New numbers for Engelland,Raymond,Hiller,Wotherspoon,Bollig,Baerts chi, Smid & Jones

[N26]

Originally Posted by bomber317

All numbers and players from the Flames site.

1 Jonas Hiller
4 Kris Russell
5 Mark Giordano "C"
6 Dennis Wideman
7 TJ Brodie
11 Mikael Backlund
15 Ladislav Smid
16 Brian McGrattan
17 Lance Bouma
18 Matt Stajan
19 David Jones
20 Curtis Glencross "A"
21 Mason Raymond
23 Sean Monahan
24 Jiri Hudler
25 Brandon Bollig
26 Tyler Wotherspoon
27 Sven Baertschi
29 Deryk Engelland
31 Karri Ramo
32 Paul Byron

46 Bill Arnold
48 Bryce Van Brabant
51 Kenny Agostino
53 Johnny Gaudreau

So if #'s 9 & 30 are retired and #12 is all but retired.

The numbers 2 (MacInnis), 14(Fleury), 28 (Regehr) and 34(Kipper) will not be given out lightly.

#35 is usually a goalie number.

#13 is (sooner or later) reserved for Gaudreau

Knight still has claim on #10

Then the only numbers under 35 available are 3, 22 & 33.

As #3 is a defenseman number (Charlie Coyle excepted) the remaining players with a chance of making the team on opening night are looking at 22 and 33.

And with #22 as the likely more traditional number it seems Reinhart, Granlund, Poirier, Agostino, van Brabant, Wolf and Arnold are in "THE RACE TO 22".

A number which none of them have worn recently at least.

Reinhart wore 23 in Kootenay and 25 in Abby

Granlund wore 26 in Abby and 11 for IFK Helsinki

Poirier wore 27 in Gatineau and 24 at the end of the year in Abby.

Agostino wore 18 at Yale

Wolf wore 89 in Hamburg

van Brabant wore 12 in university

Arnold wore 24 at Boston College.

[getbak]

MacDermid wore 28 for his one game last year, so I wouldn't say they're holding onto it too tightly.

[neo45]

Butler was also offered 28 when he first came here, about an hour after Regher was gone

[N26]

^^^
Right. I forgot that. So disappointing.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by getbak

MacDermid wore 28 for his one game last year, so I wouldn't say they're holding onto it too tightly.

No reason to prevent players form using 28. It's not like he's a potential HOFer.

[N26]

I guess so.

So 3 (the number Kulak wore in Vcr and Abby), 22, 28, 33 and 35 are open in Burke's all-under-#35 world

[Tinordi]

47 was a stupid number

[SeanCharles]

^ I kinda liked it.

It's visually appealing especially on a jersey!

[Resolute 14]

Out of curiousity, what makes any number "stupid"? Why is 47 more stupid than 26? Or 31? or 8?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Out of curiousity, what makes any number "stupid"? Why is 47 more stupid than 26? Or 31? or 8?

Combined points of NHL players who have worn it previously/ Jersey Number = stupidity quotient

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Combined points of NHL players who have worn it previously/ Jersey Number = stupidity quotient

Wouldn't that generally make lower numbers significantly higher on the stupidity scale?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Wouldn't that generally make lower numbers significantly higher on the stupidity scale?

Sorry, I should have stated that a higher quotient is better.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by N26

van Brabant wore 12 in university

So his number is still available?

[FlameZilla]

If 12 was available Mason Raymond would have snagged it.

Hoping Bennett is allowed to wear 39.

Smid changing his number to 15 is bizarre to me... Maybe a big #3-wearing defenceman is on his way via trade?

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Out of curiousity, what makes any number "stupid"? Why is 47 more stupid than 26? Or 31? or 8?

Some people like traditional numbers.

[Resolute 14]

Sure, and that's cool. But in a world where numbers like 66, 93 and 99 are celebrated, I still fail to see what makes any other number "stupid".

[habernac]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Sure, and that's cool. But in a world where numbers like 66, 93 and 99 are celebrated, I still fail to see what makes any other number "stupid".

It's July and there's nothing else hockey related to bitch about.



A number is a number. Who cares?

[Freeway]

I like training camp numbers.

[Vulcan]

It's a right of passage. High numbers are for prospects and the low numbers are a reward to show you've made it.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Sure, and that's cool. But in a world where numbers like 66, 93 and 99 are celebrated, I still fail to see what makes any other number "stupid".

I liked this comment, because you are Resolute14. If you were Resolute41, I would have disliked it.