#32|Dec. 19, 2011|Flyers at Avalanche |9:00 p.m. ET
View Single Post
12-20-2011, 07:36 PM
Join Date: Jun 2007
Originally Posted by
And this statement truly means very little. None of us have any insight on what actually may have happened. It may have gone down just like he said, or something different.
What do you mean "just like he said"? What he said was that he was gauging value; and that doesn't make any sense. That's all my issue is here.
Originally Posted by
I'm not arguing any side here, but his statement implies no such thing, unless you're using the term "implies" very loosely, i.e. incorrectly.
Perhaps it is a bit strong, but I stand behind my sentiment. When you think of "gauging interest" what do you think of? If you tell me a GM was gauging interest, I would take that to mean, that he reached out to his usual suspects via his usual means to see if there were any nibbles. Is that a far fetched statement?
If he then claims that he, instead, waived somebody so that he can "gauge interest"; what am I to think other than he did NOT do his due dilligence, and instead he decided to dangle somebody out there for nothing, to see if there was interest?
It just simply doesn't make sense. The statement is dumb. Again, I MORE than understand the rationale behind waiving a guy like Nodl; but don't spew BS at me. Don't tell me you were "gauging interest".
Nobody waives a player to gauge interest!
Just tell me you had to lose a contract, and you wanted to give Nodl a shot somewhere. That is probably the truth. Stop talking nonsense for the sake of simply saying SOMETHING.
Perhaps I'm a stickler for facts but we can only go by what we are told; and straight from the horses mouth, we were given the "reason" for waiving Nodl; and it is retarded.
To stick with the NHL 12 analogy; even a teenager playing NHL 12 "gauges interest" and sees if he can get a draft pick before he waives somebody. Nobody waives anybody and claims that was gauging interest.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DUHockey9