Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
rickross

MILAN LUCIC

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I guess at least Lucic has Cup winning experience.  Neal is always the bridesmaid and never the bride.

So true.  Plus, when Lucic speaks I expect people will listen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I didn't like the trade, but now I'm over it. I wish Lucic the best here. My expectations are limited for him. All I want is him to be noticable on the forecheck more often than not. If he can brings what Hathaway brought, then he will be a fan favorite.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what did James Neal do here that makes this such a bad trade? What was it that Neal provided that will be so sorely missed? I honestly remember Neal for losing teeth and being scratched in the playoffs. That’s it. Lucic’s contract is garbage but atleast he can still be effective when not scoring by hitting, fighting/intimidating. Neal wasnt sticking up for anyone, I can’t even recall a nice check he laid out, he provided next nothing to this team. Losing him isn’t really much of a loss at all tbh. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

At first I didn't like the trade, but now I'm over it. I wish Lucic the best here. My expectations are limited for him. All I want is him to be noticable on the forecheck more often than not. If he can brings what Hathaway brought, then he will be a fan favorite.

I hope that Lucic brings his presence too. He actually looks like a defensively responsible player which is amazing coming from Edmonton. While we are paying dearly for toughness. I rationalize it by thinking that we are overpaying Lucic by about $2 million or more, but we were already overpaying Neal by about $4.5 million given his performance. Treliving did partially fix the Neal debacle to some extent by getting value out of the contract with Lucic. Doing it this way, however, reminds people of the mistake last year. Like many others, I really thought that Neal would be our scoring threat. I cannot blame Treliving for Neal deciding to suck this year. So, this was "The Good, the bad, and the Ugly (Oilers)" trade. I just hope Treliving works some tres-magic before the summer is over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I hope that Lucic brings his presence too. He actually looks like a defensively responsible player which is amazing coming from Edmonton. While we are paying dearly for toughness. I rationalize it by thinking that we are overpaying Lucic by about $2 million or more, but we were already overpaying Neal by about $4.5 million given his performance. Treliving did partially fix the Neal debacle to some extent by getting value out of the contract with Lucic. Doing it this way, however, reminds people of the mistake last year. Like many others, I really thought that Neal would be our scoring threat. I cannot blame Treliving for Neal deciding to suck this year. So, this was "The Good, the bad, and the Ugly (Oilers)" trade. I just hope Treliving works some tres-magic before the summer is over. 

That Toronto deal would have been tremendous. Sucks it fell through. Hope he goes for something similar 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rickross said:

So what did James Neal do here that makes this such a bad trade? What was it that Neal provided that will be so sorely missed? I honestly remember Neal for losing teeth and being scratched in the playoffs. That’s it. Lucic’s contract is garbage but atleast he can still be effective when not scoring by hitting, fighting/intimidating. Neal wasnt sticking up for anyone, I can’t even recall a nice check he laid out, he provided next nothing to this team. Losing him isn’t really much of a loss at all tbh. 

 

I think about the days of Jagr and seem to have similar memories of Neal.

In fact, Jagr was in about the same shape as Neal, except Jagr felt unready.

 

I'm really disappointed in how Neal played here, so it doesn;t matter to me what he is when he leaves.

The trade bothers me from a cap management sense.

Garbage contract out, another one in.

Like Big Ern, Looch will win some fans here.

If he takes dumb penalties and loses us games, it will be different.

Then again, people still defended Smith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think about the days of Jagr and seem to have similar memories of Neal.

In fact, Jagr was in about the same shape as Neal, except Jagr felt unready.

 

I'm really disappointed in how Neal played here, so it doesn;t matter to me what he is when he leaves.

The trade bothers me from a cap management sense.

Garbage contract out, another one in.

Like Big Ern, Looch will win some fans here.

If he takes dumb penalties and loses us games, it will be different.

Then again, people still defended Smith.

🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rickross said:

So what did James Neal do here that makes this such a bad trade? What was it that Neal provided that will be so sorely missed? I honestly remember Neal for losing teeth and being scratched in the playoffs. That’s it. Lucic’s contract is garbage but atleast he can still be effective when not scoring by hitting, fighting/intimidating. Neal wasnt sticking up for anyone, I can’t even recall a nice check he laid out, he provided next nothing to this team. Losing him isn’t really much of a loss at all tbh. 

James Neal was an unmitigated disaster by all accounts.. The issue being.. He was slotted as a top 2 line right winger of which we are in desperate need of.. Lucic// At the same 6 million dollar price is a part time 4th line left winger of which there are a cazillion candidates .. Unless Neal actually screwed Harvey The Hounds wife and needed to leave immediately.. there is no fathomable explanation for this trade.. We now have the same hole on our top 2 lines offence and no money to fill the position

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Horsman1 said:

James Neal was an unmitigated disaster by all accounts.. The issue being.. He was slotted as a top 2 line right winger of which we are in desperate need of.. Lucic// At the same 6 million dollar price is a part time 4th line left winger of which there are a cazillion candidates .. Unless Neal actually screwed Harvey The Hounds wife and needed to leave immediately.. there is no fathomable explanation for this trade.. We now have the same hole on our top 2 lines offence and no money to fill the position

 

But we had the same hole with Neal here ..don't care what he did anywhere else , here he scored seven measly goals.. he was 3rd line at best

Czarnik outplayed him ..dude was /is replaceable IN HOUSE

 

When will people realize , these were 2 bad contracts.. people are acting like WE signed him for this money 

They are 2 different players with 2 different roles ..

We had to replace Hathaway..and we did it by reducing our cap $500k..

 

Without making any more moves (obviously we have to , but just sayin) we are a better team right now than opening night last year

 

Lucic is better than Hathway..that's all we should care about 

 

 

There were no other options with Neal.. you don't think BT told every single team in the league he was available ? Knew every offer available , from teams that even cares to make one ?  A buy out ?  An 8 year cap hit ? Seriously ?..no.. this was the only option. He saved $500k and improved the overall lineup.. this is a win ..a best case escape from a bad signing..

 

A bad signing I might add that nearly every single outlet called a major win for us last year ..

NOBODY saw this cliff dive coming 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

There were no other options with Neal.. you don't think BT told every single team in the league he was available ? Knew every offer available , from teams that even cares to make one ?  A buy out ?  An 8 year cap hit ? Seriously ?..no.. this was the only option. He saved $500k and improved the overall lineup.. this is a win ..a best case escape from a bad signing..

 

 

If I truly believed that Lucic was the best available in trade, then I might agree.

And considering that EDM was desperate to get rid of Lucic, I think BT could have done better.

Lucic had to be asked to waive, and actually had to be convinced to come to CGY.

 

This was a case that CGY wanted Lucic.  Plain and simple.

They paid sticker price.

A player with 10 seasons in a row of 20 goals with one bad season.

EDM was desperate to add a 20 goal guy.

EDM wanted Lucic moved, but was playing poker.

 

To us, this represents a reasonable deal.  We lose a bad contract of a one dimensional player.  We gain a player type we needed at times last season.

The player coming here will help us even if he isn;t scoring.

But, let's not pretend this was a good deal.

We bit on the deal at a time of the year when it didn;t need to be done.

None of this is an indictment of the player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

If I truly believed that Lucic was the best available in trade, then I might agree.

And considering that EDM was desperate to get rid of Lucic, I think BT could have done better.

Lucic had to be asked to waive, and actually had to be convinced to come to CGY.

 

This was a case that CGY wanted Lucic.  Plain and simple.

They paid sticker price.

A player with 10 seasons in a row of 20 goals with one bad season.

EDM was desperate to add a 20 goal guy.

EDM wanted Lucic moved, but was playing poker.

 

To us, this represents a reasonable deal.  We lose a bad contract of a one dimensional player.  We gain a player type we needed at times last season.

The player coming here will help us even if he isn;t scoring.

