Neomaxizoomdweebie

If only she could figure out how to be as successful in her personal life as she is in her professional one.

Thought it was rather meh. Shakira is overrated. J-Lo still looks amazing at 50, but I was never a big fan TBH. Also, I loved how 2 powerful latin women used the term "latino" instead of that stupid "latinx" nonsense.

1. It's not all about goals. Would you rather have a guy with 30 goals and 10 assists or a guy with 20 goals and 30 assists? 2. NJ gave up 2 picks, a 2nd and a 3rd, for Gusev before he even set foot on NHL ice. They were willing to give that up for a guy who could have turned out to be a bust. Now that he has proven he isn't a bust, and is on pace to hit 50 points( top 6 numbers regardless of how goals and assists are broken down), would it not be logical to think he might be worth more than that now? And what is the more valuable than a 2nd round pick? A 1st rounder.

Not impressed. Carley is way hotter.

The only time Philly should care about winning 4 in a row vs the Red Wings is in the Stanley Cup Finals.

AA last year was a 50 point winger. And was worth a 1st in your opinion. Gusev is a 50 point winger this season, but isn't worth a 1st round pick in your opinion. Plus Gusev isnt a purely one dimensional player like AA, and he's right handed. Which could actually make him even more valuable to some teams. Do you not see why some of us might find this nonsensical? AA=50 points=1st round pick Gusev=50 points=not worth a 1st round pick By your logic.

Oh. I know they're real. I just remember the good ol days when Hummers were gas guzzlers and got like 10 MPG. The idea of an environmentally responsible one just seems upside down now. It's like a Prius with a Hemi.

That just sounds like such an oxymoron.

Please explain to me why you think, AA, a guy who has been in the NHL for 5 seasons, hit 50 points one time (never came close the other 4 seasons), is one dimensional and horrible defensively IS worth a 1st round pick....ever.....and Gusev, who is on pace to near 50 points in his first NHL season, and is better defensively, and younger, isn't worth a 1st round pick? Because tataristhefuture Edit: I knew Gusev was an older rookie, but I didn't realize he was older than AA. Whoops!

Except AA and Pulu are in unique situations. I agree that there are other areas that need filled more, but unless a team is giving me a 21 year old top 4 D or a solid goalie under the age of 25 (there isn't), there really aren't many more options. Pulu is literally the best return we could get for AA at this point, even if the trade seems redundant. Gusev would absolutely get a late 1st at the TDL from a contender wanting to bolster their offense. Even if he ends up on their 3rd line, the increase in offensive production would be worth it to a team who wants to win now and doesn't care about developing late 1st round picks.

A. AA hasn't exactly been a model player either. One difficult player for another. B. That's exactly what a trade for Pulu is. One based on potential.

Larkin, Mantha, Zadina, Veleno, Bert, Moose, and potentially another high end F in the draft makes AA as expendable as a 3rd nipple. Trading him for Pool Party makes perfect sense cuz ur trading a guy who is essentially a one dimensional, 3rd line winger at that point for another guy who is: A. 4 years younger B. Still has the potential to be a solid, 2 way, top 6 F. C. Right handed D. Will still be at worst a 3W anyway. So basically, at worst, you're getting the same level of player back, but with the potential to be even better. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Kotkaniemi sent down to the AHL. 3rd overall pick in Zadina's draft. Clearly, he's a bust too.

TBH, I'm surprised that doesn't happen more often.

There's a game tonight?

Except you said 4th rounder and I thought you said 2nd rounder. Oops.

Not only would they miss the playoffs, they might even still finish in the bottom 5.

Yeah, but if you trade 20 of our players for 20 2nd round picks; there's a 100% chance we get 1 NHL player out of it. Get it now?

Don't worry. It's not.

None of that is hindsight except for the 2nd round draft pick not panning out. The rest was known at the time of the trade. And yes, even after hindsight, I think GM's would tell you that they would have made that trade under the exact same circumstances.

That's better than doing it alone Rosey.

That's exactly where he should be. 3rd line. We got a good player for a waiver pick up. Why would anyone poo poo this?

Is this really Trouba?

This is soooo sad. They give up 4 goals and Jimmy is looking better?

No one would argue that Holland ended up on the losing end of that deal. It was inevitable. He was bent over a barrel and every other GM knew it. He had no chance to win any trade he made that day and any other GM would have lost a similar trade under similar circumstances, but it was still a trade he had to make. The biggest argument has always been that KH shouldn't have made the trade at all and let the streak end. But what would any other GM have done in the same situation? If you asked the 30 other GMs: If you- A. Have a team decimated with injuries and you have no one to center your top 2 lines. B. Are in the playoff hunt, but are currently on the outside looking in. C. Have made the playoffs 20+ years in a row. Do you trade- A. A future 3C who can't even beat J. Andersson for a roster spot and who is going back to Sweden anyway. B. A 4th line/depth F. C. A 2nd round draft pick who never pans out. For- A. A career 2C, on an expiring contract, who is leading his team in points. B. A 5th round draft pick. I guarantee you that they all say they would make that trade.