<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PHT&#8217;s Three Duds of the Week: Crawford, Fowler and Brown</title>
	<atom:link href="http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/13/phts-three-duds-of-the-week-crawford-fowler-and-brown/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/13/phts-three-duds-of-the-week-crawford-fowler-and-brown/</link>
	<description>ProHockeyTalk on NBCSports.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 18:35:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: danphipps01</title>
		<link>http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/13/phts-three-duds-of-the-week-crawford-fowler-and-brown/comment-page-1/#comment-24356</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[danphipps01]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 04:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/?p=59359#comment-24356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even though I know that&#039;s a great deal in the long term, it&#039;s still dropping two active defensemen for one in the short. I&#039;d sooner keep Rome and give up a forward of some sort. Either way, though, I don&#039;t think Fowler&#039;s really the best fit anyway. He&#039;s a small, fast offensive defenseman whose own-zone play needs work even when his team&#039;s playing WELL. Small, fast and shooty is nice, but I&#039;d prefer big, hitty and great on the PK. Fowler&#039;s a PP machine, but the &#039;Nucks already have the best PP unit in the game by a huge margin. They could, however, stand to be tougher and getting stronger defensively is more beneficial at this point than adding more firepower to an already-explosive offensive team. To that end... I don&#039;t know, think you could trick the Sabres into giving Ehrhoff back for Bieksa? Maybe make the RIGHT call between the two this time?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even though I know that&#8217;s a great deal in the long term, it&#8217;s still dropping two active defensemen for one in the short. I&#8217;d sooner keep Rome and give up a forward of some sort. Either way, though, I don&#8217;t think Fowler&#8217;s really the best fit anyway. He&#8217;s a small, fast offensive defenseman whose own-zone play needs work even when his team&#8217;s playing WELL. Small, fast and shooty is nice, but I&#8217;d prefer big, hitty and great on the PK. Fowler&#8217;s a PP machine, but the &#8216;Nucks already have the best PP unit in the game by a huge margin. They could, however, stand to be tougher and getting stronger defensively is more beneficial at this point than adding more firepower to an already-explosive offensive team. To that end&#8230; I don&#8217;t know, think you could trick the Sabres into giving Ehrhoff back for Bieksa? Maybe make the RIGHT call between the two this time?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: elvispocomo</title>
		<link>http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/13/phts-three-duds-of-the-week-crawford-fowler-and-brown/comment-page-1/#comment-24313</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[elvispocomo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:49:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/?p=59359#comment-24313</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Us Canuck fans might be happy to help Boudreau and co out with their need for a defenceman who&#039;d actually love to play more minutes. Ballard for Fowler would have been a non-starter for totally different reasons to start the season - it&#039;d still be a no now, just for different reasons!

All kidding aside, Ballard&#039;s been better of late it&#039;s just his contract that irks Canucks fans still. We still are enamoured with Fowler (and Fistric and Franson, all D-men with last names starting with F ironically) and I&#039;m sure he wouldn&#039;t mind the change, but you just don&#039;t give up that easily on a young D-man with potential and an affordable contract.

Maybe if we throw in Rome in the deal?...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Us Canuck fans might be happy to help Boudreau and co out with their need for a defenceman who&#8217;d actually love to play more minutes. Ballard for Fowler would have been a non-starter for totally different reasons to start the season &#8211; it&#8217;d still be a no now, just for different reasons!</p>
<p>All kidding aside, Ballard&#8217;s been better of late it&#8217;s just his contract that irks Canucks fans still. We still are enamoured with Fowler (and Fistric and Franson, all D-men with last names starting with F ironically) and I&#8217;m sure he wouldn&#8217;t mind the change, but you just don&#8217;t give up that easily on a young D-man with potential and an affordable contract.</p>
<p>Maybe if we throw in Rome in the deal?&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
