Confirmed with Link: Sharks claim Goodrow from NYR

[spintops]

Goodrow's advanced stats look worse than Ryan Carpenter, as an example. He's really bad.

It's 2024 - everyone knows its about having a guy that will lose fights, that's what is important to winning hockey now

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

Yes, we should. San Jose has always been an undesirable location. However, players at the level of Goodrow are routinely and regularly available on the trade and free agent markets. There are numerous veterans that fill a bottom six role that remain unsigned for most of July. We signed Sturm as a Cup-winning veteran under similar circumstances. Guys will come at that level if we pay them enough and there are only so many NHL spots.

Sturm is still my favorite Garbage Tier Grier signing

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don’t want to take the time to look up the advanced stats of all the leagues 4th liners but I am confident in saying that the majority of all 4th liners have negative advanced stats (that’s why they are on the 4th line). Any player the Sharks put in that spot instead of Goodrow will also be a negative player.

So I don’t get the fuss about bringing in a veteran who can play C or W on the 4th line and has the cup experience Goodrow does.

If we had Goodrow last year then Carpenter could have stayed with the Cuda and helped them be a more competitive team (maybe even playoffs) which would also help the young players develop.

I don’t think Goodrow is some amazing player. I just see this as a positive for the Sharks when looking at it as a whole and what the alternatives are.

Making bad personnel decisions based on things that are outside of effectiveness is a bad habit to just handwave away. We shouldn't be acting this desperate to just have someone who by merit doesn't belong in the NHL anymore.

If you insist on judging Goodrow solely based on his stats during a season when he was reportedly playing through an injury and his most common linemates were Pitlick, Vesey, Bonino and Rempe then sure he sucks. But you're ignoring that he was a consistent 30 point scorer for the three seasons before that in addition to his physical play and penalty killing. Claiming him on waivers is a risk free bet that he will get back to that level. If he doesn't, nothing of value has been lost.

He was a bad hockey player even when he was scoring 30 points those seasons. He gives up a ton more than he creates. Then he would ghost those playoffs and get benched. I think about Goodrow no differently than how you think about Bordeleau. Someone that you believe has proven they are not worthy of a contract slot and should be moved on from. Grier just happened to bring an awful player you like in but he still sucks. It's a waste of resources.

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

It depends on what your expectations are for someone like Goodrow. For as many goals as Goodrow managed to put up in these playoffs, he still gave up more goals than he scored. The shot and chance numbers were drastically against him in the playoffs. He took the 4th most faceoffs for that team and 3rd in defensive zone draws and was largely losing them. He was alright in that department during the regular season but what has consistently remained true with Goodrow is that between the whistles, he gives up a lot more than he generates. I don't know how it can be justified to pay him 3.6 mil to have that sort of output. I get that some people look at our team as still being bad but the process of making our team better is by bringing in guys who have solid even strength output on their resume if we're going to bring in players from outside the organization.

I only consider Goodrow worse than Smith when you account for contracts and cap hit. The expectations for Goodrow are higher solely because of the contract and his experience and role as a regular in the lineup. Smith is just an extra that fills in from time to time and doesn't make much more than the minimum. He's a terrible hockey player too but nobody is looking to him to make a real impact on the ice. You don't pay Goodrow that much to not expect at least the ability to break even when he's on the ice.

If there isn’t some sort of draft day deal with the rangers involving picks or D or G prospects I’ll be I. The same boat as you in the wasted cap space for a guy at that price tag should be in the 25-35 not range.

This is an ideal cap dump trade imo

defenseman Vladimir Malakhov
and a conditional first-round draft pick to San Jose for defenseman
Jim Fahey and the rights to left wing Alexander Korolyuk.

 

[OrrNumber4]

2) Goodrow is only 31 and his two years before this one featured 11/13 goals and 20 assists in each, so it's no guarantee that he actually is cooked,

Underrated point.

 

[Star Platinum]

Yes, we should. San Jose has always been an undesirable location. However, players at the level of Goodrow are routinely and regularly available on the trade and free agent markets. There are numerous veterans that fill a bottom six role that remain unsigned for most of July. We signed Sturm as a Cup-winning veteran under similar circumstances. Guys will come at that level if we pay them enough and there are only so many NHL spots.

I don't know that I buy that San Jose has always been an undesirable location. Does it have the appeal that cities like New York, Chicago, L.A., or Miami have? No. Does it have the low taxes of Nevada, Texas or a Florida? No. But it also doesn't have the weather of Winnipeg or Edmonton. I mean, aside from the tradition of being an original 6 team, do professional players really want to live near Detroit or Montreal? Real estate prices are a barrier for a lot of people that might otherwise live near San Jose, but not for professional athletes.

It all comes down to winning. If you have a winning club, you will be popular with free agents. If you're losing, you'll have an easier time in free agency in New York or Vegas than you will in San Jose (although why anyone would want to live in Vegas is beyond my comprehension - it's a classic case of a place you don't want to spend more than 3-4 days at IMO). But a winning team will always be able to attract players. If the money and the opportunity to win is even, will the Sharks lose on on free agent battles? Sometimes. But not all the time.

Right now, we're hockey hell so we're gonna be picking through the leftovers.

