|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 16, 2024 13:35:30 GMT -5
Why the presumption that X can't take the next step and replace Savard?
Is Savard that high a step? Because i don't see him as anything but a small stepping stone...
|
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jul 16, 2024 14:05:58 GMT -5
A stepping stone that most likely will bring back a first rounder next trade deadline. I know he isn't a fan favourite on this board, but he does bring some good intangibles, big, strong, shot blocker, penalty killer, leader. By all accounts, a lot of young guys look up to him in the dressing room.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 16, 2024 14:09:38 GMT -5
One guy on Twitter posted a prediction for goals by the top 10 Habs this coming year. I added them up and he had 221 goals for just 10 Habs players.
I replied that if the top 10 Habs get 221 goals that means the team would likely score 280+ goals. Only 6 teams did that this past year.
That’s dreamland kinda stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 16, 2024 17:28:15 GMT -5
Yeah, that is just not realistic.
And we have to keep in mind that, somehow, Montreal had like the third or fourth highest goal total from d-men in the entire league. So if that number does not prove sustainable, then there is even more pressure on the forwards to pot a whole lot more goals. Obviously having at least a middle of the pack power play would help too.
|
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jul 16, 2024 21:29:39 GMT -5
Yeah, that is just not realistic. And we have to keep in mind that, somehow, Montreal had like the third or fourth highest goal total from d-men in the entire league. So if that number does not prove sustainable, then there is even more pressure on the forwards to pot a whole lot more goals. Obviously having at least a middle of the pack power play would help too. The PP has already improved without changing any of the personnel - see ya Alex. Add Lane, a dman with skill we have not had since Markov, and the maturing of all the forwards and we will most certianly have a better PP. Hopefully they have Maths on the 2nd unit. If Lane is the puck mover, you need a big shot on the other point. Xman? |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 16, 2024 21:42:06 GMT -5
I wish I could share your optimism my friend. I just do not see coach/management demoting Matheson who crushed it offensively last season and who St. Louis constantly raves about. It is possible, I suppose, to get creative and have two d-men on the PP1 unit. But that seems problematic because Hutson is not going to be playing the bumper or down low, so essentially having him dangle and create off the half wall means that Suzuki moves to the bumper. Time will say. One thing for sure having more elite skill is a good problem to have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jul 17, 2024 7:01:12 GMT -5
I wish I could share your optimism my friend. I just do not see coach/management demoting Matheson who crushed it offensively last season and who St. Louis constantly raves about. It is possible, I suppose, to get creative and have two d-men on the PP1 unit. But that seems problematic because Hutson is not going to be playing the bumper or down low, so essentially having him dangle and create off the half wall means that Suzuki moves to the bumper. Time will say. One thing for sure having more elite skill is a good problem to have. Hopefully the addition of Lane and having Dach back means we can have a 2nd pp unit that can actually produce so the 1st unit doesn't have to play 1:45 of the 2 minute PP 2nd pp unit Newhook-dach-Roy Hutson-?? I think Matheson-Arber on the 1st pp unit makes sense, we need a Canon from the point to take the pressure off of Matheson, same thing can be said if Hutson and the 2nd unit. The nice thing about Arber is he can put the puck on the net to go along with his canon |
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jul 17, 2024 7:34:49 GMT -5
I wish I could share your optimism my friend. I just do not see coach/management demoting Matheson who crushed it offensively last season and who St. Louis constantly raves about. It is possible, I suppose, to get creative and have two d-men on the PP1 unit. But that seems problematic because Hutson is not going to be playing the bumper or down low, so essentially having him dangle and create off the half wall means that Suzuki moves to the bumper. Time will say. One thing for sure having more elite skill is a good problem to have. Hopefully the addition of Lane and having Dach back means we can have a 2nd pp unit that can actually produce so the 1st unit doesn't have to play 1:45 of the 2 minute PP 2nd pp unit Newhook-dach-Roy Hutson-?? I think Matheson-Arber on the 1st pp unit makes sense, we need a Canon from the point to take the pressure off of Matheson, same thing can be said if Hutson and the 2nd unit. The nice thing about Arber is he can put the puck on the net to go along with his canon I think Gallagher usually plays on the second PP. Roy won't get many PP minutes this season. |
