Vinnie

Flycoon busily composed on 3/30/2007 :
> "KerplunKuK" wrote in message
>
>> Nice to see some passion from Vinnie in tonight's first period with a
>> couple of good hits. Also good to see some of the bigger men defending
>> Vinnie. A good fight to take IMO
>>
>> -- XBL : D0C RAY
>
> Funny that "they" were saying that this is Brad's team before the season
> started. If Vinny doesn't wear the "C" next year, he will be wearing someone
> else's sweater the following season.

He certainly deserves the C.

Richards is going to get it, tho, 99.999999999999% sure.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

In L. Scribbled:

> He certainly deserves the C.
>
> Richards is going to get it, tho, 99.999999999999% sure.

Strange you should say that. We don't get much Bolts hockey here in the UK,
but they were discussed on our show this week and they said Vinnie was the
ideal replacement for Taylor, and they spoke to some reporter from the Tampa
Tribune who said he was 99% sure it would go to him.
Would being the C effect Vinnies game or enhance it though?
--
XBL : D0C RAY
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

KerplunKuK busily composed on 3/31/2007 :
> In L. Scribbled:
>
>> He certainly deserves the C.
>>
>> Richards is going to get it, tho, 99.999999999999% sure.
>
> Strange you should say that. We don't get much Bolts hockey here in the UK,
> but they were discussed on our show this week and they said Vinnie was the
> ideal replacement for Taylor, and they spoke to some reporter from the Tampa
> Tribune who said he was 99% sure it would go to him.

Interesting because all reports here indicate it will be Richards,
including a quote from the coach along the lines that he is being
groomed for it.

> Would being the C effect Vinnies game or enhance it though?

I wonder more if *not* wearing the C would upset him enough to get him
off his game. Vinny made it very clear when the C was taken from him
and given to Dave Andreychuk that he wanted it back when it was time.
I think he's more than shown he could handle it, while Richards'
problems handling the pressure of his contract make me leery of how
he'd react to the combined pressure of his contract and the C. And, no
knock to Richards as a player, I simply don't think he has an assertive
enough personality. Of course, perhaps Torts is looking for more of a
"yes man" than Vincent would be. Who knows.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

> I wonder more if *not* wearing the C would upset him enough to get him off
> his game. Vinny made it very clear when the C was taken from him and
> given to Dave Andreychuk that he wanted it back when it was time. I think
> he's more than shown he could handle it, while Richards' problems handling
> the pressure of his contract make me leery of how he'd react to the
> combined pressure of his contract and the C. And, no knock to Richards as
> a player, I simply don't think he has an assertive enough personality. Of
> course, perhaps Torts is looking for more of a "yes man" than Vincent
> would be. Who knows.

Maybe you guys here know better than I would, how tactful is Vinny's
approach? I would see Richards as being more professional with his attitude
and how he handles himself compared a biased opinion of LeCav being a little
more undiciplined (which may have changed for the better if his character
reflects his maturity on this ice). Vinny is definantly stronger when it
comes to getting a point across but sometimes it's how you handle things
that might make Richards more capable.

Semper Fi,
J
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

"James & Tara Adams" wrote in message

>> I wonder more if *not* wearing the C would upset him enough to get him
>> off his game. Vinny made it very clear when the C was taken from him and
>> given to Dave Andreychuk that he wanted it back when it was time. I
>> think he's more than shown he could handle it, while Richards' problems
>> handling the pressure of his contract make me leery of how he'd react to
>> the combined pressure of his contract and the C. And, no knock to
>> Richards as a player, I simply don't think he has an assertive enough
>> personality. Of course, perhaps Torts is looking for more of a "yes man"
>> than Vincent would be. Who knows.
>
> Maybe you guys here know better than I would, how tactful is Vinny's
> approach? I would see Richards as being more professional with his
> attitude and how he handles himself compared a biased opinion of LeCav
> being a little more undiciplined (which may have changed for the better if
> his character reflects his maturity on this ice). Vinny is definantly
> stronger when it comes to getting a point across but sometimes it's how
> you handle things that might make Richards more capable.
>
> Semper Fi,
> J

Your perception of Lecavalier is based upon what he showed as an 18-21 yo
playing in the NHL, not the version of Vinny we have seen in Tampa the last
4 seasons. Brad is as dull as drying paint, he is as forceful an off ice
personality as he is a battling for loose pucks on the boards or finishing a
check.

