Sabres waive Corey Tropp

[Trettioåtta]

Worse Drew Stafford for Tropp....hmmmm

 

Not surprised he got picked up. Prototypical bottom 6 player.

 

What are the points per game for WDS and Tropp over last three years?

[Eleven]

Tropp, D'Agostini, tomato, tomahto....

[wjag]

Tropp, D'Agostini, tomato, tomahto....

 

Tropp, D'Agostini, Ennis, Flynn, Porter, Scott, Adam, McCormick,Stafford, tomato, tomatoe

[K-9]

Tropp, D'Agostini, tomato, tomahto....

 

Potato, potahto.

 

Let's call the whole thing off!

 

Which may not be a bad idea at this juncture.

 

GO SABRES!!!

[inkman]

Using "Darcy" as a verb. Really like that. Now we can move on from "compete" as a verb.

Please for the love of god

 

I'm just using the line that gets thrown around at some people, by certain people, when critical discussion about the Sabres happens.

 

See how stupid it sounds?

It is what it is

[nfreeman]

Using "Darcy" as a verb. Really like that. Now we can move on from "compete" as a verb.

 

He wasn't using it as a verb.

 

Bad move on the Sabres part it will come back to bite them. When Tropp scores against Buffalo as a Bluejacket it'll be the same feeling as when Paille or Macarthur scores against Buf. Talent that was over looked by management

 

Tropp doesn't have as much game as Clarkie, but he might turn into a Paille.

 

I too kinda liked Tropp but it's unlikely this move turns out to be consequential.

[darksabre]

 

 

He wasn't using it as a verb.

 

 

 

Tropp doesn't have as much game as Clarkie, but he might turn into a Paille.

 

I too kinda liked Tropp but it's unlikely this move turns out to be consequential.

 

Aww, why'd you have to bring up Danny? :(

[Taro T]

The part that you pointed out that you disagreed with was actually the part I meant you agreed with. You said "nope" when talking about what I said about their value for the rest of their careers... And then went on to use a different word for value.

 

You agree with that. We just disagree on where the value is.

 

 

And since when are we making decisions about the now? This team is done.

 

And you can't argue that he was brought in as a teacher, but then say it's about now. That'd also be a move about the future.

Can we stop saying that this is a guy he's comfortable with? We have no idea what the relationship is. We're basing that off D'Agostini being at a camp a while back. That could've just been a case of convenience and availability.

 

 

 

Read some of the posts here. He won't get a shot in Rochester. He's off to Columbus. He got claimed early on in the waiver order, and I'm sure multiple other teams would've made a claim.

I fully realize you think we agree. I have tried to explain why we don't. That is on you. NEITHER player has significant value to the Sabres long term. So the value is what they are worth today, and that value includes current intangibles.

 

I truly doubt thry expected to lose Tropp, but he'll be replaceable - all 4th liners are.

 

And if you can't see how a 'teacher' can be about today (which can set expectations for the future) then there is no point in continuing the discussion.

[Hoss]

 

I fully realize you think we agree. I have tried to explain why we don't. That is on you. NEITHER player has significant value to the Sabres long term. So the value is what they are worth today, and that value includes current intangibles.

 

I truly doubt thry expected to lose Tropp, but he'll be replaceable - all 4th liners are.

 

And if you can't see how a 'teacher' can be about today (which can set expectations for the future) then there is no point in continuing the discussion.

 

Thanks for trying to make it personal. Always a good way to do things...

 

Anyways. I was trying to make light of the fact that we both have opposite opinions but technically agreed on ONE thing. If your argument is that neither has future value and that their only value is what they are now then you're still saying that their value for the rest of their careers is what is important which is what I said in the first place. We just disagree on where the value is, how long the value projects and who has more of it.

 

And, sure, being a teacher can be about today... But teachers (in the classroom and in businesses) are more about long-term projection. A teacher doesn't teach an accounting class expecting the students to head down to Wall Street at the end of the class.

[Taro T]

Thanks for trying to make it personal. Always a good way to do things...

 

Anyways. I was trying to make light of the fact that we both have opposite opinions but technically agreed on ONE thing. If your argument is that neither has future value and that their only value is what they are now then you're still saying that their value for the rest of their careers is what is important which is what I said in the first place. We just disagree on where the value is, how long the value projects and who has more of it.