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jul 17, 2024 7:55:13 GMT -5
Hopefully the addition of Lane and having Dach back means we can have a 2nd pp unit that can actually produce so the 1st unit doesn't have to play 1:45 of the 2 minute PP 2nd pp unit Newhook-dach-Roy Hutson-?? I think Matheson-Arber on the 1st pp unit makes sense, we need a Canon from the point to take the pressure off of Matheson, same thing can be said if Hutson and the 2nd unit. The nice thing about Arber is he can put the puck on the net to go along with his canon I think Gallagher usually plays on the second PP. Roy won't get many PP minutes this season. Too bad, the kid has the smarts and the vision |
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jul 17, 2024 11:25:32 GMT -5
I think Gallagher usually plays on the second PP. Roy won't get many PP minutes this season. Too bad, the kid has the smarts and the vision Roy will get his opportunity on one of the PP units and he will stay there if he performs. I don't see Marty holding back any of the kids just to give a vet some TOI. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 17, 2024 11:43:46 GMT -5
Even if the PP is improved this year, that does not mean the addition of any more goals
For that to occur, each player on the PP has to maintain the same ES production. Also, more PP goals likely change the situational outcomes in games where the team is defending a one goal game, vs going for a goal to win
We had threads on this before. The goal is to score between 240-260 goals and how that occurs doesn’t really matter
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 17, 2024 12:30:39 GMT -5
Even if the PP is improved this year, that does not mean the addition of any more goals For that to occur, each player on the PP has to maintain the same ES production. Also, more PP goals likely change the situational outcomes in games where the team is defending a one goal game, vs going for a goal to win We had threads on this before. The goal is to score between 240-260 goals and how that occurs doesn’t really matter I think that 240-260 is manageable provided we don't have 600 man games lost to injury again (excluding Price). I think the top line can get 100. They had 81 last year with Suzuki having more than we might have expected (30 goals per year, though, is not out of the question for Nick) and Caufield concentrating on other parts of his game as well as still recovering from shoulder surgery. Finally, Slaf didn't get going till after 20 games or so and being saddled with less than stellar line-mates. 30-35-35 is my prediction, for 100 goals. The second line is a mystery of course and we'll need 60 goals from them. Twenty each. I think that's doable too. Newhook, Dach and Roy each with 20 goals or plus or minus a few from each one to average out to 20 each. The fourth line, I'm hoping for 20 goals. This line was a revolving door, but 20 doesn't seem out of line. I skipped past the 3rd line because it may be the greatest mystery. Gallagher or Anderson may end up on this line, or Armia. Dvorak probably starts at centre and who knows who else is there (RHP, Pezzetta, Florian, Heineman, etc.) Dvorak has averaged about 15 goals a year when he's played 70+ games. That leaves 25 between the wingers. Twelve or 13 each. Again, seems not out of reach. so we have 100 + 60 + 40 + 20 = 220. We need 20-40 goals from the D. Last year, all defensemen (excluding Lindstrom) scored 45. The general thinking is that this number is an outlier and not likely to be repeated. Firstly, I'm not completely in agreement with that sentiment. Marty wants his D being aggressive and taking risks when warranted. I think that's the main reason we got that many goals from D, especially the 6 goals from Savard, or 7 from Barron. Those aren't likely to be repeated. Offsetting that to some degree is the fact that those goals came from 8 defensemen, who averaged 60 games played last year. That's 75% of the possible games played. Will we have as injury riddled a year? If the same guys are playing, but playing more often and consistently, might they not produce a bit more? Maybe not, but Kovacevic and Barron will be replaced by names like Hutson or Mailloux or Reinbacher, all of whom should be expected to produce as much or hopefully more. The defense being groomed is one with offensive capabilities and excellent transition and zone exit skills. They should, hopefully, not only approach, match, or exceed last year's D totals but also improve those of the forwards. Can we get 30 goals from the D? I think that's a slam dunk. 220 + 30 + 250. Not voodoo math or expectations. It's time we started putting up points. |
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jul 17, 2024 13:55:31 GMT -5
17, I think you are over reaching on the first line. I think 90 goals is where they will end up at.
