Jump to content


Photo

Post your defenceman trade proposals here


  • Please log in to reply
252 replies to this topic

#1 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:18 AM

Your chance to say who you would target, what you would pay, and how stupid the other guy's proposal is.
I'll start:

Evander Kane, Justin Bailey and pick 8
For
Cam Fowler and pick 26

Depends on how the playoffs unfold, but there is a good chance that the Ducks look at Theodore and Montour and say "Cam's great, but do we really need to pay him $7 million?"

Each team trades from a position of strength to fill a position of weakness.
Contract situations match
Solves the Ducks expansion problem.

Fire away.

#2 mustacheofgod

mustacheofgod

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,077 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NYC

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:24 AM

Jack Eichel for a Erik Karlsson

#3 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:38 AM

My preferred targets would be two of Fowler, Trouba Ekholm, Ellis. I don't expect any of them to be moved, so combining my preferences with expectations, I arrive at players more like Vatanen and Brodin.

Kane and a 3rd for Brodin.
#8, Bailey/Baptiste, Girgensons for Vatanen and #27.

Brodin-Risto
McCabe-Vatanen
Guhle-Antipin
Falk

Bogo banished somewhere. Anywhere. Gorges in the A.

#4 (E5)

(E5)

    Eklund's Rumors Are False (e5)

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 822 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southern California

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:40 AM

My preferred targets would be two of Fowler, Trouba Ekholm, Ellis. I don't expect any of them to be moved, so combining my preferences with expectations, I arrive at players more like Vatanen and Brodin.

Kane and a 3rd for Brodin.
#8, Bailey/Baptiste, Girgensons for Vatanen and #27.

Brodin-Risto
McCabe-Vatanen
Guhle-Antipin
Falk

Bogo banished somewhere. Anywhere. Gorges in the A.

 

I like these thoughts



#5 thewookie1

thewookie1

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,757 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:50 AM

My preferred targets would be two of Fowler, Trouba Ekholm, Ellis. I don't expect any of them to be moved, so combining my preferences with expectations, I arrive at players more like Vatanen and Brodin.

Kane and a 3rd for Brodin.
#8, Bailey/Baptiste, Girgensons for Vatanen and #27.

Brodin-Risto
McCabe-Vatanen
Guhle-Antipin
Falk

Bogo banished somewhere. Anywhere. Gorges in the A.


Like the 1st trade, still disinterested in Vantenen though. Rather go after the cheaper Trevor Van Reimdyke

#6 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:53 AM

Like the 1st trade, still disinterested in Vantenen though. Rather go after the cheaper Trevor Van Reimdyke


Vatanen certainly had a tough year, but I think he's classic "square peg round hole" for Carlyle.

#7 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:56 AM

Is there anyway in hell Anaheim trades Fowler? He's there best dman and maybe best player.

#8 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:59 AM

Is there anyway in hell Anaheim trades Fowler? He's there best dman and maybe best player.


It'd have to be a Godfather offer. They'll flip Vatanen and use that money to extend Fowler.

#9 GASabresFan

GASabresFan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 10:02 AM

Your chance to say who you would target, what you would pay, and how stupid the other guy's proposal is.
I'll start:
Evander Kane, Justin Bailey and pick 8
For
Cam Fowler and pick 26
Depends on how the playoffs unfold, but there is a good chance that the Ducks look at Theodore and Montour and say "Cam's great, but do we really need to pay him $7 million?"
Each team trades from a position of strength to fill a position of weakness.
Contract situations match
Solves the Ducks expansion problem.
Fire away.


Love the topic and love Cam Fowler, but is he a fit here? His job in Ana is primary PP qb and top pairing puck mover. We already have one of those and ours is bigger, more physical and at a better contract price going foward. Also there appears to be cliff in this draft after the 23rd prospect. I did a review of 10 recent top 31 draft lists from good sources like TSN, ISS, McKeens etc.. and 23 names appeared in at least 8 of 10 lists. The next level guys appear in 50% or less of the lists.

