Speculation: TDL rumors/speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.

one2gamble

Registered User
Dec 24, 2007
16,997
7,973
I don't know if I could ever justify paying that much for one but man do I want one. Even then, i feel like I'd be too scared to drink it
its not worth that, its probably worth slightly more than its actual msrp but the markups for it now are crazy talk
 

hockeyball

Registered User
Nov 10, 2007
21,552
886
its not worth that, its probably worth slightly more than its actual msrp but the markups for it now are crazy talk

People have always asked me how I afford all the gadgets and stuff I do... I just explain that if you eliminate drinking, smoking, and drugs from your budget they'd have a lot of extra money too.

I literally cannot even figure out how people afford that crap. It's expensive as hell, and in my opinion, completely counter productive. Never had any interest in any of them my entire life, and I plan to keep it that way.
 

one2gamble

Registered User
Dec 24, 2007
16,997
7,973
People have always asked me how I afford all the gadgets and stuff I do... I just explain that if you eliminate drinking, smoking, and drugs from your budget they'd have a lot of extra money too.

I literally cannot even figure out how people afford that crap. It's expensive as hell, and in my opinion, completely counter productive. Never had any interest in any of them my entire life, and I plan to keep it that way.
lucky you, i have a whisky and a gadget fetish.....oh and hockey. I cant think of 3 more expensive "hobbies" off the top of my head lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Lebanezer

I'unno? Coast Guard?
Jul 24, 2006
14,812
10,411
San Jose
People have always asked me how I afford all the gadgets and stuff I do... I just explain that if you eliminate drinking, smoking, and drugs from your budget they'd have a lot of extra money too.

I literally cannot even figure out how people afford that crap. It's expensive as hell, and in my opinion, completely counter productive. Never had any interest in any of them my entire life, and I plan to keep it that way.
:laugh::thumbu:
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,376
13,783
Folsom
Boyle was a fine player for the Sharks. But he was not a superstar. And, I rue that trade... because of the opportunity costs. That trade was DW committing to Dan Boyle as the core of the teams defense for six years, and that was a bad decision.

lol you rue that trade? Based on what? Boyle was an elite superstar #1 d-man for this team for four of his six years here. It's laughable that you want to try and argue opportunity costs yet give absolutely no support for that statement. Opportunity costs like what? The assets used in the trade? That can't be it because nothing really materialized from the players and picks dealt. Cap cost? That can't be it because how many top d-men moved in free agency during that time that they couldn't otherwise afford due specifically to Boyle being here? DW committing to Boyle as part of the core of the team's defense was an excellent move that was worth the cost quite easily and has had residual positive effects in terms of what they look for in d-men that they didn't before then really and the fact that his rights got us Balcers which helped get us Karlsson.

This is a very poor take even for you.
 

mooncalf

Registered User
Mar 15, 2017
1,493
1,182
San Jose
Boyle was a fine player for the Sharks. But he was not a superstar. And, I rue that trade... because of the opportunity costs. That trade was DW committing to Dan Boyle as the core of the teams defense for six years, and that was a bad decision.
What even is this take?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

fasterthanlight

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 30, 2009
6,473
5,608
Seattle, WA
Boyle was a fine player for the Sharks. But he was not a superstar. And, I rue that trade... because of the opportunity costs. That trade was DW committing to Dan Boyle as the core of the teams defense for six years, and that was a bad decision.

Gonna have to disagree with ya on this one. Boyle was definitely a number 1, superstar D. We gave up Wishart (26 NHL games) Carle (I'd argue we sold high and avoided some contract nightmares) a 1st and 4th. If the assets are not the opportunity cost, what was?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

one2gamble

Registered User
Dec 24, 2007
16,997
7,973
so like, the boyle acquisition was about 3 team refreshes ago, lets talk about the 2019 deadline or whisky
 

Bizz

2023 LTIR Loophole* Cup Champions
Oct 17, 2007
10,970
6,636
San Jose
Nino for Victor Rask. Basically we could have gotten Nino for a very low price.