Second line needs to bring in 75. (25 each)
Third is 50
Fourth around 30
If this happens you get to 245 without the defence.
The question I have is do we have enough firepower to make up 75 goals on the second line and my answer is still no. If you are moving guys between second and 3 in your line-up that means you don't have a true second line. Until that happens, no playoffs for us.
Example without taking into cap considerations.
Toronto has the big 4. You know 2 each are playing the top two lines.
69 + 26 = 95 goals (Matthews and Marner)
40 + 29 = 69 goals (Nylander and Tavares)
Obviously we don't have that kind of scoring talent, but If we get guys that avg 30 on the first and 25 on the second, we are getting close to that level.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 17, 2024 20:02:25 GMT -5
17, I think you are over reaching on the first line. I think 90 goals is where they will end up at. Second line needs to bring in 75. (25 each) Third is 50 Fourth around 30 If this happens you get to 245 without the defence. The question I have is do we have enough firepower to make up 75 goals on the second line and my answer is still no. If you are moving guys between second and 3 in your line-up that means you don't have a true second line. Until that happens, no playoffs for us. Example without taking into cap considerations. Toronto has the big 4. You know 2 each are playing the top two lines. 69 + 26 = 95 goals (Matthews and Marner) 40 + 29 = 69 goals (Nylander and Tavares) Obviously we don't have that kind of scoring talent, but If we get guys that avg 30 on the first and 25 on the second, we are getting close to that level. I believe Skilly has always meant 250+ goals from the entire team, so that's the basis I was working on. I don't think we can get 75 goals from, say, Newhook-Dach-Roy. They'll be able to do that when Demidov arrives, but not before then. But I seriously think that first line can get 100. Slaf got 20 from 2/3rds of a season, despite playing with Anderson for a while and before he broke out. By the end of the season, he was THE driver on that line. I honestly believe Caufield's shoulder issue did not fully resolve itself until late in the season. At 90%, his shot wasn't quite accurate enough, strong enough or with a quick enough release. Back at 100%, the pucks started going in again. I think he could get 40 this year, but was comfortable with 35. That may be optimistic (assuming they don't miss many games) but it's time Lady Luck was kind to us. But even 90 would be pretty good. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jul 17, 2024 21:05:29 GMT -5
Hopefully the addition of Lane and having Dach back means we can have a 2nd pp unit that can actually produce so the 1st unit doesn't have to play 1:45 of the 2 minute PP 2nd pp unit Newhook-dach-Roy Hutson-?? I think Matheson-Arber on the 1st pp unit makes sense, we need a Canon from the point to take the pressure off of Matheson, same thing can be said if Hutson and the 2nd unit. The nice thing about Arber is he can put the puck on the net to go along with his canon I think Gallagher usually plays on the second PP. Roy won't get many PP minutes this season. I really like Gallagher as a person and player. Hard work, honest effort. Self sacrifice. Unfortunately his best before date has expired and he led the league in goals called back for goaltender interference. |
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jul 17, 2024 22:13:26 GMT -5
The likelihood of reaching 240 goals is non-existant when you have $16+ million of salary tied up in 3 forwards (Gally, Dvo, and Josh) who will be doing well to get 40 goals between them. Throw in Armia and then you're up to $20 miliion tied up in forwards that might get 50 goals. That means the other players really have to pick it up. Suze's line might get 100 goals but that still won't be enough. I guess we can hope that Dach, Newhook and Roy have seasons like none of them have ever had by a large margin, but that's not likely. It is what it is. Until HuGo can dump the ridiculous contracts MB left behind, we ain't geting 240 goals.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 17, 2024 23:20:49 GMT -5
The likelihood of reaching 240 goals is non-existant when you have $16+ million of salary tied up in 3 forwards (Gally, Dvo, and Josh) who will be doing well to get 40 goals between them. Throw in Armia and then you're up to $20 miliion tied up in forwards that might get 50 goals. That means the other players really have to pick it up. Suze's line might get 100 goals but that still won't be enough. I guess we can hope that Dach, Newhook and Roy have seasons like none of them have ever had by a large margin, but that's not likely. It is what it is. Until HuGo can dump the ridiculous contracts MB left behind, we ain't geting 240 goals. That's only if they're playing. If one or two are a) traded or b) relegated to Laval, that frees up ice time for someone who can score. I think Gallagher is salvageable and Dvorak has been injured more than inept. I don't have an excuse for Anderson. Gally and Dvorak should be good for 30 goals combined. |