I'll make a counter ANA proposal.
Kane for Vatanen and Stoner. The money is similar between just Kane and Vatanen, but Kane only has one year left while Vatanen has 3. The sweetener is our taking of Stoner, who has one year left at 3.25, who should be back and healthy for next season. Stoner is a cheaper and imho better skating version of Gorges. He'd give us additional proven NHL depth and by taking him we are giving budget oriented Ana additional needed and wanted cap and salary relief. The reason for Vatanen is that he is a R hand D who can move the puck, add some offense and slot directly behind Risto as the focus of the 2nd pair. His three years will give us time to rebuild the D pipeline and for Guhle to develop into the role.

#10 sabills

sabills

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,926 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 10:17 AM

Brodin and a 3rd from Minnesota for #8.

 

Minnesota according to this :http://www.hockeysfu...-2015-16/page/3(which is a year old, but is probably still fairly applicable since its post draft), their prospect line is very weak. They have no picks in rounds 1 or 2 this year, and none in round 2 next year. They are an aging team, and losing Brodin for nothing to the Expansion Draft as some predict would be rough. 

 

Sabres get a solid, young second line D-man (he was playing ~20 minutes a night for Minnesota last year) in a year with a weak-ish draft, and would have 2 seconds and 3 thirds this year, which is some decent ammo if they want to move up or grab another player. Minnesota gets some return for a guy they could lose anyways, and a chance to add a solid prospect.


Edited by sabills, 03 May 2017 - 10:18 AM.


#11 Saratoga

Saratoga

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted 03 May 2017 - 11:19 AM

Our #8 to LA for Derek Forbort.

Former 2010 first round lhd dman. Has been having a hard time cracking LA lineup since being drafted due to their depth. Played well in LA last year, played a full season. Big boy, 6'4", 25 yo. Same birthday as me, but eleven years younger haha.

LA would make that trade in a heartbeat, and we improve our blue line now.

Edited by Saratoga Sabres Fan, 03 May 2017 - 12:17 PM.


#12 GASabresFan

GASabresFan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 11:34 AM

Brodin and a 3rd from Minnesota for #8.
 
Minnesota according to this :http://www.hockeysfu...-2015-16/page/3(which is a year old, but is probably still fairly applicable since its post draft), their prospect line is very weak. They have no picks in rounds 1 or 2 this year, and none in round 2 next year. They are an aging team, and losing Brodin for nothing to the Expansion Draft as some predict would be rough. 
 
Sabres get a solid, young second line D-man (he was playing ~20 minutes a night for Minnesota last year) in a year with a weak-ish draft, and would have 2 seconds and 3 thirds this year, which is some decent ammo if they want to move up or grab another player. Minnesota gets some return for a guy they could lose anyways, and a chance to add a solid prospect.

[

This is a very reasonable proposal and I can see Minn going for it.

What about no trade at all now that we should be signing Antipin. With Vik, we now have Antipin, Bogo, Risto, McCabe, Guhle, Falk and Gorges under contract for next season. Since Antipin can play RD, you have the makings of a balanced D group already.
McCabe Risto
Guhle Antipin
Gorges Bogo
Falk

Pick up a couple of inexpensive vets for depth next season and see what happens

#13 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 11:38 AM

[

This is a very reasonable proposal and I can see Minn going for it.

What about no trade at all now that we should be signing Antipin. With Vik, we now have Antipin, Bogo, Risto, McCabe, Guhle, Falk and Gorges under contract for next season. Since Antipin can play RD, you have the makings of a balanced D group already.
McCabe Risto
Guhle Antipin
Gorges Bogo
Falk

Pick up a couple of inexpensive vets for depth next season and see what happens


You spent all season making excuses for Bylsma because of the blue line, and you're okay going into next season with that? C'mon man!

#14 Huckleberry

Huckleberry

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,149 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brussels, Belgium

Posted 03 May 2017 - 11:47 AM

Vatanen certainly had a tough year, but I think he's classic "square peg round hole" for Carlyle.