5.25M a year for 6 years for essentially Boedker 2.0 except not as good defensively.

No thanks.

Minnesota getting Rask basically means one of Coyle or Fehr is getting traded soon and I wouldn't mind having either of those two back.
 
Last edited:

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,376
13,783
Folsom
5.25M a year for 6 years for essentially Boedker 2.0 except not as good defensively.

No thanks.

Minnesota getting Rask basically means one of Coyle or Fehr is getting traded soon and I wouldn't mind having either of those two back.

I don't think Nino's anything special and I don't see who we'd give up that would've made getting him at his rate worth it but Carolina won that deal because Rask is garbage.
 

Fistfullofbeer

Moderator
May 9, 2011
30,321
9,007
Whidbey Island, WA
5.25M a year for 6 years for essentially Boedker 2.0 except not as good defensively.

No thanks.

Minnesota getting Rask basically means one of Coyle or Fehr is getting traded soon and I wouldn't mind having either of those two back.

I think Fehr is pretty much a 4C at this point, so as much as I would like him at that position, I would rather get an upgrade in the top-9. My ideal scenario for the playoffs is to have either a speedy 3C or top-9 winger with the idea that Jumbo goes down to 4C and Pavs OR the new acquisition becomes the 3C. It would be really nice to have Pavs and Jumbo split up again and having them both with faster line-mates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChompChomp

hohosaregood

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
32,399
12,604
lucky you, i have a whisky and a gadget fetish.....oh and hockey. I cant think of 3 more expensive "hobbies" off the top of my head lol
Right there with you. I spend pretty minimally on hockey and booze though. But my gadget budget is quite high
 

rideaucrusher21

Registered User
Aug 8, 2008
1,123
257
CA
lucky you, i have a whisky and a gadget fetish.....oh and hockey. I cant think of 3 more expensive "hobbies" off the top of my head lol
Cars. I have friends that go to the racetrack and stuff and they can’t do anything else. Sometimes I’ll take them to Sharks games because they can’t afford tickets anymore haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

OffSydes

#tank2014/5
Aug 14, 2011
3,387
2,065
My vice is cycling and it can get expensive fast but shopping the opposite seasons will save you tons of money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one2gamble

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,594
4,555
Behind A Tree
My vice is pepsi. I like a scattered drink, only smoked twice and that was for the sake of trying it. Still can't get enough of pepsi.
 

Used As A Shield

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
3,949
1,199
My vice is coffee, it used to be dark beers but had to give it up when I found out I could no longer consume gluten.
 

Quid Pro Clowe

Registered User
Dec 28, 2008
52,301
9,174
530
When he decided to hit Boyle in the numbers, the stumble became irrelevant. Definition of defenseless. That's 15 to 20 games in todays NHL despite the silly premise that the DOPS won't suspend players that hurt Sharks.
I said the hit was illegal. Boyle stumbling changed it from a 2 minute minor to a 5 minute major and a 5 game suspension. Glad the league didn't fault the victim in that case.

My main point was I've seen more malicious hits than that one against Sharks, even by the player in question.
 

TomasHertlsRooster

Don’t say eye test when you mean points
May 14, 2012
33,360
25,417
Fremont, CA
I said the hit was illegal. Boyle stumbling changed it from a 2 minute minor to a 5 minute major and a 5 game suspension. Glad the league didn't fault the victim in that case.

My main point was I've seen more malicious hits than that one against Sharks, even by the player in question.

I still think Lapierre’s was hit on Boyle was the most malicious, but at any rate, it doesn’t really change what I’m saying.

We had a true useless goon on the ice, along another 4th liner that added toughness and wasn’t afraid to drop the gloves. It didn’t deter a damn thing - Lapierre still threw an incredibly malicious hit on Boyle that essentially ended his career. And, the useless goon didn’t even manage to get his hands on Lapierre; he just fought another useless goon. Desjardins supposedly punched Lapierre and made him bleed, but footage never surfaced and I’m quite skeptical that it actually happened.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad