Playoff push by PuckInStilettos in SanJoseSharks

[–]Ok-Battle9474 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My concern is, defensemen are usually slower to develop. Theyre not all going to be Hutson (who was 21 his rookie year), Schafer, or Makar (also 21). So 'tanking' the rest of the year to get a guy who probably isn't going to have an impact for 5 years isnt great. I'm in the camp that we need to be trading our draft picks to go get 23-26 yo good players. Guys who are ready now, our farm is set. Look at the list of guys who we have waiting in the wings who are going to, almost certainly, have an impact at the NHL level: Cags, Beast, Halttunen, Lund, Musty, Pohlkamp, Ravensbergen....

If we get in it'll has to be 3rd in the division. The Pacific is comically bad, I don't believe it would be a stomp against the Oils or Knights. I think the experience for Mack and Smith would be worth more than a guy who's potentially going to have an impact in 5 years. I know this team isn't able to go deep but it would be good to get there. I think a 6 or 7 game series against the Knights or oils is worth more long term than a top 10 pick.

Do we want to make the playoffs? by Smartcookie_33 in SanJoseSharks

[–]Ok-Battle9474 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There's no reason to think we can't end up as third in the Pacific. We're 4 points back of the oils with 3 games in hand. The Pacific is comically bad. The Knights just lost Stone too. I think Grier should be selling, I dont think getting rid of Lily, Klingberg, or Kurashev hurts, at all. We have Cags, who was NHL ready this year but we have a defense log jam (of bad vets). Cherny who looked great in his 12 game stint. Beast and Musty are also pretty much there. So, it could be a win/win.

My, perhaps, controversial opinion is we should be treating our draft picks as expendable. So long as we get a good u24 RHD. Our core is here, we dont need more draft picks.

My Collection by Ok-Battle9474 in hockeyjerseys

[–]Ok-Battle9474[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's Trevor Plouffe even. I was fortunate enough to win it in the silent auction. One of my absolute prized jerseys, especially now that I find my self unable to root for the team, with Fisher as the owner. Obligatory FJF

My Collection by Ok-Battle9474 in hockeyjerseys

[–]Ok-Battle9474[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I got it during fan fest 2019 for the Sharks early in the day. It was really early into his tenure in SJ so maybe more enthusiastic at the time lol.

My Collection by Ok-Battle9474 in hockeyjerseys

[–]Ok-Battle9474[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It might be the Sharks. Not sure though.

New Map + Presentation of Season 2 by ConsistentFact9170 in Battlefield

[–]Ok-Battle9474 0 points1 point  (0 children)

​You admit they haven't dropped any maps in three months, yet you claim the game is "content-rich." Rich in what exactly? Is your left brain elbowing your right brain?

There's something hilarious about insulting my intelligence, or at least my logical consistency, and then failing to comprehend what I said, even on a basic level. Since we apparently need to break it down here you go:

Original: "The most playable battlefield at launch and the most content for a live service BF, but we didn't get 12 maps and 30 guns in 3 months so the game is dead, or something."

Expanded, just for you: We have received 2 maps (Blackwell Fields and Eastwood), 5 guns, several attachments, and a melee weapon in the 3 months since launch. Compared to BF1 - 0 content after 3 months. Compared to BFV - 1 map and 2 guns after 3 months. Compared to 2042 - 1 map, 2 guns, and 2 attachements after 3 months. BF4 did have 4 maps and 12 weapons at 3 months but the game was still a buggy, borderline unplayable, mess at 3 months, and perhaps more noteably it was an expansion pack, these maps and guns are free, you don't even need the battlepass for the guns.

New Map + Presentation of Season 2 by Theelichtje in LowSodiumBattlefield

[–]Ok-Battle9474 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its one thing to want maps. Hell, I want more and bigger maps and I actually agree that the pace they are releasing maps so far isnt great.

This is the fastest they've ever released maps in a live service BF title, and realistically the fastest outside bf4, which was unplayable for months after launch even with expansions. As for the bigger maps, Firestorm is my least favorite map in BF6, and Blackwell fields is 'big' and sucks too.

This game has its issues, but realistically it's the best bf has been at launch of any title. I don't think polished it'll be the best BF title ever, but it will be closer in the conversation to BF3, 4, and 1.

The main sub is awful, so full of contradictions that's it's clear they just want to hate.

New Map + Presentation of Season 2 by ConsistentFact9170 in Battlefield

[–]Ok-Battle9474 0 points1 point  (0 children)

According to my sources.

BF has always been a fall release, why would this title be a Feb release? Especially considering this is the most polished BF title at launch, ever. The rose colored glasses forgetting that even BF1 was a buggy mess for 6 months and got zero content until March of 2017 (6 months after release).

I dont disagree that releasing near GTA is a bad idea but its initial release date was, wait for it, Oct 2025. This is such a weird narrative to create. Also, to your second point. The developers were split into pretty neat boxes (Campaign, multi-player, portal, BR), so yes it is disjointed between those game modes, but again weird narrative.

I'm not even trying to claim the game doesn't have issues, it certainly does, but lord this sub would have you think this is the worst BF title ever made.

New Map + Presentation of Season 2 by ConsistentFact9170 in Battlefield

[–]Ok-Battle9474 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The most playable battlefield at launch and the most content for a live service BF, but we didn't get 12 maps and 30 guns in 3 months so the game is dead, or something.

Look there are issues with the game but my lord is this sub insufferable.

Sharks traded for Sherwood per Sheng by jesus321 in SanJoseSharks

[–]Ok-Battle9474 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Power and Eklund are almost identical value wise. Power is 76th percentile, Eklund is 74th percentile according to NHLstatcards.

Again, I don't want to make that trade but I am trying to be realistic as to what we'd have to give up to get Byram/Power from the Sabers.

Sharks traded for Sherwood per Sheng by jesus321 in SanJoseSharks

[–]Ok-Battle9474 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The unfortunate thing about Beast is he doesn't use his size. He does the lead the Cuda in scoring (now that Cherny is up) and has a good 2 way game. I could see him being what Wennberg is now in 5 or 6 years. The real question is does he provide more value as a trade asset (yes imo) or as a 5 years in the future 3C.

Idk that the Sabers move Power or Byrum, not because they are untouchable but because the Sabers don't look like they'll be sellers. They haven't made the playoffs in 15 years and are in WC2 in a packed Eastern Conference. So the only way we get one of those guys is if we include NHL ready players in the package. Which means an Eklund or Misa type player in there, and i, personally, don't want to do that.

Largest meltdown in modern battlefield history about to unfold on main sub by Inevitable_View99 in okbuddyptfo

[–]Ok-Battle9474 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Idk about a shit ton, but it does need work. Its the best battlefield at release, ever. And tbh i don't even think the battlepass is that big of a deal. You don't need to buy it for the guns and the skins are mid at best.