 

He was paired with Bieksa the most, so no wonder he had a rough year :P


Our #8 + bailey for Hanifin

 

Or Reinhart for Hanifin



#15 GASabresFan

GASabresFan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 11:55 AM

You spent all season making excuses for Bylsma because of the blue line, and you're okay going into next season with that? C'mon man!

I never excused DD, I just said I didn't know if DD was the problem because he didn't have a real team to coach.

I never said I was ok with that group, but it is an option based on the contracts already signed. Compared to last year it is an upgrade both in terms of cost, speed, puck moving skill and upside potential. Do I want Gorges to return? H-ll no. I don't want Bogo back either. I want a serious upgrade, just look at my earlier proposal. However, what if the new GM can't find the right trade? This maybe plan B. If Guhle and Antipin step up and play well and Bogo returns to the form he showed in the 2nd half last year, this group could be pretty solid.

Edited by GASabresFan, 03 May 2017 - 11:56 AM.


#16 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 12:01 PM

I never excused DD, I just said I didn't know if DD was the problem because he didn't have a real team to coach.

I never said I was ok with that group, but it is an option based on the contracts already signed. Compared to last year it is an upgrade both in terms of cost, speed, puck moving skill and upside potential. Do I want Gorges to return? H-ll no. I don't want Bogo back either. I want a serious upgrade, just look at my earlier proposal. However, what if the new GM can't find the right trade? This maybe plan B. If Guhle and Antipin step up and play well and Bogo returns to the form he showed in the 2nd half last year, this group could be pretty solid.


The thread is about what you would try to do.

#17 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 03 May 2017 - 12:03 PM

Rasmus Asplund for Ryan Murray.

#18 Radar

Radar

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 03 May 2017 - 12:35 PM

Right now I would be looking for teams not able to protect defensemen in expansion draft. Next I look for deals after the entry draft. We're not going to draft a defenseman who will help us now. I think Kane is a tradeable asset to immediately improve our defense if we really don't think we can sign him we really need to get out now while he's had a good season. I'm last of all looking at free agency but that's in most cases overpaying.

#19 GASabresFan

GASabresFan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 01:42 PM

I'll make a counter ANA proposal.

Kane for Vatanen and Stoner.

The money is similar between just Kane and Vatanen, but Kane only has one year left while Vatanen has 3. The sweetener is our taking of Stoner, who has one year left at 3.25, who should be back and healthy for next season. Stoner is a cheaper and imho better skating version of Gorges. He'd give us additional proven NHL depth and by taking him we are giving budget oriented Ana additional needed and wanted cap and salary relief. The reason for Vatanen is that he is a R hand D who can move the puck, add some offense and slot directly behind Risto as the focus of the 2nd pair. His three years will give us time to rebuild the D pipeline and for Guhle to develop into the role.

  

The thread is about what you would try to do.


Does the above proposal not qualify?

#20 Crusader1969

Crusader1969

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,346 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 01:44 PM

[

This is a very reasonable proposal and I can see Minn going for it.

What about no trade at all now that we should be signing Antipin. With Vik, we now have Antipin, Bogo, Risto, McCabe, Guhle, Falk and Gorges under contract for next season. Since Antipin can play RD, you have the makings of a balanced D group already.
McCabe Risto
Guhle Antipin
Gorges Bogo
Falk

Pick up a couple of inexpensive vets for depth next season and see what happens

 

 

Right now I would be looking for teams not able to protect defensemen in expansion draft. Next I look for deals after the entry draft. We're not going to draft a defenseman who will help us now. I think Kane is a tradeable asset to immediately improve our defense if we really don't think we can sign him we really need to get out now while he's had a good season. I'm last of all looking at free agency but that's in most cases overpaying.

 

are we still that desperate for Dmen after adding Guhle and Antipin? I don't think they should be. If I'm making a trade im contacting a team like Nashville who have Subban, Elkholm, Josi and Ellis worth protecting. Will you be able to pry one of them out at a discount? I always thought Ellis would be the guy, especially with a couple of prospects ready to make the move to the NHL. Not so sure with the way he has been playing in the Playoffs.

