ghdi Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/shownews.jsp?content=h081745A BRODEUR ON AL-MO: Star goalie Martin Brodeur was thrilled to hear that free-agent winger Alexander Mogilny was back in New Jersey for a second tour of duty. "I'm excited that Al-Mo and Vladdy Malakhov (signed earlier this month) are back - two guys that really helped us win the Stanley Cup in 2000, under Larry Robinson, who's back as our coach.," said Brodeur. "Al-Mo's a great guy, he loves New York and always wanted to be there." Brodeur asked reporters how much Mogilny signed for and found it interesting when told it was a $7-million US, two-year deal. "It's funny how it works, eh? Lou (Lamoriello) wouldn't give him that after we won the Stanley Cup (in 2000)," laughed Brodeur. "And now we have the new system and he gives him that." - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevilMinder Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Erm, not a good way to kiss the bosses arse there Marty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Ha...but that's what makes Brodeur so entertaining. He is balsy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher_watts31_ls Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 When you put up the numbers marty puts up your arse gets kissed...not the other way around Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackjack Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 What's Brodeur talking about? Didn't Mogilny sign with Totonto for $5.5, not $3.5? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section 110 Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 here's an old SI article talking about Mogilny making $5.2 in 2001. He must have made at least that annually from Toronto: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hockey/nh...s_mogilny_slam/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsadvoc8 Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 I haven't seen it pointed out yet, but it seems everyone is happy to have Robinson as coach. It seems that if Burns was coach we wouldn't have gotten AlMo or Malakhov. Is that b/c Larry is easier on the players and they can get away with more or is there a genuine dislike for Burns? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mddevsfan Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 I haven't seen it pointed out yet, but it seems everyone is happy to have Robinson as coach. It seems that if Burns was coach we wouldn't have gotten AlMo or Malakhov. Is that b/c Larry is easier on the players and they can get away with more or is there a genuine dislike for Burns? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> From everything I've seen, they're both pretty good guys, but with very different attitudes. I don't think the players dislike Burns, but he is much more of a disiplinarian than Larry. This is probably good for the young guys, but some veterans just don't want to be told what to do like that, i.e. Igor Larionov. If I remember correctly, when Larry got fired it was because he was too relaxed with the players and they lost focus. That's why Burns was brought in to correct it. Burns wasn't disliked, but a veteran winding down his career would likely look elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mddevsfan Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 I haven't seen it pointed out yet, but it seems everyone is happy to have Robinson as coach. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Also, you're getting a lot of the "party line" there. Lou could hire Hitler, and 3/4 of the team would talk about how happy they were to be playing for him. I like Larry, and I think the players do too, but the statements they make about it are meaningless sound bytes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darwindog Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 These guys didn't play under Burns ... you're talking apples and oranges and it sort of bugs me because both are great and both won cups with different teams... it's chemistry yeah -- but it's not a case of i wont work for Burns. It'll be interesting to see how the new guys like Larry! I mean Rass marshall etc.. I'm sure they'll love him! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Not sure how much genuine difference in attitude there is by players in general toward Pat or Larry. But remember that the Russian players wanted to hire Larry to coach their World Cup entry, but weren't allowed to do it. There seems to be a tremendous amount of respect for him from Russian players. Now, if he can just get Vlad to play consistently, I'll be happy. No games off!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils102 Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I remember hearing Brodeur saying on the 2003 Stanley Cup DVD, that the vets loved playing under Burns. I remember it being some of the younger guys like Gomez who he had a prickly relationship with and who really struggled under him for a while. I think that even with Burns still around we could have gotten Malakhov and Almo. Hell for the money we payed we better have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.