I missed his nomination somewhere and formally recind my support for Luongo.
I think there is an interesting argument for Luongo as injury/suckage protection on Brodeur, but Kipper stands a chance of being one of the top dogs, and two is better than one.
Bob thinks that I should go with Getzlaf instead of Radulov but I figure the Russians enjoy piling up the pts in the round robin more than the Canadians do so I'll keep with him.
Please advise if any changes before noon Tuesday
ReplyDeleteKopitar is Slovenian, and since Slovenia isn't in the tournament I reccomend the OOCC consider a replacement (Perry!).
ReplyDeleteAs for a goalie other than Luongo to backup the OOCC, my impression is the options are rather limited.
Looking forward to some Olympic Hockey! Will be a nice break from Flames hockey - especially if Canada wins gold.
ReplyDeleteWell can we get a new nominee from Mike?
ReplyDeleteAlso the OOC needs to pick between Luongo and Kipper as goalie #2...
For the CC - any objection to Nabokov/Lundqvist (specifically anyone prefer Miller)?
Appreciate any help finalizing these
I promote Kipper!
ReplyDeleteI missed his nomination somewhere and formally recind my support for Luongo.
I think there is an interesting argument for Luongo as injury/suckage protection on Brodeur, but Kipper stands a chance of being one of the top dogs, and two is better than one.
Echo the comments re Kopitar. Go with Perry.
ReplyDeleteBob thinks that I should go with Getzlaf instead of Radulov but I figure the Russians enjoy piling up the pts in the round robin more than the Canadians do so I'll keep with him.
Agree with Kipper over Luongo, however.
I will replace Kopitar with Perry.
ReplyDeleteI also vote for Kipper.
Fellow Calgary conference members: I fully support Lundqvist over Miller... I think Sweden has better chance of going further than US does.
ReplyDeleteI think goalie stats should remain same as FUNHL method, but no big deal if consencus is that we go with non-FUNHL method for this.