 

They have Arvidsson and Johansen as RFA's. Mike Fischer as an UFA. Maybe Elkholm and his $3.75Mill may be too expensive for them (even though its a great deal). Ellis is making 2.5M  over the next 2 seasons.

 

Im not trading the 8th overall pick, I think that is completely reckless. Why trade away a guy who has a good chance to become a top pair or Top 6 dman (and cheap) for a guy who is my 3 or 4 dman. Makes no sense to me. Sabres won't be a cup contender next season so I am not making moves out of desperation.

 

Im also not trading Kane, unless you know he will not sign an extension or if he is starting to alienate his teammates. Is he one of the ones Jack was talking about when he said "you can't be just happy to play in the league"?

 

You may be able to get a team with a cap crunch to take a couple of draft picks and not have to trade away a top prospect.



#21 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,258 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 03 May 2017 - 01:49 PM

You spent all season making excuses for Bylsma because of the blue line, and you're okay going into next season with that? C'mon man!


C'mon man, indeed.

Compare and contrast the D corps you assembled versus the one assembled by GA. Imagine how much better our D looks with Brodin and Vatanen instead of Gorges and Bogosian. Or even one of the two players from the former proposal. The price you mentioned in the proposals for Brodin and Vatanen is more than reasonable considering how much better our D immediately becomes.

Edit: I do now see your proposal GA and appreciate the clarification of your position.

He was paired with Bieksa the most, so no wonder he had a rough year :pOur #8 + bailey for Hanifin

Or Reinhart for Hanifin


8 + Bailey = Yes
Reinhart = No

Edited by Thorny, 03 May 2017 - 01:52 PM.


#22 Radar

Radar

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 03 May 2017 - 01:55 PM

In my post I'm not advocating trading our #8 pick, in fact I am against that. After the draft some teams will make trades they wanted to wait to see how the draft unfolds first. I have a feeling Kane will not sign here for a contract amount and term we're going to agree on. If he will fetch a young #2 type defenseman I do it. Antipin and Guhle look promising but not ready to say their going to turn this defense around. In the above post Baily and #8 for Hanifin I would maybe do that.

Edited by Radar, 03 May 2017 - 02:00 PM.


#23 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,258 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 03 May 2017 - 02:00 PM

are we still that desperate for Dmen after adding Guhle and Antipin? I don't think they should be. If I'm making a trade im contacting a team like Nashville who have Subban, Elkholm, Josi and Ellis worth protecting. Will you be able to pry one of them out at a discount? I always thought Ellis would be the guy, especially with a couple of prospects ready to make the move to the NHL. Not so sure with the way he has been playing in the Playoffs.
 
They have Arvidsson and Johansen as RFA's. Mike Fischer as an UFA. Maybe Elkholm and his $3.75Mill may be too expensive for them (even though its a great deal). Ellis is making 2.5M  over the next 2 seasons.
 
Im not trading the 8th overall pick, I think that is completely reckless. Why trade away a guy who has a good chance to become a top pair or Top 6 dman (and cheap) for a guy who is my 3 or 4 dman. Makes no sense to me. Sabres won't be a cup contender next season so I am not making moves out of desperation.
 
Im also not trading Kane, unless you know he will not sign an extension or if he is starting to alienate his teammates. Is he one of the ones Jack was talking about when he said "you can't be just happy to play in the league"?
 
You may be able to get a team with a cap crunch to take a couple of draft picks and not have to trade away a top prospect.


That's the thing: I'm not sure how likely it is that the D man we hypothetically get at 8 actually becomes a top pair D man, and to my mind the chances he does is favourably offset by the added benefits of adding a bona-fide top 4 D talent who, A - can step in right away and increase the chances of maximizing the young careers/contacts of guys like Jack and Sam (and even maximizing the primes of guys like ROR and Okposo), rather than have to wait several years for that drafted D to make an impact. And B - is still relatively young, and able to grow with our young core, and not be purely a "win now" guy.