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jul 17, 2024 23:35:23 GMT -5
The likelihood of reaching 240 goals is non-existant when you have $16+ million of salary tied up in 3 forwards (Gally, Dvo, and Josh) who will be doing well to get 40 goals between them. Throw in Armia and then you're up to $20 miliion tied up in forwards that might get 50 goals. That means the other players really have to pick it up. Suze's line might get 100 goals but that still won't be enough. I guess we can hope that Dach, Newhook and Roy have seasons like none of them have ever had by a large margin, but that's not likely. It is what it is. Until HuGo can dump the ridiculous contracts MB left behind, we ain't geting 240 goals. That's only if they're playing. If one or two are a) traded or b) relegated to Laval, that frees up ice time for someone who can score. I think Gallagher is salvageable and Dvorak has been injured more than inept. I don't have an excuse for Anderson. Gally and Dvorak should be good for 30 goals combined. So we're hoping that 2 forwards eating up $11 million in salary cap can give us 30 goals?  |
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jul 18, 2024 7:18:48 GMT -5
That's only if they're playing. If one or two are a) traded or b) relegated to Laval, that frees up ice time for someone who can score. I think Gallagher is salvageable and Dvorak has been injured more than inept. I don't have an excuse for Anderson. Gally and Dvorak should be good for 30 goals combined. So we're hoping that 2 forwards eating up $11 million in salary cap can give us 30 goals? Well that is what Tavares is being paid and he got 29  But yes, not good bang for the buck. I am in the minority here but I think with the right line mates, Gallagher can get back to scoring 20-25. Has he ever played with Dach before? |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 18, 2024 12:44:19 GMT -5
That's only if they're playing. If one or two are a) traded or b) relegated to Laval, that frees up ice time for someone who can score. I think Gallagher is salvageable and Dvorak has been injured more than inept. I don't have an excuse for Anderson. Gally and Dvorak should be good for 30 goals combined. So we're hoping that 2 forwards eating up $11 million in salary cap can give us 30 goals? The goal total required and the salary paid to people are two separate matters. If your cheapest guy is scoring 50 and your most expensive give you 10, it's still 60 goals. I didn't factor in contracts because the Habs are well under the CAP, even before they put Carey on LTIR. I looked at the available players and what they might produce. We are lucky in that we have a lot of decent, young, relatively inexpensive players right now. Can some combination of those players get us 240 goals? I think so. Health is always a key factor. It was only 3 season ago that Calgary practically went unscathed by injuries. I don't expect that, but at least I hope ours are limited to the average. To answer the question, fifteen goals for two guys like Dvorak and Gally isn't unreasonable. Gallagher was playing well and producing late in the season. Dvorak was playing well also after he came back from injury. Gallagher had 16 goals last year in what we consider a poor year. Dvorak had 5 in 30 games, or prorated to 14 goals over 82 games. Neither might play the full 82, but we're still looking at 25-35 goals, especially with improvements on the defense and in goal. Can they stay healthy? If not, then replacements might do almost as well. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 18, 2024 20:25:52 GMT -5
I hope Dvorak can stay healthy (at least until Hughes can trade him) because I want to see Newhook on the second line. Yeah, Dvorak could pot 15 goals if healthy, though it is concerning to think he has only played 150 of 246 games since becoming a Canadien. And even healthy, 15 may be a little ambitious because even back in his Coyotes days where he typically potted 15-18 per season, he got a significant percentage of his goals on the power play where got prime usage. And there is no conceivable way Dvorak is on Montreal's PP1 unit. I could him in the bumper on the second unit but they will be lucky to get 40 seconds a crack.
