Claimed off Waivers: [SJS] F Barclay Goodrow claimed by San Jose

[Stewie Griffin]

What I don't get is, if this claim was to get around his NTC, why would you want to acquire a player who's using his NTC to not go to you?

Maybe Sharks get something later on in another deal, who knows? It's not like Goodrow will refuse to report to camp. If you had a 15 team NTC, wouldn't you use one of those spots on the worst team in the NHL who will be just as bad next season?

 

[Djp]

Not sure why SJ does this without getting a sweetener with him. I know they need to hit the floor, but Goodrow's value is better known in the playoffs, something that SJ is unlikely to do anytime soon.

They can trade himvst 50% and get something positive for him. The rangers doesnt have the cap spsce to do that

Sure they could have traded him for FC instead of waiver claim

 

[Dog]

Welcome to shark country Goodrow get ready to lose majority of the games! Get ready for a lot of stinkers and alot of blowouts.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

I don't really get the hate for Grier here. That young team needs vets and salary to reach the floor. Sure, maybe prefer to also get assets by taking on the garbage, but this doesn't hurt the Sharks in anyway. Quite the opposite.

because the ideal HfB "rebuild roster" is 21 teenagers on ELCs and not even reaching the salary floor

 

[BillR10]

They can trade himvst 50% and get something positive for him. The rangers doesnt have the cap spsce to do that

Sure they could have traded him for FC instead of waiver claim

You need a retention slot to retain. Sharks won't have 1 until after next season

 

[CupofOil]

Ridiculous. The Sharks let the Rangers off the hook big time. They could have gotten a draft pick from the Rangers if they wanted Goodrow that bad and get an asset out of it, so much stupidity from team GMs today (taking the PLD contract etc.) that it's making my head spin.

 

[LOFIN]

Ridiculous. The Sharks let the Rangers off the hook big time. They could have gotten a draft pick from the Rangers if they wanted Goodrow that bad and get an asset out of it, so much stupidity from team GMs today (taking the PLD contract etc.) that it's making my head spin.

No they couldn’t because Goodrow wouldn’t waive his NTC

 

[Patty Ice]

A big f*** off to you, San Jose.

Sincerely,
Metro Disivion fans

Payback for Capfriendly.

 

[CupofOil]

No they couldn’t because Goodrow wouldn’t waive his NTC

Fair enough but couldn't they have signed some "vet presence" for less? I get that they have tons of money to spend but why intentionally add a bad contract? I actually like Goodrow well enough but I like him at 1.5m or so, not $3.6m

 

[LOFIN]

Fair enough but couldn't they have signed some "vet presence" for less? I get that they have tons of money to spend but why intentionally add a bad contract? I actually like Goodrow well enough but I like him at 1.5m or so, not $3.6m

San Jose doesn’t care if it’s a bad contract lol. They will remain bad for years to come, they can afford a bad deal or two. In fact, they need some to reach the cap floor.

 

[Double Dion]

Ridiculous. The Sharks let the Rangers off the hook big time. They could have gotten a draft pick from the Rangers if they wanted Goodrow that bad and get an asset out of it, so much stupidity from team GMs today (taking the PLD contract etc.) that it's making my head spin.

That Dubois one was downright shocking. We should see if Washington needs a #4 defenseman making 9.25 or a #2 LW making 10.5. How a guy gets into that chair and is still capable of making those kinds of decisions is beyond me.

 

[Goptor]

Salary cap floor is increasing. League is doing everything it can to hurt the Sharks.

 

[Charlie Conway]

I liked Goodrow. Great for his role, has those leadership elements, good PKer, plays his ass off. There's just no offense there, and his production came from being up and down the lineup in Gallant's last year. He played the role he was asked to, and he did it well.

Rebuilding teams need vets. Goodrow can be a tradeable asset in a year or so when the Sharks have a retention slot. He plays the "right way" that coaches love, and he'll drop the gloves for his teammates. He can also play up and down the lineup depending upon what's needed.

Sure, it's an expensive claim. But the Sharks will be trading off some assets this year, and you still need to field a team that hits the floor.

And, to be honest, Goodrow will be a bottom 6 upgrade on a lot of the UFAs San Jose will have leaving.

 

[Machinehead]

I don't think there are any favors going either way here. People always big brain acquisitions like this but the simplest explanation is, the Sharks wanted him for whatever reasons they have.

There are worse players who are going to play bigger roles this season. The NHL adores bad players. Tanner Glass played over 500 games.

 

[SML2]

Pretty bad choice for the sharks to do the Rangers a solid on this one. No reason they couldnt pay a draft pick for it.

I dont like even the concept that Grier is paying back the guy that got him the gm job.

No, there is a reason. Goodrow had a 15 team no trade list. He didn't have a no move clause. If I get something back for you, that's a trade. If I lose you on waivers,that's a move. Fact is, SJ can keeep Goodrow for a year or so to help turn the culture around and then hold half the contract and move him to a contender for a profit.

 

[StreetHawk]

They can trade himvst 50% and get something positive for him. The rangers doesnt have the cap spsce to do that

Sure they could have traded him for FC instead of waiver claim

They can't do that until July 1, 2025 as they have used all 3 of their retention spots for burns, Hertl and Karlsson.

I would expect something to flow between the 2 clubs in the coming days. Could be like NYR sending their first at #30 to SJ's #2 at #33 with a minor leaguer to eat up a contract slot,

 

[BillR10]

I wonder if this "handshake" is the sharks would have traded for him with a sweetner, he said no with the NTC and the sharks knew they would be #1 on the wire so a follow up trade would be the same while bypassing the ntc

 

[DingDongCharlie]

I like this pickup for San Jose. You need good veterans around a young developing team. Nobody will question Goodrow's effort level and leadership he will provide a young developing squad.

It's just cap space for a team with ample amounts.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Fair enough but couldn't they have signed some "vet presence" for less? I get that they have tons of money to spend but why intentionally add a bad contract? I actually like Goodrow well enough but I like him at 1.5m or so, not $3.6m

Lots of clubs that would love Goodrow are contenders. Problem is most contenders don't have the cap space to add role players @ his cap hit. I'd love Goodrow @ 50% of his contract too, but most teams able to add these full cap hits are the lower ranked teams looking to add proven vets.

They pay more money but cap space for them doesn't matter. This way they get their guy. In free agency @ equal $ as you suggest they have to compete against the market for said player. Maybe a Goodrow comparable player will only sign around @2m with a contender.

Typically speaking you don't see the best role player types signing with bottom feeders without being compensated, meaning overly. Perry and Foligno to Chicago comes to mind.

 

[Lion Hound]

GM Favors are real!

 

[Zirakzigil]

Seems like a good role player for the Sharks rebuild. Rangers are lucky to get rid of that much cap for free.

 

[themelkman]

No, there is a reason. Goodrow had a 15 team no trade list. He didn't have a no move clause. If I get something back for you, that's a trade. If I lose you on waivers,that's a move. Fact is, SJ can keeep Goodrow for a year or so to help turn the culture around and then hold half the contract and move him to a contender for a profit.

No we cannot. Our retention slots are filled for years. Goodrow will be on this team for three years unless a new gm takes over.

Now that isnt a huge deal, but these choices add up over time.

 

[UnSandvich]

Goodrow's probably going to be wearing a letter in SJ over the next few years

 

[Chet Manley]

Why would a rebuilding team want a player that had you on his ntc moping around?

 

[Flan the incredible]

No we cannot. Our retention slots are filled for years. Goodrow will be on this team for three years unless a new gm takes over.

Now that isnt a huge deal, but these choices add up over time.

Burns retention is over after this year.