debatable.

 

Just admit that was a bad trade...Christ, you're wrong on so many other things, what the **** is one more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VINCE when someone brings up you at the game any reply other than 'yea I was there' is just going to be brought up again because you react to it. You sound guilty when you react to it. In conclusion if you want it to go away then it is actually you who should SShut up. Get it?

 

Lets try a test run: Vince you were there?

 

As for Ferarro I mentioned he scored over 400 goals so Crossman was just not a great trade. He was worth at least an additional draft pick at the least. And speaking Of avoiding topics the point of the thread is how many bad trades the Whalers made to try and bail themselves out of bad business deals in Colonial Realty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, this isn't about Ferraro, this is about getting fair value for him. And no matter what you say Vince, 40 games of Doug Crossman and 2+ years of Doug Houda, who might be the biggest stiff to ever wear a Whalers uniform, is NOT equal value.

 

During this slump Vince is referring to, by the way, Ferraro went 54 regular season games and 7 playoff games, scoring 11 goals and adding 19 *****ists. 30 points in 61 games, or...one point every other game. (source: http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/ferrara01.html) Now...while I will agree those numbers aren't good, especially when you consider the season before when he had 76 points (41G, 35A)...and the fact he was only 26 at the time of the trade...the Whalers absolutely could have...and SHOULD have received more in return than Doug Crossman, who was traded for Doug Houda.

 

So once again, Vince screams and whines when people don't do research, but when they do, as I just did...it makes him look foolish. This was a bad trade.

 

End of discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote :

> Correct. And the trade was actually made even worse when EJ traded

> Crossman 3 months later for Doug Houda.

 

I can't remember who exactly it was-I think it might've been the JI's Randy Smith-who started his column informing readers of the Crossman-Houda trade with, "Houda **** is this guy?"

 

Maybe it was Alan Greenberg; but I think it was Smith. It was a great line though, regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark is obviously mentally retarded so I will will try to say this a little clearer.

 

When Ferraro was traded he was on a real hot streak. According to my research he scored three goals in his final 42 games as a Whaler. Citing my previous posts that is one in the last 20 regular season games in 1990, the zero goals in the seven-game playoff versus Boston, and two in the first 15 games of the 90-91 season. Also according to previous research there was only one *****ist in those final 20 games in '90, three *****ists in the playoffs, and five *****ists in the first 15 of '90-91. So that is a total of 12 points in his last 42 Whaler games. To put it politely, he was ****ing canal water.

 

So what if he "was only 26 at the time of the trade". He was regressing at a staggering clip over two seasons and a playoff. I ask again, what can you get for someone on a major downswing? How long do you wait with a team that was 5-9-3 at that point? Once again you brainiacs think you could have done better. As if you really knew that this twerp was going to snap out of it.

 

The fact that you folks amazingly carry a torch for someone as insignificant Ray Ferraro is more proof that you really did not follow the game very closely and let personal feelings cloud you judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Now you're changing your parameters on your slump. Incredible.

 

Before, you were basing this on "the last half of the 1989/90 season, the playoffs, and the 1990/91 season before the trade". Now...it's his last 42 games. What's going to be next, changing it to the last 20 games when he had 2 goals?

 

Oh, and as for "snapping out of it", he had 40 goals the next season (1991/92). So yes, I'd say it was a pretty safe guess to say he would snap out of it, especially since he had 10 years left in his career.

 

The Whalers, for the Nth time, received Doug Crossman for Ferraro. Had Crossman stayed with the team for longer than 40 games, you might.....MIGHT, have an argument. But, you don't. Because Crossman was traded for Doug Houda. If you think that Doug Houda, who was basically little more than a cone on the ice that people skate around in drills, is equal value to Ray Ferraro, even a badly slumping Ray Ferraro, then you have simply no idea what the **** you are talking about.

 

And once again, for the Nth time, nobody is carrying a torch for Ray Ferraro, all anybody was saying was that his trade to the Islanders was a horrible one for the Whalers, and it actually got WORSE when the player he was traded for was shipped out 40 games later for Doug Houda. And it got worse still when Ferraro did snap out of it and ended up having a pretty decent NHL career for himself.

 

Oh, and if I am mentally retarded, that makes me about 1 zillion times smarter than you. I've seen bricks smarter than you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good trade with a slumping player is to wait it out till his stock goes up. That would have worked here but it didnt and the Whalers got the shaft in the deal.

 

Your not a good Whaler fan if you didnt appreciate Ferraro, as I have said poor performing players dont score over 400 goals in the sports most elite league. Vince when I am wrong I admit it, but I know you haven't learned how to do that yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>>Wow. Now you're changing your parameters on your slump. Incredible.<<<

I didn't change squat you moron. The corrected the numbers I had previously presented. Both sets prove my point.

 

>>>Oh, and as for "snapping out of it", he had 40 goals the next season (1991/92). So yes, I'd say it was a pretty safe guess to say he would snap out of it, especially since he had 10 years left in his career.<<<

Again you stupid dung heap, how long do you wait? Also who could tell how many years he would have left? Frankly he was a beneficiary of expansion but that is another argument.