|
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jul 19, 2024 9:48:47 GMT -5
So we're hoping that 2 forwards eating up $11 million in salary cap can give us 30 goals? Well that is what Tavares is being paid and he got 29 But yes, not good bang for the buck. I am in the minority here but I think with the right line mates, Gallagher can get back to scoring 20-25. Has he ever played with Dach before? Ask anyone incliding Leafs fans, the one contract Leafs would like to get out of is the Taveres fiasco - way over paid for what he brings. I think Gally can still muck it up in front of the net, but his shot has disappeared, probably from the hand injuries. Perhaps he's able to strengthen it over the summer. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 19, 2024 13:15:30 GMT -5
The older guys (except Anderson) all seemed to play better at the end of the year. Sometimes the worry about being traded, moving, having to deal with wife and kids, being apart, etc. weighs on guys (understandably) and once the TDL has passed, those concerns are removed. They can still be traded, but it's easier to deal with travel challenges over the summer, and you're not apart from your family. Not having to possibly deal with those matters may have relaxed the vets and they played more naturally. In any case, there was noticeable improvement toward the end of season. Many pundits expressed how much better Gallagher and Dvorak looked. From my seat, they weren't adding a ton of value, but at least they weren't dragging us down and were pulling their weight. It would be interesting to know how many points Gally, Dvorak and Armia got in the last 20 games. The 17 goals Armia put up last year were the highest of his career. Even if he's not traded, he can still contribute 15 goals or so on the 3/4 lines.
Some yokels (ESPN?) have picked the Habs to finish 31st. They must be using analytics alone because they aren't seeing the changes that are about to happen next year. I'd be shocked and extremely unhappy if we finish in the bottom 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jul 19, 2024 13:21:01 GMT -5
The 2nd line has a much better chance of having demidov on it now that Kuznetsov has been released. He won't sign with any nhl time and chances are good he'll sign with SKA... SKA already has 16 forwards without Koozy... this makes it harder for Demidov to make the team so if they push him to the MHL it might make him easier to get this year... also DD prefers playing centre... hmmmmm...
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 19, 2024 14:03:21 GMT -5
I think, in addition to the number of roster spots on SKA, with Kuznetsov needing to get paid, money comes into play and the need to pay Kutznetsov along with the lack of need to have Demidov for a year (who wouldn't get much ice time anyway), points to getting transfer fee $$ from the Habs to help cover Kuznetsov's salary. Money rules a lot of decisions for oligarchs and I get the feeling it will affect this one too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 19, 2024 17:59:05 GMT -5
I keep saying this every year, and I guess I’ll keep saying it until it sinks in.
Production is NOT linear.
If Caufield scores the mythical 40, that means production from another player likely goes down (in this case likely Suzuki). Case in point, last year Suzuki’s goals went up, at the detriment to Caufield’s goals, but it increased his points (assists).
If production was linear, then MTL (and all teams) should be getting 300+ goals since the discussions on so-called “linear production “ began (so and so got 30 last year, he is good for 40 this year. If that’s the case then he is good for 50 then 60, then … )
There is no way the first line can get 100 goals. None. That means they all get 30. Or Caufield gets 50 , and I remind everyone he has yet to score 30 and in the year he was most productive he still wasn’t on a 50 goal pace
I do agree the big unknown is the second line. We can just as easily get 50 from them as we could get 70
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 19, 2024 18:54:59 GMT -5
I would be satisfied with 85-90 goals from the first line. More than 90 would be incredibly good news; fewer than 85 would likely mean that the Habs are going to the struggle to keep pace with the wildcard pack.