#24 MattPie

MattPie

    J-Bot, U-Bot, and We-Bot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,351 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Strafing some corners

Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:18 PM

Bogo and a 5th for Arizona's 2nd round pick.



#25 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:22 PM

Bogo and a 5th for Arizona's 2nd round pick.


Ooh, addition by subtraction. I like.

#26 d4rksabre

d4rksabre

    Playground King

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,094 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The big slide

Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:29 PM

Bogo and a 5th for Arizona's 2nd round pick.

I would just give them Bogo and a 5th. They don't even have to give us anything back. 



#27 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:44 PM

Does the above proposal not qualify?


Ordinarily, yes. But since I don't want to admit to having missed it...no. :P

I would just give them Bogo and a 5th. They don't even have to give us anything back.


Chicago had to give up Teravainen to dump Bickell's contract. Is Bogo's worse than his? I think it might be, but I hope the league doesn't see it that way.

#28 kas23

kas23

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:51 PM

That's the thing: I'm not sure how likely it is that the D man we hypothetically get at 8 actually becomes a top pair D man, and to my mind the chances he does is favourably offset by the added benefits of adding a bona-fide top 4 D talent who, A - can step in right away and increase the chances of maximizing the young careers/contacts of guys like Jack and Sam (and even maximizing the primes of guys like ROR and Okposo), rather than have to wait several years for that drafted D to make an impact. And B - is still relatively young, and able to grow with our young core, and not be purely a "win now" guy.

Our pipeline is drained. Blame it on GMTM trading away our picks or Sabres raiding the cupboard, it's nearly dry. It needs some youth pumped into it and, bust or not, drafting 8 will go towards improving this. We won't be true Cup contenders next year and likely not the year after either.

And it's the coach's job to maximize the young careers/contacts of guys like Jack and Sam, not via trading for other players.

Edited by kas23, 03 May 2017 - 03:53 PM.


#29 Saratoga

Saratoga

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted 03 May 2017 - 03:59 PM

Slight momentary topic change, but does anyone know if Kane's agent has stated whether or not they are open to discussing a contract extension come July? I only bring it up in this thread because it is central to how we approach much of this, imo.



#30 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,258 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:12 PM

Our pipeline is drained. Blame it on GMTM trading away our picks or Sabres raiding the cupboard, it's nearly dry. It needs some youth pumped into it and, bust or not, drafting 8 will go towards improving this. We won't be true Cup contenders next year and likely not the year after either.
And it's the coach's job to maximize the young careers/contacts of guys like Jack and Sam, not via trading for other players.


There's no reason we can't have the expectation of being a contender in two seasons. Oilers already have a fair shot this year. Leafs took the Caps to 6 games this year, and were dead last, last year. You can win in today's NHL with stars on ELCs. We have other draft picks this year, and I don't believe our pipeline is drained, at least not at forward. Our core is also very young, so we have time to restock.

And how is it not also the GMs job to maximize the roster when there is remaining flexibility? Have to try and put together a team that can win now. We can't wait 3 more seasons to attempt to be contenders. What are we waiting for, Jack's UFA years?

#31 krt88

krt88

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 65 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:39 PM

Your chance to say who you would target, what you would pay, and how stupid the other guy's proposal is.
I'll start:

Evander Kane, Justin Bailey and pick 8
For
Cam Fowler and pick 26

Depends on how the playoffs unfold, but there is a good chance that the Ducks look at Theodore and Montour and say "Cam's great, but do we really need to pay him $7 million?"

Each team trades from a position of strength to fill a position of weakness.
Contract situations match
Solves the Ducks expansion problem.

Fire away.


Easy pass for Anaheim.

Sabres get best players, Ducks get biggest contract and the picks are irrelevant in this draft. Bailey doesn't make up the difference.