 

And, sure, being a teacher can be about today... But teachers (in the classroom and in businesses) are more about long-term projection. A teacher doesn't teach an accounting class expecting the students to head down to Wall Street at the end of the class.

I'm not making it personal.

 

I'm saying any value Tropp has 3 years (or so) down the road is immaterial, as that is easily replaceable. That value doesn't fit into the decision to send Tropp down/out. You still don't appear to understand that is what I'm saying.

[Hoss]

 

I'm not making it personal.

 

I'm saying any value Tropp has 3 years (or so) down the road is immaterial, as that is easily replaceable. That value doesn't fit into the decision to send Tropp down/out. You still don't appear to understand that is what I'm saying.

 

We don't know what Tropp will be in three years.

[Two or less]

Jeez, i knew Tropp was a fan favorite but didn't realize this many people would think it's a big deal. It's not a big loss. Tropp was awful this season. In the Philly game, he was the worst player on the ice. Just can't keep rewarding guys like this because they work hard. There needs to be more of a precedent then working hard to make the roster. I truly believe, the Sabres believed it'd be in his best interest as a hockey player to go down to Rochester for a few weeks and work with the coaches there on his game before bringing him back up to finish the season. But, he is replaceable. If Columbus feels he's the type of player they need, then so be it. Good luck to them and him.

 

This over re-action reminds me of the day Tim Kennedy was waived.

[Taro T]

We don't know what Tropp will be in three years.

:doh:

 

:wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

[darksabre]

 

:doh:

 

:wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

 

I told you he was being very Darcy but you had to find out for yourself :P

[Eleven]

A verb is an action word. An adjective--which, notably in this instance, often is a word ending in'y'--modifies a noun.

 

There are two main verbs in the poorly-punctuated sentence "I told you he was being very Darcy but you had to find out for yourself"

 

However, there also are two sentences (in the grammatical sense) there.

 

Let us focus our efforts on the first of those: "I told you he was being very Darcy." (Period added.)

 

In that sentence, the main verb is "told." It is the first-person-past conjugation of the verb, "to tell." There is another verb, it is "was being." Past continuous. It's used, in this instance, to modify "he," which is the indirect object of "told," and the subject of "was." Now, let's look at what "he" "was being": very Darcy. "Very," as used here, is an adverb. Now, we know that, often, adverbs modify verbs. But they have another, almost clandestine, job: Adverbs also modify adjectives (and other adverbs, but that's not relevant here). "Very" is modifying not a verb, but, indeed, an adjective! "Darcy" modifies the "he." The "he" who is unfortunate to be "very Darcy," but the "he" nonetheless. Poor guy.

 

"Darcy" would be a verb had the sentence been, "well, he Darcied the ###### out of that draft pick!" Or, "O! For the love of all that is good in this world, let us not Darcy ourselves on the world stage!"

 

 

(I needed something to do. I hope I didn't totally Darcy this post.)

[Taro T]

I told you he was being very Darcy but you had to find out for yourself :P

:doh:

 

A verb is an action word. An adjective--which, notably in this instance, often is a word ending in'y'--modifies a noun.

 

There are two main verbs in the poorly-punctuated sentence "I told you he was being very Darcy but you had to find out for yourself"

 

However, there also are two sentences (in the grammatical sense) there.

 

Let us focus our efforts on the first of those: "I told you he was being very Darcy." (Period added.)

 

In that sentence, the main verb is "told." It is the first-person-past conjugation of the verb, "to tell." There is another verb, it is "was being." Past continuous. It's used, in this instance, to modify "he," which is the indirect object of "told," and the subject of "was." Now, let's look at what "he" "was being": very Darcy. "Very," as used here, is an adverb. Now, we know that, often, adverbs modify verbs. But they have another, almost clandestine, job: Adverbs also modify adjectives (and other adverbs, but that's not relevant here). "Very" is modifying not a verb, but, indeed, an adjective!

 

"Darcy" would be a verb had the sentence been, "well, he Darcied the ###### out of that draft pick!" Or, "O! For the love of all that is good in this world, let us not Darcy ourselves on the world stage!"

 

 

(I needed something to do. I hope I didn't totally Darcy this post.)

It wasn't TOTALLY Darcied, but it was a good attempt. :P

[Hoss]

 

:doh:

 

:wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

 

Go ahead and bash your head. Your argument is that Tropp's value in three years is replaceable. That's simply impossible to determine. He had potential. He was a hard-nosed, hard-working player which this team had and does lack. In three years, who knows what he is. He could've turned into a 10-15 goal guy who works hard in the bottom six. You can say that's replaceable, but when was the last time we had that?

