Why Brisebois?
I’m going to write this story in the past tense because most of you will read it after the Tampa Bay Game. This is not a bashing of Patrice Brisebois, god knows he gets enough. Its merely an observation and some FACTS!
Brisebois is old. Brisebois is not the player he used to be and he was a decent player before. It is not his fault. He is just not young enough to hang tough with a lot of the athletes in today’s game. But his experience helps make it less obvious. Sure he gives up the occasional/often puck, but he certainly knows how to play a great non-physical game of hockey. My question is…we know Brisebois is most likely toast after this season. Why not let a rookie play? Currently Brisebois is being used as our “filler” for injured players. He took O’Byrne’s spot for a while. He is currently holding Hamrlik’s spot until he returns. But Brisebois does not gain anything from being in the game. Is he going to get better? Unlikely. Is he going to spark and score a bonanza of goals. Improbable. So I really don’t see the harm in letting a guy like Fischer or Valentenko play his role for those odd games. And even if you’re worried about their development, let someone like Jamie Rivers play. I honestly don’t care who they give it to, as long as …
a) They can gain something from playing in the NHL
b) They can make themselves unnoticeable. If they want to show some flare a score a bit, I sure as hell won’t stop them, but as long as they play a decent game and are not a liability, then they deserve it.
It’s like taking an old dog, who’s about to die in a couple of months, and trying to teach him tricks. Wouldn’t that time and effort be better spent on a puppy?
Now let’s see how Brisebois plays tonight, but that’s not even the point. Unless Brisebois is clearly a bigger contributor than any of the above mentioned players, I don’t think he needs to play.
Your thoughts?