 

>>>A good trade with a slumping player is to wait it out till his stock goes up. That would have worked here<<<

Again Petey how long do you wait? It already lasted over 40 games. There was no guarantee it "would have worked here".

 

>>>Your not a good Whaler fan if you didnt appreciate Ferraro,<<<

**** YOU!!! I appreciated the fact that Ferraro choked like a ***** doing a John vs. Boston in the playoffs. I appreciated the fact that when he was traded he was doing nothing. He was a middling, insignificant player who had a couple of decent seasons and one real good playoff run (with another team). For the time he spent here (parts of seven seasons) we should have expected more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry that you are so incorrigible. The **nniest thing you said was Ferraro was done at 26 years old. It's the only point you have tried to make and it's a small percentage of the bad trades the Whalers made even if you could prove the Ferraro trade was good you still lose the debate. The Whalers made bad trades that led to **rther attendance drop. I am getting to the point where we need to start deleting posts due to the fact that you get too defensive. it's obvious you getting over emotional about this issue. You are the most over sensitive person on this board. The personal attacks prove you cant handle a discussion.

 

Ray Ferraro the horrible hockey player

1258 Games Played

408 Goals Scored

490 *****ists

898 Points

 

68 Playoff Games Played

21 Playoff Goals Scored

22 Playoff *****ists

43 Playoff Points

 

Yea he was "insignificant" and he was a "middling" player

 

The good news for you is this is the "End of the Discussion" you were looking for earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" For the time he spent here (parts of seven seasons) we should have expected more."

 

Interesting. We should have expected more from Ferraro, but yet getting 40 games of Doug Crossman and 2 years of crappy Doug Houda was, in your eyes, enough to get for him in a trade.

 

Now you're contradicting yourself. Way to go, Vince. Yet, for some reason, you call me the retard. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got almost as much production out of Ken Linseman for the 30 seconds he was a Whaler than we got out of Crossman & Houda combined. Slumping or not, when you swap a talented #2 center away for little more than air, it's simply not a good trade for a team that set the benchmark for aw**l trades &-1982 aside- drafting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Crossman stayed a couple of years and put up around 50 pts/year as an offensive minded defenseman, OK, then at the very least Vince would have an argument. But for Crossman to only be here 40 games, and then for EJ to trade him for Doug "oh look at yet another player skate around me like I'm standing freaking still" Houda...the trade looks that much worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why I am "incorrigible" is that you have no idea what is actually being said.

 

>>> The **nniest thing you said was Ferraro was done at 26 years old.<<<

I did not say that. I said he was regressing. At 26 years old and in your seventh year it would seem reasonable to wonder if a player is worth keeping around especially on a team that is not exactly lighting up the league. Ferraro was not doing anything when he was traded, that is a fact. The Whalers were struggling at the time. I once again ask, how long do you wait for an established player to snap out of a slump. Do wait for another six game losing streak before doing anything? The point is accountability. Ferraro was going downhill. This time included a major flop in the playoffs against the team's arch rival. Why not hold someone accountable for their play? I guess that is too difficult for you to comprehend.

 

>>> if you could prove the Ferraro trade was good you still lose the debate.<<<

Show me where I said the Ferraro-Crossman trade was a "good" trade. You cannot because I never said it. The point was, and still is, what do you expect to get in return for a player who was stinking it up? It would be nice if you would accurately describe what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>>Ray Ferraro the horrible hockey player<<<

I never said he was "horrible". I said he was insignificant. He was also a mediocre journeyman of relatively little impact. Averaging 22 goals over 18 years is really not much. He plateaued at a young age. Sure there were a couple above average seasons but nothing that would indicate any star power. And once again there was no indication he was going to last as long as he did when he was shipped out.

 

>>>68 Playoff Games Played...43 Playoff Points<<<

Take out his John Druce-like run in 1993 and you get 23 points in 50 games. Again not very much and as I have said this includes the zero goal performance versus Boston in 1990.

 

>>>Interesting. We should have expected more from Ferraro, but yet getting 40 games of Doug Crossman and 2 years of crappy Doug Houda was, in your eyes, enough to get for him in a trade.<<<

When did I say that Crossman and Houda were All-Stars? My point stands what did you expect to get for someone who was not doing anything?

 

I am sorry you two are too mentally retarded to understand simple English. I am also sorry you have a very limited hockey IQ. Your stupidity and arrogance is very entertaining to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now, FINALLY, you have admitted that the Ferraro/Crossman trade wasn't a good one. That was my point from the very beginning!!!!!! Jesus Christ. It only took 55 replies for you to figure it out. Thanks Vince.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was nothing to FINALLY admit to. For the eight trillionth time, Ferraro was doing nothing when he was traded. He was an insignificant player. If we did not get much in return it was because there was not much to give. To grovel over him shows a lack of hockey a*****en. Your "point" was, as usual, pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this