My preferred targets would be two of Fowler, Trouba Ekholm, Ellis. I don't expect any of them to be moved, so combining my preferences with expectations, I arrive at players more like Vatanen and Brodin.

Kane and a 3rd for Brodin.
#8, Bailey/Baptiste, Girgensons for Vatanen and #27.

Brodin-Risto
McCabe-Vatanen
Guhle-Antipin
Falk

Bogo banished somewhere. Anywhere. Gorges in the A.


First one could work if the Wild are willing to take on Kane. Not sure they'd do that.

Second has zero chance! Young cost controlled defense for spare parts. Nope, never gonna get it done!

#32 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:49 PM

Our pipeline is drained. Blame it on GMTM trading away our picks or Sabres raiding the cupboard, it's nearly dry.

People forget how young Risto and McCabe are.
Those two and Guhle could be half our defence for a decade.

I'm not saying trade 8 for someone like Brent Seabrook, but I have no problem sacrificing an 18-year-old talent this year for a guy in his mid-20s. Hell, we get lucky and we could replenish the pipeline with our two second-rounders this year.

Defenceman cook slower and last longer.
I'd rather have Cam Fowler or Jonas Brodin now than a kid who will turn into them five years from now.
Our forwards can't wait for our D to catch up.

Edited by dudacek, 03 May 2017 - 04:50 PM.


#33 Radar

Radar

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:59 PM

People forget how young Risto and McCabe are.
Those two and Guhle could be half our defence for a decade.
I'm not saying trade 8 for someone like Brent Seabrook, but I have no problem sacrificing an 18-year-old talent this year for a guy in his mid-20s. Hell, we get lucky and we could replenish the pipeline with our two second-rounders this year.
Defenceman cook slower and last longer.
I'd rather have Cam Fowler or Jonas Brodin now than a kid who will turn into them five years from now.
Our forwards can't wait for our D to catch up.


I'm 74 but if I were 34 I'd agree with this.

#34 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,258 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 03 May 2017 - 05:08 PM

People forget how young Risto and McCabe are.
Those two and Guhle could be half our defence for a decade.
I'm not saying trade 8 for someone like Brent Seabrook, but I have no problem sacrificing an 18-year-old talent this year for a guy in his mid-20s. Hell, we get lucky and we could replenish the pipeline with our two second-rounders this year.
Defenceman cook slower and last longer.
I'd rather have Cam Fowler or Jonas Brodin now than a kid who will turn into them five years from now.
Our forwards can't wait for our D to catch up.


To me, the bolded is THE key point.

#35 kas23

kas23

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 06:01 PM

There's no reason we can't have the expectation of being a contender in two seasons. Oilers already have a fair shot this year. Leafs took the Caps to 6 games this year, and were dead last, last year. You can win in today's NHL with stars on ELCs. We have other draft picks this year, and I don't believe our pipeline is drained, at least not at forward. Our core is also very young, so we have time to restock.

And how is it not also the GMs job to maximize the roster when there is remaining flexibility? Have to try and put together a team that can win now. We can't wait 3 more seasons to attempt to be contenders. What are we waiting for, Jack's UFA years?

Well, by Cup contender, I mean cup contender. I don't consider Toronto or Edm cup contenders although they made the playoffs. Nashville or the Caps are Cup contenders. So, I don't think we should be mortgaging the future until we get to that point. Right?

I think that just with Guhle and Antipin, assuming they are not complete flops, we should be where Toronto and Edm are in about 2 years. You look at how they have been developing, they've been rebuilding longer than we have. It's not a surprise they are ahead of us.

That said, I don't think anything on-ice lead to D Day. It must have been the lack of character and structure.

People forget how young Risto and McCabe are.
Those two and Guhle could be half our defence for a decade.

I'm not saying trade 8 for someone like Brent Seabrook, but I have no problem sacrificing an 18-year-old talent this year for a guy in his mid-20s. Hell, we get lucky and we could replenish the pipeline with our two second-rounders this year.