Demidov would be a huge infusion of offensive dynamism for the second line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 19, 2024 19:41:28 GMT -5
85 is the high water mark. That’s 35 from one player and the other two averaging 25 between them
We then need 60-65 from the second line
We then need 40-45 from the third line
Then 20-25 from the fourth line and sub ins
Then 25-30 from the defense
That’s the pathway to 240+
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jul 19, 2024 21:42:28 GMT -5
17, I think you are over reaching on the first line. I think 90 goals is where they will end up at. Second line needs to bring in 75. (25 each) Third is 50 Fourth around 30 If this happens you get to 245 without the defence. The question I have is do we have enough firepower to make up 75 goals on the second line and my answer is still no. If you are moving guys between second and 3 in your line-up that means you don't have a true second line. Until that happens, no playoffs for us. Example without taking into cap considerations. Toronto has the big 4. You know 2 each are playing the top two lines. 69 + 26 = 95 goals (Matthews and Marner) 40 + 29 = 69 goals (Nylander and Tavares) Obviously we don't have that kind of scoring talent, but If we get guys that avg 30 on the first and 25 on the second, we are getting close to that level. If the first line gets 30 each and the second line gets 25 each, play the second line first. With the extra minutes they will add more than 30 each. Our first line is much stronger than our second but neither is elite. Suzuki supplies the brains Caufield snipes 40+ and Slavkovsky rules the boards and dirty goals in the crease rebounds. All three improve but not there yet. Unless Dach plays 80 games like he never did in the past and Roy plays like a much bigger man than he is and Newhook does more than just skate fast, our second line is weaker than the teams we need to catch. Our defense is both deep and skilled adding points and intangibles. Goaltending has improved and has the depth for a gem to emerge. We are not a cup contender nor a sure thing to make the playoffs. Improving from fifth worst but climbing a steep hill. Vancouver made a big jump last season and our time will come. Where would we be with Demidov Michkov and almost Eiserman on the first line and Suzuki Caufield and Slavkovsky on the second? |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 19, 2024 23:16:54 GMT -5
I keep saying this every year, and I guess I’ll keep saying it until it sinks in. Production is NOT linear.If Caufield scores the mythical 40, that means production from another player likely goes down (in this case likely Suzuki). Case in point, last year Suzuki’s goals went up, at the detriment to Caufield’s goals, but it increased his points (assists). If production was linear, then MTL (and all teams) should be getting 300+ goals since the discussions on so-called “linear production “ began (so and so got 30 last year, he is good for 40 this year. If that’s the case then he is good for 50 then 60, then … ) There is no way the first line can get 100 goals. None. That means they all get 30. Or Caufield gets 50 , and I remind everyone he has yet to score 30 and in the year he was most productive he still wasn’t on a 50 goal pace I do agree the big unknown is the second line. We can just as easily get 50 from them as we could get 70 Absolutely. That's why Sam Reinhart, who averaged 26 goals per game throughout his career (if we take out 2023/24), suddenly puts up 57 last season. Every guy that might have a down year could be mitigated by someone having an exceptional year. Who's to say Caufield won't score 50 next year? I didn't exaggerate my numbers, I tried to be realistic. I didn't pick the top of any player's range, nor the bottom. I'm not saying Armia is going to get 21 goals next year (his prorated numbers from last season), but we can hope for 15, no? I was optimistic on the first line numbers, but I expect Slaf to get better this year, not worse. I expect Suzjuki to get 30 because he's a good player. If Caufield's shoulder issues are behind him, he might explode. Just for kicks I went back to Feb 17, about the last 2 months of the season. Twenty eight games were played in that span. Suzuki 13-13-26 Caufield 8-11-19 Slaf 8-14-22 That's 29 goals in 28 games, prorated over 82 games as 85 goals. Not 100, obviously. But....of Caufield's 8 goals, 7 of them came in the last 8 games. That's the point I was trying to make. He didn't really start scoring until the last part of the season and a lot of those goals were not assisted by Suzuki or Slaf. Names like Newhook, Armia and Gallagher showed up. Don't ask me why. In those last 8 games (April), the line put up 13 goals, 10 assists. thirteen goals in 8 games equates to 144 goals over a full 82 game season. Small sample (they're not getting 133 goals next year), but really interesting in that Caufield had that shoulder surgery and we suspected there was something wrong with his shot. It's not unreasonable to assume it finally felt right late in the season and that's why the puck started going in. Or it was just regression. I think that surgery took a long time to heal and that's why he was just a bit off.
Nothing wrong with 90 goals from the first line.
|
|
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/6F6VF25GCFF2HFJCOITRJSGNPE.jpg)