But, let's not pretend this was a good deal.

We bit on the deal at a time of the year when it didn;t need to be done.

None of this is an indictment of the player.

Contractually, acquiring Lucic makes no sense. For his production at this cost and term, it’s a terrible contract....especially at this time in the Flames window of contention. Either way, we were paying Neal more $ to be the even less effective player. It’s a head scratcher for BT, it almost reeks of desperation where he’s otherwise been patient and prudent. To his credit it is down to $5.25M so he did manage to save a bit of cap room. Seattle is close to Vancouver...he might be all too willing to move closer to home and once again try and revitalize his career with a new change of scenery. Ironically Lucic said he put too much pressure on himself in Edmonton to live up to his contract...now he expects that pressure to somehow relieve itself in Calgary? Big gamble by BT....if Lucic stinks up the place then BT goes right under the microscope and into the hot seat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

If I truly believed that Lucic was the best available in trade, then I might agree.

And considering that EDM was desperate to get rid of Lucic, I think BT could have done better.

Lucic had to be asked to waive, and actually had to be convinced to come to CGY.

 

This was a case that CGY wanted Lucic.  Plain and simple.

They paid sticker price.

A player with 10 seasons in a row of 20 goals with one bad season.

EDM was desperate to add a 20 goal guy.

EDM wanted Lucic moved, but was playing poker.

 

To us, this represents a reasonable deal.  We lose a bad contract of a one dimensional player.  We gain a player type we needed at times last season.

The player coming here will help us even if he isn;t scoring.

But, let's not pretend this was a good deal.

We bit on the deal at a time of the year when it didn;t need to be done.

None of this is an indictment of the player.

Are you suggesting that we turned down better deals simply because we wanted Lucic? All reports I've seen indicate this was initiated by Edmonton ..many suggest Connor himself due to them working out together 

 

 

I can't see what a Better Deal looks like. Any deal for Neal was always going to be something that fans would have a problem with 

Can't see any other trade that didn't involve US sweetening the deal.

Keeping salary in the books , adding draft picks .I've read more than once that ownership initially rejected the buyout of Brouwer but did finally say yes to sign Neal..so buying out Neal I'd say was never an option .

 

The idea that we ignored better offers I just can't see possible 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Are you suggesting that we turned down better deals simply because we wanted Lucic? All reports I've seen indicate this was initiated by Edmonton ..many suggest Connor himself due to them working out together 

 

 

I can't see what a Better Deal looks like. Any deal for Neal was always going to be something that fans would have a problem with 

Can't see any other trade that didn't involve US sweetening the deal.

Keeping salary in the books , adding draft picks .I've read more than once that ownership initially rejected the buyout of Brouwer but did finally say yes to sign Neal..so buying out Neal I'd say was never an option .

 

The idea that we ignored better offers I just can't see possible 

I would not blame the Flames for refusing to buy out another player. The owners distance themselves somewhat from day to day operations by hiring a staff to deal with these issues when you know some want to get more involved. It is their money after all. Then, they are asked to throw away money because a trade doesn't work out as planned? I would tell them to "fix it" myself.

 

Neal was a brutal signing. A lot of people, myself included, thought Treliving had made a very solid deal. After all, the dude was known as "the real deal" given his scoring consistency. So, how do you fix a player who is not performing? I cannot blame Treliving for acquiring Neal, and I hold my nose at getting Lucic, but this was likely a necessary evil. He turned nothing into something.

 

Now, if James Neal had dressing room issues that could have been identified by Treliving ahead of the trade ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Are you suggesting that we turned down better deals simply because we wanted Lucic? All reports I've seen indicate this was initiated by Edmonton ..many suggest Connor himself due to them working out together 

 

 

I can't see what a Better Deal looks like. Any deal for Neal was always going to be something that fans would have a problem with 

Can't see any other trade that didn't involve US sweetening the deal.

Keeping salary in the books , adding draft picks .I've read more than once that ownership initially rejected the buyout of Brouwer but did finally say yes to sign Neal..so buying out Neal I'd say was never an option .