Vinny has truly arrived, Brad has taken several steps backwards this season.

But all that really matters is you are a long time Vinny basher, right J?
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

James & Tara Adams busily composed on 3/31/2007 :
>> I wonder more if *not* wearing the C would upset him enough to get him off
>> his game. Vinny made it very clear when the C was taken from him and given
>> to Dave Andreychuk that he wanted it back when it was time. I think he's
>> more than shown he could handle it, while Richards' problems handling the
>> pressure of his contract make me leery of how he'd react to the combined
>> pressure of his contract and the C. And, no knock to Richards as a player,
>> I simply don't think he has an assertive enough personality. Of course,
>> perhaps Torts is looking for more of a "yes man" than Vincent would be.
>> Who knows.
>
> Maybe you guys here know better than I would, how tactful is Vinny's
> approach? I would see Richards as being more professional with his attitude
> and how he handles himself compared a biased opinion of LeCav being a little
> more undiciplined (which may have changed for the better if his character
> reflects his maturity on this ice). Vinny is definantly stronger when it
> comes to getting a point across but sometimes it's how you handle things that
> might make Richards more capable.

I would guess you would only need to look at how the young man handled
the two years Torts blasted him daily in the media. He never once --
*not once* -- fired back, even when prodded and goaded by the press to
do so. The only comment I ever heard him say was "the coach and I have
different philosophies on how to handle the media." He was the far
more mature participant in that ongoing saga and if he could handle
himself that well at 22, I think at 27-28 he'd handle the
responsibility just fine. He stands up for his teammates both verbally
with the officials (something Brad is doing more but it's still pretty
rare) and physically with their opponents (something Brad never does).
I heard someone say the C goes to someone the players respect, and
since his captain and teammates have been calling him the best player
in the NHL this season, and from what I've observed at practices,
Vincent has their utmost respect.

I think Brad is fine as an A - he can speak up in the room, but IMO the
C needs to go to someone who is more visible on the ice.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

James & Tara Adams busily composed on 4/1/2007 :
>> But all that really matters is you are a long time Vinny basher, right J?
>
> I never "bashed" Vinny, I just said that Brad was better and until this year,
> he was. I joined the bandwagon with the anti-Michael Jordan of hockey
> because at the time he wasn't

You should bash the stupid owner who made the remark, not the player.
Vincent never claimed any such thing and to bash him because Art
Williams had a big, hockey-ignorant mouth is foolish.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

> Richards was never part of the conversation. But if you feel the need to
> show your man-crush on him a bit more, have at it.

Read the conversation. And the intention was to talk about hockey, not man
crushes, so I'm sorry to disappoint you.

> Richards was in the top 5 of "most over rated" in a recent poll of NHL
> platyers.

Due to his salary, and I'll agree to that, like I have been all season
that's he's underachieved for his salary. "Personally" I don't like him but
if I were a coach of a hockey team, I'd be happy to be bring him on still.

Semper Fi,
J
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

> You should bash the stupid owner who made the remark, not the player.

Art Williams did a lot of stupid things but in hindsight, he was big part of
the Bolts staying in Tampa with the Maloofs wanting to move them to Arizona.
I think he was just trying to market his team a little, but, not that I know
anything, I feel Vinny was taking it to his head (not that I blame an 18
year old kid living the high life getting comments like that from his check
signer and coach)

> Vincent never claimed any such thing and to bash him because Art Williams
> had a big, hockey-ignorant mouth is foolish.

But again, when did I actually "bash" Vinny? If anything I rode the media
bandwagon about his mentality and from what today's reports still say, he
did have a big head back then. Not that I'm taking anything back but of all
the players I have bashed, I've always had the asterisk over Vinny saying
that he was really good.