 

[Pavelski2112]

I don't know that I buy that San Jose has always been an undesirable location. Does it have the appeals that cities like New York, Chicago, L.A., or Miami have? No. Does it have the low taxes of a Texas or a Florida? No. But it also doesn't have the weather of Winnipeg or Edmonton. I mean, aside from the tradition of being an original 6 team, do professional players really want to live near Detroit or Montreal? Real estate prices are a barrier for a lot of people that might otherwise live near San Jose, but not for professional athletes.

It all comes down to winning. If you have a winning club, you will be popular with free agents. If you're losing, you'll have an easier time in free agency in New York or Vegas than you will in San Jose (although why anyone would want to live in Vegas is beyond my comprehension - it's a classic case of a place you don't want to spend more than 3-4 days at IMO). But a winning team will always be able to attract players. If the money and the opportunity to win is even, will the Sharks lose on on free agent battles? Sometimes. But not all the time.

Right now, we're hockey hell so we're gonna be picking through the leftovers.

The problem is that even when the Sharks were a perennial Cup contender, they never had a lot of UFAs pining to sign here

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

The problem is that even when the Sharks were a perennial Cup contender, they never had a lot of UFAs pining to sign here

Yeah the whole tax thing and the cost of living in the Bay Area are the 2 biggest detractors from players wanting to come to SJ

 

[CupfortheSharks]

I think it’s a good thing that the Sharks have not signed many high end UFAs. Most of their contracts are horrible. You can get some decent depth players with fair contracts from the UFA market but teams are mostly better off without the high end guys and their crippling contracts.

 

[TheBeard]

You generally have a sensible approach or at the very least to a conversation about the topic, I don’t I’ve ever seen you respond with just a “because Grier”

I think Grier isn't nor should have done anything dramatic so early in the rebuild stage. He's making small low risk/high reward moves that rarely work out. The only way to judge him is how he builds a contender when the team is on the upward swing.

 

[Star Platinum]

I think Grier isn't nor should have done anything dramatic so early in the rebuild stage. He's making small low risk/high reward moves that rarely work out. The only way to judge him is how he builds a contender when the team is on the upward swing.

He'll be judged on how well he drafts. If he doesn't do that well, nothing else will matter.

 

[TheBeard]

He'll be judged on how well he drafts. If he doesn't do that well, nothing else will matter.

I disagree.

If Macklin turns out to be Daigle, is that Grier's fault?

 

[TheBeard]

Florida is f***in' rattled.

 

[Sharkz4Fun]

The problem is that even when the Sharks were a perennial Cup contender, they never had a lot of UFAs pining to sign here

I can't remember the later 2000's, but all throughout the 2010's, who was even there for them to sign? They had a main core similar to Dallas now where they didn't feel the need to target every high end FA and only added through drafts and an occasional move. Wilson signed tons of quality FA's over the years even with the bad ones. They went after Stamkos/Tavares who both made very reasonable decisions. Very few high-end quality guys even make it to FA. Even in those incredibly poorly written Athletic articles I never saw anything negative in regards to the city or organization.

I think there is absolutely nothing to SJ being undesirable and it's still only a few people weirdly hanging onto that.. for some reason...?

 

[sharski]

How is this 13 pages? Lol

No matter whether or not you think this was a good move, it's fundamentally inconsequential, Goodrow is not going to make or break the rebuild

I think we're gonna be alright, folks

Nobody could have possibly foreseen this black swan event I'm still processing it

 

[Star Platinum]

I disagree.

If Macklin turns out to be Daigle, is that Grier's fault?

If Macklin turns out to be Daigle, Grier is gonna pay the price for it

 

[TheBeard]

Adam MA

If Macklin turns out to be Daigle, Grier is gonna pay the price for it

Should he?

 

[timorous me]

Adam MA

Should he?

Definitely not. But it helps explain why rebuilding GM jobs are so unappealing. Even when you get some good fortune, like winning a lottery like this, your success is so incredibly dependent on the development of 18 year-olds that it's going to take a long time before you can feel comfortable in even just the direction of the organization.

 

[Star Platinum]

Should he?

Are we living in the real world or the pretend world?

 

[TheBeard]

Are we living in the real world or the pretend world?

I would hope the powers that be would recognize the truth.

 

[Star Platinum]

I would hope the powers that be would recognize the truth.

So, the pretend world.

 

[TheBeard]

So, the pretend world.

Well, it would be something we wouldn't know for another 3-4 years and tbh with all the other pieces Grier has acquired, if the team still stinks then it is on him.

 

[Bizz]

It's virtually impossible for a consensus #1 pick to bust out in today's age. Of the most recent ones, Lafreniere was never really highly touted. Yakupov was pretty much the only one and even he had questions about his game going into that draft. Celebrini will be fine.

 

[Alaskanice]

It's virtually impossible for a consensus #1 pick to bust out in today's age. Of the most recent ones, Lafreniere was never really highly touted. Yakupov was pretty much the only one and even he had questions about his game going into that draft. Celebrini will be fine.

I’ve seen it talked about that Celebrini will be the more important player than Bedard.

 

[spintops]

It's virtually impossible for a consensus #1 pick to bust out in today's age. Of the most recent ones, Lafreniere was never really highly touted. Yakupov was pretty much the only one and even he had questions about his game going into that draft. Celebrini will be fine.

Don't jinx us