Jargon
Registered User
Just going to put this here, apropos of nothing in particular.
Hodge is going to counter in like 7 months with some video of Walman falling or something and be like rofl see ahahahah
Just going to put this here, apropos of nothing in particular.
Admittedly, i didn't know the next stage after beating the dead horseBeating a dead horse? He brings up Walman any chance he gets (unprovoked). That stud is in the glue factory.
Just going to put this here, apropos of nothing in particular.
2019-20 Red Wings anyone?I don’t get why people want to keep giving back assets for a player who only looked good playing top line minutes on the worst team in the cap era. He is not good and Grier did a great job not falling into the trap by handing him a long term deal.
I admit I was fooled by Zetterlund before the deadline thinking he was a core adjacent piece. After Grier traded him for what looked like a soft return I feel like my Sharks beer goggles were removed to realize he was a very flawed player.
Please keep doing itHodge single handedly willing the Oilers to win with his Hodgecannon. Bouchard, Walman, I'm sure he probably called McDavid a mental smurf too somewhere up the line.
This is gaslighting/fake news wrapped into one.I'm not the one who made Steve Yzerman call a press conference to imply Walman was traded due to character issues.
Good on him for having a decent game for once. f*** the Kings.
That’s not what gaslighting is.This is gaslighting/fake news wrapped into one.
Is it really implying that Walman was traded due to character issues if Yzerman is saying no and no to regretting the trade to the Sharks and elaborating on it?I'm not the one who made Steve Yzerman call a press conference to imply Walman was traded due to character issues.
Good on him for having a decent game for once. f*** the Kings.
It's implying that it was not business or hockey related. Not many logical choices after thatIs it really implying that Walman was traded due to character issues if Yzerman is saying no and no to regretting the trade to the Sharks and elaborating on it?
A) The guy who built a back to back Cup champion and perennial contender in Tampa doesn't have a track record of solid managerial decisions? Even in Detroit, what mistakes has he made?Even if it were character related:
A) Yzerman doesn't exactly have a track record of solid managerial decisions
B) There were teams that would have paid for or at the very least taken Walman without needing to be enticed
C) There were no apparent issues in SJ and Edmonton doesn't seem to have any issues with him either, so it tells me it may be an organizational problem in Detroit
cool story, bro.A) The guy who built a back to back Cup champion and perennial contender in Tampa doesn't have a track record of solid managerial decisions? Even in Detroit, what mistakes has he made?
B) Wrong. The only thing that has been reported is that other teams would have taken Walman for a sweetener of lesser value than a 2nd.
C) Have you already forgotten about Walman being healthy scratched by Warsofsky for blowing off a team-mandated recovery session? He's been in Edmonton for ten minutes so it says it all that you have to brag about him not pissing people off there yet (that we know of).
About as intelligent a take as saying Grier has been bad at his job because the Sharks finish last every year.Yzerman has long known to be bad at his job. This is no secret
All it is saying is that he doesn’t regret it. It implies nothing beyond that. It can be as simple as Yzerman not wanting to admit regret due to ego.It's implying that it was not business or hockey related. Not many logical choices after that
Things are far more nuanced than you are implying here. Yzerman has his failings, but he's won, Grier has his failings, and still has a lot to prove. Yzerman's record has far more data points that can be used in an argument than Grier's.About as intelligent a take as saying Grier has been bad at his job because the Sharks finish last every year.
He has never won a cup as a GM.Things are far more nuanced than you are implying here. Yzerman has his failings, but he's won, Grier has his failings, and still has a lot to prove. Yzerman's record has far more data points that can be used in an argument than Grier's.
About as intelligent a take as saying Grier has been bad at his job because the Sharks finish last every year.
What are the data points supposedly proving Yzerman is bad at his job?Things are far more nuanced than you are implying here. Yzerman has his failings, but he's won, Grier has his failings, and still has a lot to prove. Yzerman's record has far more data points that can be used in an argument than Grier's.
We just need people to not hold grudges or whatever you want to call it against players that leave for whatever reason. That's all.Arguing about a GM that isn’t ours cause he said something about a player that is no longer on the team? We really need the draft lottery don’t we?