Semper Fi,
J
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

James & Tara Adams busily composed on 4/3/2007 :
>> You should bash the stupid owner who made the remark, not the player.
>
> Art Williams did a lot of stupid things but in hindsight, he was big part of
> the Bolts staying in Tampa with the Maloofs wanting to move them to Arizona.

No question in my mind that Art Williams saved this franchise.

Still doesn't mean anyone should hold the "Michael Jordan of hockey"
remark against the player.

> But again, when did I actually "bash" Vinny? If anything I rode the media
> bandwagon about his mentality and from what today's reports still say, he did
> have a big head back then.

Just to satisfy my own curiosity, can you provide some links to or
quotes from "today's reports" about this?
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

James - Tara Adams busily composed on 4/21/2007 :
> Then why was Torts arguing that he should have been traded because of his
> cocky attitude?

You're going to have to show me a source for that one. I know I've
never heard him say that.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

James - Tara Adams busily composed on 5/2/2007 :
> Can't get much more plain than this (from the second story):
>
> "For the coach, off ice, closed-door discussions were private, but the fire
> alarm went off more than once. Tortorella had players who were going to buy
> the team concept he proposed and fill their roles in his system — or not
> play. That included the stars.
> One of those stars was Vincent Lecavalier, the Bolts' first-overall pick in
> 1998. Lecavalier wanted to skate and shoot, glide and glitter. Tortorella
> wanted attack and backchecking, hits and consistency.
>
> Feaster wanted his coach and top star to get along and win. Tortorella said
> that would happen when Lecavalier played as he was told. Lecavalier sulked,
> complained and eventually grew weary.
>
> Feaster told Tortorella, "I'm not firing you." He told Lecavalier, "I'm not
> trading you." Resolve the problem, gentlemen. Not bad for a recovering
> lawyer."

I ask again... where does that say that Torts was "arguing for Vinny to
be traded"?

Answer - nowhere.

Torts has never argued for Vinny to be traded. They butted heads when
he completely tore apart Vinny's game. The cause was good, the
transition was understandably difficult.

Only one person in the Lightning organization has *ever* lobbied for
the trade of Vincent Lecavalier. That was Rick Dudley, and it got him
fired.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie 

"Sharon L." wrote in message

> James - Tara Adams busily composed on 5/2/2007 :
>> Can't get much more plain than this (from the second story):
>>
>> "For the coach, off ice, closed-door discussions were private, but the
>> fire alarm went off more than once. Tortorella had players who were going
>> to buy the team concept he proposed and fill their roles in his system —
>> or not play. That included the stars.
>> One of those stars was Vincent Lecavalier, the Bolts' first-overall pick
>> in 1998. Lecavalier wanted to skate and shoot, glide and glitter.
>> Tortorella wanted attack and backchecking, hits and consistency.
>>
>> Feaster wanted his coach and top star to get along and win. Tortorella
>> said that would happen when Lecavalier played as he was told. Lecavalier
>> sulked, complained and eventually grew weary.
>>
>> Feaster told Tortorella, "I'm not firing you." He told Lecavalier, "I'm
>> not trading you." Resolve the problem, gentlemen. Not bad for a
>> recovering lawyer."
>
> I ask again... where does that say that Torts was "arguing for Vinny to be
> traded"?
>
> Answer - nowhere.
>
> Torts has never argued for Vinny to be traded. They butted heads when he
> completely tore apart Vinny's game. The cause was good, the transition
> was understandably difficult.
>
> Only one person in the Lightning organization has *ever* lobbied for the
> trade of Vincent Lecavalier. That was Rick Dudley, and it got him fired.
>

Let's not let those fact thingies get in the way of what J wants to believe
about Vinny. He is obviously one of those "player haters" so jealous of
extraordinary talent that the mere thought of him being as decent a person
as he is a great hockey player makes him even nuttier.

Pretty much like the crowd that hated Clinton because he was too smart and
well spoken and loved Bush because he was just like some everyday dude you'd
meet sitting on a barstool on Nebraska Avenue after a long day driving a tow
truck.
 >> Stay informed about: Vinnie