this isn't a "pick em" bet, assuming you understand what that means.
I'm being generous by letting you pick how much you will pay me.
even if 2 since 1980 it is still better than the rangers.
elFreak
this is for you.
at least we have more meat in this thread now.
sean5
frenchie, the point of odds are to give incentive to those who wish to bet on the least likely outcome. more risk = more reward. in this scenario YOU made the offer to bet $100 that the rangers would lose in the first round. how then do you think you get better odds. the fact that you made the bet would tell the average person that the odds are in your favor meaning you should be paying me more money. quit trying to squirm out of the deal frenchie and just put up $100 usd. i don't care about youtube videos or stanely cups won when my grandparents were losing their virginity. you bet $100 that rangers would lose in the first round and i took you up on that plain and simple.
elFreak
It must suck that a "frenchie" has a better grasp of the English language than you.
sean5
lol frenchie, do you wear a visor just to surf the web? frenchmen can't even man up to bets they make hahaha.
L.E.N.
Vlad
Can we please let the Rangers get to 20 wins first before we start talking all this nonsense.
verndogs
quote:
Originally posted by elFreak
how are they underachieving?
they went further than the blue shirts last year.
lol..by what? a day or two? :P
verndogs
As for the Rangers:
I hated the Naslund signing. He's so washed up it's not even funny.
I was a bit skeptical about the Voros signing, but he's a nice cheap alternative as the Avery replacement with just as much production :).
Redden was a necessity because our D line is lacking. Yeah, he was way overpaid, but I can live with it. I'll take him over that useless piece of crap Tom Poti and that bumblin stumbln Marek Malik.
verndogs
quote:
Originally posted by elFreak
Lundqvist is the hope for the team, they will go as far as he takes them (which can be far, he is for real).
Pretty much.
DuBam
So we just acquired a former NHL player, and this guys career was a bit taller than that circus-midget :p
Can anyone tell me anything about Shawn Bates? Former Bruins and Isles center.
NHL Totals 465 72 + 126 = 198
Any comments, good or bad are very much appreciated :)
elFreak
quote:
Originally posted by verndogs
As for the Rangers:
I hated the Naslund signing. He's so washed up it's not even funny.
I was a bit skeptical about the Voros signing, but he's a nice cheap alternative as the Avery replacement with just as much production :).
Redden was a necessity because our D line is lacking. Yeah, he was way overpaid, but I can live with it. I'll take him over that useless piece of crap Tom Poti and that bumblin stumbln Marek Malik.
To be fair though, Redden has played a lot better than I expected him to. I still am not sold on him, and i still think he will fail. He was one of the biggest reasons (minus goaltending) that Ottawa consitently choked when they had the power house teams. When you play 20 minutes a game and you defend like a 5 th d man, no matter how much offense you have on the team it is not going to end up well. Those years when he was one of the better guys on the Canadian National team seem behind him.
We did win the conference last year...but you could also say i'm throwing shots (avery like:p) to get a little more participation in this thread. You could also say it is working.
BTW Sean, i did wear a visor, because i was a goalie. I'm not french, but you will always be american.
@ Dubam...Shawn Bates was a utility player. Just a guy to eat up minutes and fore check. When the league really cut down on clutching and grabbing, he became useless. He could however be a good add to your team on the pk...also could be good because the size and speed of players in your league is a little less.