 

The idea that we ignored better offers I just can't see possible 

 

I think this was a targeted deal.  There were many reports of EDM receiving underwhelming offers for Lucic (w/Puljujarvi).  If that was the starting point for negotiations, how is it all we got was $750k off Lucic in a one-for-one.  Holland was after a 20 goal guy.  Getting that while ridding themselves of the Lucic contract solved two problems.  BT suggested that they were looking at Lucic and they felt he was due a comeback.

 

If Turris was offered for Neal, would that be better?  Probably more likely to rebound, but not a heavy player and an extra year.  Not exactly a favorite of mine, but might not be an anchor contract as soon.  Nashville might have offered $750k to take that one off their hands.  They did pick up Duchene, so Turris may be not needed as much.  This is just speculation.  It makes sense from their perspective and they aren't shy to makes deals.  It was also one team that showed interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think this was a targeted deal.  There were many reports of EDM receiving underwhelming offers for Lucic (w/Puljujarvi).  If that was the starting point for negotiations, how is it all we got was $750k off Lucic in a one-for-one.  Holland was after a 20 goal guy.  Getting that while ridding themselves of the Lucic contract solved two problems.  BT suggested that they were looking at Lucic and they felt he was due a comeback.

 

If Turris was offered for Neal, would that be better?  Probably more likely to rebound, but not a heavy player and an extra year.  Not exactly a favorite of mine, but might not be an anchor contract as soon.  Nashville might have offered $750k to take that one off their hands.  They did pick up Duchene, so Turris may be not needed as much.  This is just speculation.  It makes sense from their perspective and they aren't shy to makes deals.  It was also one team that showed interest.

I get what you're saying, and I was actually somewhat surprised JP wasn't involved , but at the same time smoke in the air indicated Bennett was discussed ..and if that was the price , instead of salary retained and a potential pick, then I can see why that wasn't done 

 

I'd actually argue that Turris would be a worse decision.. he'd likely be another Neal, if he's not scoring he's useless ..plus I'm not sure Nash is still in a position to take on more cap. Plus had we done a deal like that , we'd still be looking for a Hathaway replacement 

 

No doubt ..BT wanted a heavy player ..always has, has been actively looking for one since Engelland left we signed Neal only after Reaves turned us down , so agreed  he would fit the bill.

 

All I'm saying is people need to seperate Neal and Lucic .. this is a 2 part deal, no argument we gave up the player who is most likely to save face..but Lucic wasn't picked up to replace Neal , he was brought to replace Hathaway

 

We shed a bad contract of a player who was never going to fit in here , and has already been replaced in the lineup..we won the west basically without and in spite of him ..and not only didn't pay a team to take him, we got paid 

 

We were already soft ..and loss of Hathaway made us even softer ..he needed to be replaced ..Lucic is a major upgrade to Hathaway..many will say we could have found his replacement for a million or less , but the reality is we replaced Hathaway for -$500K

 

Not calling it a win, it was a loss the minute the season ended with Neal being healthy scratched and only scoring 7 goals..  but I'd say for sure it was the best available save of a bad situation 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think people understand just how bad Neal was last season, he was far and away our worst player, I would say that he could have been the worst player in the NHL last season. I personally don't think Neal will score 20 goals again in this league.

 

I don't buy the he wasn't a fit or we didn't put him in the right role excuse, he was just plain bad. I also don't buy the whole he will bounce back because he is training with Roberts this summer, because he has been training with Roberts since he was 15 years old.

 

Don't get me wrong Lucic is not a good player, I just think he fits the role we need and Neal doesn't. I also think that Lucic is a better player than Neal even if Neal does somehow manage to score 20 goals. 

 

I was once on board with acquiring Turris, but when I think about what we need, Turris doesn't fit the bill. We already have a ton of soft skill players, and Turris isn't that skilled.

