Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Sharks Claim Barclay Goodrow on Waivers


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

 

Completely get and agree with what you are saying regarding draft picks for deadline ammo.

 

I'm doubtful that you could get a 3rd round pick for Vesey given that there will be guys out there looking PTOs when camps opens who can give you similar production vs. salary. Suspending disbelief on that for a moment, can you really argue that a 3rd round "scratch ticket" brings the same value vs. as a proven commodity in Vesey?

 

Has to be a better way to replenish 1-2 of these scratch tickets over the next 2 seasons.   

 

   

 

If you think there's guys out there ready for PTOs who can match Vesey, then why would you not trade him and roll with a PTO? I think you answered it in your post. He's a proven commodity. PTOs miss all of the time. Nothing against Vesey, but given the makeup of this team in particular and the internal options they have for their 4th line, I think I'd rather take the pick. They don't need him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, siddious said:

What better pk’r and bottom 6 guy are you getting for $800k?

 

it’s not even that an upgrade is hard to attain here but what upgrade are you looking for exactly?

Vesey also plays both wings and can slot up the line-up if needed.  There's changes to make to improve the team and then there's just making changes for the sake of making changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, siddious said:

What better pk’r and bottom 6 guy are you getting for $800k?

 

it’s not even that an upgrade is hard to attain here but what upgrade are you looking for exactly?

 

The PK units last year were Zib/Kreider, and Trocheck/Goodrow. Vesey was the primary backup option. When they traded for Wennberg, he became the primary backup option. I don't know when Vesey became this irreplaceable cog on the PK, but it's just not true.

 

Rempe is my 4th line right wing next year. Cuylle is my 4th line left wing next year. I don't understand this automatic 3rd line ticket Cuylle has when he literally didn't produce a damn thing for the last 50 games on a team that needs more scoring out of their 3rd line. Kakko's questionable production is already going to be there, don't need it on both 3rd line wings. I just think both Cuylle and Rempe bring attitude and physicality, and are the better options for 4th line ice than Vesey moving forward. I agree Vesey is a good bottom 6er for $800k, that's why he's worth something to another team in a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

Vesey also plays both wings and can slot up the line-up if needed.  There's changes to make to improve the team and then there's just making changes for the sake of making changes.

 

He's been one of the numerous options they slotted up to play with Zib/Kreider and it didn't work. Just because he HAS slotted up doesn't mean he CAN. He's not good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

The PK units last year were Zib/Kreider, and Trocheck/Goodrow. Vesey was the primary backup option. When they traded for Wennberg, he became the primary backup option. I don't know when Vesey became this irreplaceable cog on the PK, but it's just not true.

 

Rempe is my 4th line right wing next year. Cuylle is my 4th line left wing next year. I don't understand this automatic 3rd line ticket Cuylle has when he literally didn't produce a damn thing for the last 50 games on a team that needs more scoring out of their 3rd line. Kakko's questionable production is already going to be there, don't need it on both 3rd line wings. I just think both Cuylle and Rempe bring attitude and physicality, and are the better options for 4th line ice than Vesey moving forward. I agree Vesey is a good bottom 6er for $800k, that's why he's worth something to another team in a trade.

Cuylle had about as solid of rookie season as anyone could have asked for on this team. 

 

And your suggestion is to demote him to the fourth line?

  • Like 1
  • Keeps it 100 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus I'm bored so I just looked it up in the 47 playoff games combined on the 3rd line (primarily made up of Kakko, Cuylle and Wennberg) they scored 3 goals.  I think they all qualified as a problem, again not the biggest problem but a big part of the problem. Screw it even if they got moved around some line wise the end result is in 47 games that's what they combined for. 

Edited by Scott
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Scott said:

Jesus I'm bored so I just looked it up in the 47 games combined on the 3rd line (primarily made up of Kakko, Cuylle and Wennberg) they scored 3 goals.  I think they all qualified as a problem, again not the biggest problem but a big part of the problem. Screw it even if they got moved around some line wise the end result is in 47 games that's what they combined for. 


We have a chicken dinner!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found he got softer every day the season went on. Once Rempe showed up, I feel like he completely abandoned his identity and started thinking he was an offensive guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:


Thanks for proving my point.

I'm trying to reconcile you advocating Berard or Othmann for the first line and then half an hour later putting a kid who had a good rookie year in the third line, on the 4th.

 

I don't really see what point is being proven there.

 

But I am seeing a trend of just immediately chucking any player who doesn't provide immediate satisfaction for you... Or any player who slumps, or any player who has a bad season, etc. 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

I'm trying to reconcile you advocating Berard or Othmann for the first line and then half an hour later putting a kid who had a good rookie year in the third line, on the 4th.

 

I don't really see what point is being proven there.

 

But I am seeing a trend of just immediately chucking any player who doesn't provide immediate satisfaction for you... Or any player who slumps, or any player who has a bad season, etc. 

 

Two different scenarios being discussed. The one in the other thread was a hypothetical where Kane is the best change they can make. At that point, forget Kane because it doesn’t change anything, and just play the kids which would include letting Cuylle develop on the 3rd. The one discussed in this thread is building some version of a bottom 6 that can better supplement the rest of the team to compete now. Cuylle is not on my 3rd line in that scenario.