[darksabre]

A verb is an action word. An adjective--which, notably in this instance, often is a word ending in'y'--modifies a noun.

 

There are two main verbs in the poorly-punctuated sentence "I told you he was being very Darcy but you had to find out for yourself"

 

However, there also are two sentences (in the grammatical sense) there.

 

Let us focus our efforts on the first of those: "I told you he was being very Darcy." (Period added.)

 

In that sentence, the main verb is "told." It is the first-person-past conjugation of the verb, "to tell." There is another verb, it is "was being." Past continuous. It's used, in this instance, to modify "he," which is the indirect object of "told," and the subject of "was." Now, let's look at what "he" "was being": very Darcy. "Very," as used here, is an adverb. Now, we know that, often, adverbs modify verbs. But they have another, almost clandestine, job: Adverbs also modify adjectives (and other adverbs, but that's not relevant here). "Very" is modifying not a verb, but, indeed, an adjective! "Darcy" modifies the "he." The "he" who is unfortunate to be "very Darcy," but the "he" nonetheless. Poor guy.

 

"Darcy" would be a verb had the sentence been, "well, he Darcied the ###### out of that draft pick!" Or, "O! For the love of all that is good in this world, let us not Darcy ourselves on the world stage!"

 

 

(I needed something to do. I hope I didn't totally Darcy this post.)

 

This post was both informative and humorous, very un-Darcy of you!

 

 

 

Go ahead and bash your head. Your argument is that Tropp's value in three years is replaceable. That's simply impossible to determine. He had potential. He was a hard-nosed, hard-working player which this team had and does lack. In three years, who knows what he is. He could've turned into a 10-15 goal guy who works hard in the bottom six. You can say that's replaceable, but when was the last time we had that?

 

Drew Stafford seems to be filling that role nicely.

[qwksndmonster]

Sucks that he got claimed. Maybe he'll start playing better when he's further removed from his face being broken and make us look silly this year.

 

Good luck Tropper.

[Hoss]

Drew Stafford seems to be filling that role nicely.

 

Talking about a legitimate hard-to-play-against bottom six player that works hard, forechecks and can add secondary scoring.

[thesportsbuff]

Drew Stafford seems to be filling that role nicely.

 

I'm assuming you were just more or less making a joke, but I think we can all agree that Drew Stafford is not a hard nosed or particularly hard working player. He also has just 8 goals in his last 75 games, despite playing Top 6 minutes (inexplicably). So, while production-wise he may be filling the role of a 10 goal bottom 6 player, his ice time (which says he is Top 6) + alleged lack of work ethic tells me he is not filling that role in any way shape or form.

[darksabre]

 

 

I'm assuming you were just more or less making a joke, but I think we can all agree that Drew Stafford is not a hard nosed or particularly hard working player. He also has just 8 goals in his last 75 games, despite playing Top 6 minutes (inexplicably). So, while production-wise he may be filling the role of a 10 goal bottom 6 player, his ice time (which says he is Top 6) + alleged lack of work ethic tells me he is not filling that role in any way shape or form.

 

It pains me to admit it but he is actually playing quite well this season, including a physical presence. He is actually filling the bottom six role well except for being slotted too high in the lineup on a team that has no talent to push him back down.

 

And I hate Drew Stafford.

[Hoss]

 

 

It pains me to admit it but he is actually playing quite well this season, including a physical presence. He is actually filling the bottom six role well except for being slotted too high in the lineup on a team that has no talent to push him back down.

 

And I hate Drew Stafford.

 

If what you're getting at is that he isn't playing that poorly, but everybody still hates him... Then the problem might be that fat contract of his. Imagine having a hard-working bottom six player who doesn't have a big contract... That Tropp guy in Columbus could be that someday.

[Robviously]

It pains me to admit it but he is actually playing quite well this season, including a physical presence. He is actually filling the bottom six role well except for being slotted too high in the lineup on a team that has no talent to push him back down.

 

And I hate Drew Stafford.

Stafford has played really well since Nolan showed up.

 

And I still want him off the team as soon as possible.

[Huckleberry]

Suspected he wouldn't clear waivers, for same reason we picked up D'agostini, why wouldn't a team take a chance on him ?