 

I honestly think there is a very good chance that Lucic finishes the year with more points than Neal. Maybe I am overly optimistic about Lucic, but I think that Neal really is as bad as he showed last year and don't think he improves.

 

Also the comment about him needing to be convinced to come to Calgary, the best way I heard it explained is that when you break up with your wife you don't just move to the neighbors house. Lucic probably wanted to get out of Alberta, and I don't blame him after the way he was treated by the Oilers and their fans.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I don't think people understand just how bad Neal was last season, he was far and away our worst player, I would say that he could have been the worst player in the NHL last season. I personally don't think Neal will score 20 goals again in this league.

 

I don't buy the he wasn't a fit or we didn't put him in the right role excuse, he was just plain bad. I also don't buy the whole he will bounce back because he is training with Roberts this summer, because he has been training with Roberts since he was 15 years old.

 

Don't get me wrong Lucic is not a good player, I just think he fits the role we need and Neal doesn't. I also think that Lucic is a better player than Neal even if Neal does somehow manage to score 20 goals. 

 

I was once on board with acquiring Turris, but when I think about what we need, Turris doesn't fit the bill. We already have a ton of soft skill players, and Turris isn't that skilled.

 

I honestly think there is a very good chance that Lucic finishes the year with more points than Neal. Maybe I am overly optimistic about Lucic, but I think that Neal really is as bad as he showed last year and don't think he improves.

 

Also the comment about him needing to be convinced to come to Calgary, the best way I heard it explained is that when you break up with your wife you don't just move to the neighbors house. Lucic probably wanted to get out of Alberta, and I don't blame him after the way he was treated by the Oilers and their fans.

 

1000% agree man.

 

McDavid can do magic so he can turn Neal into a 20-goal scorer, yet, simply scoring 20-goals riding shotgun with McDavid is not the measure of a good hockey player.  I agree with you, even if Neal scores 20 with McDavid, it doesn't change the fact that Lucic > Neal overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what Neal's value was in other GM's eyes.  I do know that Holland would not trade for him if he felt he would put up less than 20 points.

What he can achieve there is another topic entirely, and I really don't care since he wouldn't do much better here this year.

He's probably going to be a minus player with crappy fancy stats regardless.

 

All I can say is that a GM hoping to get rid of a NMC and $6m contract certainly got better than he should have.

Lucic would not have gotten them Turris, even with a cap savings of $750k.

That's all I am really saying here, not complaining so much about the player.

We overpaid plain and simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

I have no idea what Neal's value was in other GM's eyes.  I do know that Holland would not trade for him if he felt he would put up less than 20 points.

What he can achieve there is another topic entirely, and I really don't care since he wouldn't do much better here this year.

He's probably going to be a minus player with crappy fancy stats regardless.

 

All I can say is that a GM hoping to get rid of a NMC and $6m contract certainly got better than he should have.

Lucic would not have gotten them Turris, even with a cap savings of $750k.

That's all I am really saying here, not complaining so much about the player.

We overpaid plain and simple.

But this is why you have to view it as 2 seperate trades.

Lucic was signed in Edmonton to be a 20 goal power forward who could ride shotgun with McDavid .. his toughness was a plus

No arguing , he is not that player . They still have toughness without him in Kassian , nurse , etc ..  Edmonton ate 750m of his salary to move him 

In Calgary, we needed what they have too much of .. if he only scores 6 goals again.. but brings his other intangibles effectively. He's valuable here ..he was useless in Edmonton

 

Neal was signed to be a 20 goal leader .. bring attitude ..bring leadership.. he brought none of that . We have offense to replace him.we won't miss him in the lineup..so we traded him for a conditional 3rd round pick so Edmonton can gamble he can be that again..

 

if he busts they eat 6 years of cap to buy him out and still keep paying $750k of Lucic as well..that's nearly a $3m cap hit if Neal busts again this trade can end  up costing Edmonton 

 

One teams trash is another teams treasure

Personally I think we are taking less risk.. Lucic WILL bring us the non scoring attributes ..  Neal, is either bust or boom 

 

We save 500k cap hit ..and may get a 3rd rounder .. i seriously don't see the Lose here 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

But this is why you have to view it as 2 seperate trades.

Lucic was signed in Edmonton to be a 20 goal power forward who could ride shotgun with McDavid .. his toughness was a plus

No arguing , he is not that player . They still have toughness without him in Kassian , nurse , etc ..  Edmonton ate 750m of his salary to move him 

In Calgary, we needed what they have too much of .. if he only scores 6 goals again.. but brings his other intangibles effectively. He's valuable here ..he was useless in Edmonton

 

Neal was signed to be a 20 goal leader .. bring attitude ..bring leadership.. he brought none of that . We have offense to replace him.we won't miss him in the lineup..so we traded him for a conditional 3rd round pick so Edmonton can gamble he can be that again..

 

if he busts they eat 6 years of cap to buy him out and still keep paying $750k of Lucic as well..that's nearly a $3m cap hit if Neal busts again this trade can end  up costing Edmonton 

 

One teams trash is another teams treasure

Personally I think we are taking less risk.. Lucic WILL bring us the non scoring attributes ..  Neal, is either bust or boom 

 

We save 500k cap hit ..and may get a 3rd rounder .. i seriously don't see the Lose here 

 

For a team that lacked toughness, we got arguably THE toughest guy in the league.  

 

Don't forget the Sharks game where Kane called out our whole team and we responded by getting demolished on the scoreboard.  We played scared.  I think that impacted the rest of our season.  

 

I know the cap hit is crazy and I'm not trying to sugar coat it but to think we pay the same for Neal who doesn't bring anything, there's no contest.  If money didn't matter and we get to choose between Lucic or Neal, then we should choose Lucic every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, cccsberg said:

So true.  Plus, when Lucic speaks I expect people will listen.

 

Apparently Lucic has been a Captain "C" or "A" everywhere he's played.  Yes, when he speaks others listen.  And based on how he plays, he leads by example (not to say he's dominating but the effort only dragged down by skill).

 

We have a young core so hopefully he brings that leadership to help out.  Also make everyone feel safer and protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

For a team that lacked toughness, we got arguably THE toughest guy in the league.  

 

Don't forget the Sharks game where Kane called out our whole team and we responded by getting demolished on the scoreboard.  We played scared.  I think that impacted the rest of our season.  

 

I know the cap hit is crazy and I'm not trying to sugar coat it but to think we pay the same for Neal who doesn't bring anything, there's no contest.  If money didn't matter and we get to choose between Lucic or Neal, then we should choose Lucic every time.

 

I don't think they played scared.  I think they took it to be a throwing of the gauntlet and reacted by playing to hit, expecting SJS to come at us hard.

Instead, they psych'd us.

Everytime Eric Francis opens his mouth about stuff, the Flames overreacted.

I wish we had traded him for Louie Debrusk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't think they played scared.  I think they took it to be a throwing of the gauntlet and reacted by playing to hit, expecting SJS to come at us hard.

Instead, they psych'd us.

Everytime Eric Francis opens his mouth about stuff, the Flames overreacted.

I wish we had traded him for Louie Debrusk.

 

If we had a Lucic, then the psych wouldn't have worked.  Someone in the room should've said, "I'll take care of Kane.  You guys go play hockey.". 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are giving Kane way too much credit for that game.  IMO that game we were completely fine effort level we were the more aggressive team but also the smarter team.   David Rittich was not ready and Mike Smith didn’t stop the bleeding, but we weren’t scared or going out of our way to impose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I think you are giving Kane way too much credit for that game.  IMO that game we were completely fine effort level we were the more aggressive team but also the smarter team.   David Rittich was not ready and Mike Smith didn’t stop the bleeding, but we weren’t scared or going out of our way to impose.

 

We came ready for a brawl (because they psyched us).  They came ready for a hockey game.  We lost the hockey game.

 

I don't think that's an outlying view of the game.  That's pretty consensus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...