 

Your problem is you don’t seem to realize you’ve got one foot in either direction and you don’t even realize it. Not that you would care, as long as your ultimate form of entertainment is shootout wins in November.

Edited by BrooksBurner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Two different scenarios being discussed. The one in the other thread was a hypothetical where Kane is the best change they can make. At that point, forget Kane because it doesn’t change anything, and just play the kids which would include letting Cuylle develop on the 3rd. The one discussed in this thread is building some version of a bottom 6 that can better supplement the rest of the team to compete now. Cuylle is not on my 3rd line in that scenario.

 

Your problem is you don’t seem to realize you’ve got one foot in either direction and you don’t even realize it. Not that you would care, as long as your ultimate form of entertainment is shootout wins in November.

I'm sorry that it bothers you that others can enjoy the sport and the team outside of winning a cup. I'm also sorry you can't figure out how to do it, because you're going to be miserable more often than not.

 

I don't have one foot in either direction. Balancing winning now (Kane) with developing young NHLers (giving Cuylle more ice time not less after a good rookie year) is pretty commonplace and something almost every competitive team tries to do, just take a look at Dallas. 

 

I can just as easily say your problem is you deal only in absolutes.

  • If you're not winning a cup, you're a loser organization 
  • You're either trying to win or rebuilding
  • I'm right and everyone who doesn't agree is wrong 

There's a lot of grey in the world. Two things can be true at once. We can enjoy the team and the season even though it ended in disappointment. 

 

Broaden your horizons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Pete said:

I'm sorry that it bothers you that others can enjoy the sport and the team outside of winning a cup. I'm also sorry you can't figure out how to do it, because you're going to be miserable more often than not.

 

I don't have one foot in either direction. Balancing winning now (Kane) with developing young NHLers (giving Cuylle more ice time not less after a good rookie year) is pretty commonplace and something almost every competitive team tries to do, just take a look at Dallas. 

 

I can just as easily say your problem is you deal only in absolutes.

  • If you're not winning a cup, you're a loser organization 
  • You're either trying to win or rebuilding
  • I'm right and everyone who doesn't agree is wrong 

There's a lot of grey in the world. Two things can be true at once. We can enjoy the team and the season even though it ended in disappointment. 

 

Broaden your horizons. 


You’re so boring. A bullet point list? Lol, only thing you’ve spent more time whining about other than writing long posts about me, were Gallant for 2 full years and Kreider for 10+.

  • Keeps it 100 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:


You’re so boring. A bullet point list? Lol, only thing you’ve spent more time whining about other than writing long posts about me, were Gallant for 2 full years and Kreider for 10+.

 

c2d02c0f-1bc7-4c76-a6b8-bf36867f2ae1_tex

 

Also, as his nemesis, you know this means you have to use his philosophy against him and ruthlessly defend Gallant and Kreider now, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:


You’re so boring. A bullet point list? Lol, only thing you’ve spent more time whining about other than writing long posts about me, were Gallant for 2 full years and Kreider for 10+.

Cool story, still waiting for your point tho. 

 

Are you going to respond to any of the hockey related posts or you going to resort to your normal cop out of a personal shot?

 

 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

c2d02c0f-1bc7-4c76-a6b8-bf36867f2ae1_tex

 

Also, as his nemesis, you know this means you have to use his philosophy against him and ruthlessly defend Gallant and Kreider now, right?

Don't forget, he also uses my memes and GIFs because he's the most unoriginal fuck on the planet. 

 

And make no mistake, he doesn't defend them because he's my nemesis, he defends them because he actually thinks they're good, that's the saddest part of all of it. 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

Cool story, still waiting for your point tho. 

 

Are you going to respond to any of the hockey related posts or you going to resort to your normal cop out of a personal shot?

 

 

 

You just made a bullet point list about what my problem is. Am I supposed to decipher that as wanting a hockey discussion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

You just made a bullet point list about what my problem is. Am I supposed to decipher that as wanting a hockey discussion

You don't have to decipher anything, it was fucking bulleted out for you. It was pretty fucking clear. I tried to make it easy for you, I don't know how I can simplify it more. And to clarify even more, that's not even half the shit I think is wrong with you. 

 

"This bulleted list that clearly outlines the issue is too hard for me to understand".

 

No wonder hockey confuses you. 

 

Not everything is black and white. I made my points regarding Kane and Cuylle. You didn't have an answer so you decided to talk shit. So now I'll talk some shit too. 

 

Just own your cop out.

 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

You don't have to decipher anything, it was fucking bulleted out for you. It was pretty fucking clear. I tried to make it easy for you, I don't know how I can simplify it more. 

 

"This bulleted list that clearly outlines the issue is too hard for me to understand".

 

No wonder hockey confuses you. 

 

 

Sarcastic U Mad GIF by Superstore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

i told my friends id by a sharks tank top jersey if they claimed him and they did, so I had to purchase it

https://benchclearers.com/collections/san-jose-sharks/products/san-jose-sharks-air-mesh-tank

 

 

Feel bad for Goody, he obviously didn't want to go there and its kind of a ruthless move by Drury to pull it off this way

 

You gotta be ruthless if you want to get and stay ahead.

 

Drury is not being ruthless enough yet.  We need one of the big contracts to go by whatever means necessary.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...