Defenceman cook slower and last longer.
I'd rather have Cam Fowler or Jonas Brodin now than a kid who will turn into them five years from now.
Our forwards can't wait for our D to catch up.

I'm not saying we have no young players in our system, it's just that below the Sabres, there really isn't too much to get excited about. I want a steady stream of great prospects in all facets of our farm system. This is how the great teams remain competeative.

That said, I think our #8 is more important than adding Brodin. I'd rather have Fowler than #8, but there's no way we get #8 for him. And I don't think #8 is going to take 5 years to turn in to something. Patience!

Edited by kas23, 03 May 2017 - 06:04 PM.


#36 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,258 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 03 May 2017 - 06:06 PM

Well, by Cup contender, I mean cup contender. I don't consider Toronto or Edm cup contenders although they made the playoffs. Nashville or the Caps are Cup contenders. So, I don't think we should be mortgaging the future until we get to that point. Right?
I think that just with Guhle and Antipin, assuming they are not complete flops, we should be where Toronto and Edm are in about 2 years. You look at how they have been developing, they've been rebuilding longer than we have. It's not a surprise they are ahead of us.
That said, I don't think anything on-ice lead to D Day. It must have been the lack of character and structure.

I'm not saying we have no young players in our system, it's just that below the Sabres, there really isn't too much to get excited about. I want a steady stream of great prospects in all facets of our farm system. This is how the great teams remain competeative.


I agree that we don't want to mortgage the future, but that's why I'll reference dudacek and agree that I don't want to trade the pick for a Seabrook. But if we can leverage it into a young defender like Brodin who can step right in, due to Minnesota expansion draft concerns, I make the trade.

#37 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 03 May 2017 - 06:23 PM

Just because Fowler was avaliable a year ago doesn't still mean he is

#38 Tondas

Tondas

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,849 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lincoln, NE

Posted 03 May 2017 - 06:54 PM

Offer sheet Gostisbehere where Philly can't match.  Hopefully, Gio (not re-signed), Moulson (Las Vegas favor by McPhee) , and Kane (trade for draft choice) will be elsewhere and off our books.  That's over 10 million to work with.



#39 GASabresFan

GASabresFan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 874 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 07:36 PM

No one is answering the question of what we really need.

 

1) Norris type D man - We have this covered with Risto

2) 1st Line steady D who eats minutes - we may have this covered with McCabe.

3) Second line puck mover to eat minutes and fill in as 2nd PP QB -  This is the big missing piece!  Could Antipin be a value solution here?  Brodin (LD) in trade? Vatanen (RD)? Other?

4) Partner for D no. 3.  I don't think O is a necessity here, but some physical play would be nice. Scandella?

5 & 6) The bottom pairing - Ideally 2 guys that can skate and take on 15 minutes a night.  Physical play would be nice.  Not expecting big numbers.  Mix of youth and vets for cap reasons.  Guhle for one of these jobs? Bogo?

7 & 8) Depth D - Falk, Gorges, Nelson - UFA vets? 

 

Ultimately what we are really missing is a full 2nd pairing.  If Antipin works as the puck mover for the 2nd line, then what we need to acquire in trade (or FA) is an Alzner or maybe a Marco Scandella from Minn.  I'd rather get a Vatanen or Brodin send Guhle to the A for a year and make Antipin the 3rd pairing puck mover.

 

Trade options

1) Scandella for a 2nd rd pick.  (Minn needs cap relief, and draft picks)

2) Brodin for Fasching, a 2nd this season and 1st next season. (Minn needs cap relief, picks and a local RW if they choose to trade away someone like Neiderreider.

3) Vatanen and Stoner for Kane and a 3rd. (Ana needs cap relief to re-sign Fowler and more offensive punch)



#40 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 03 May 2017 - 07:48 PM

No one is answering the question of what we really need.

3) Second line puck mover to eat minutes and fill in as 2nd PP QB - This is the big missing piece! Could Antipin be a value solution here? Brodin (LD) in trade? Vatanen (RD)? Other?)

I think I did - Ryan Murray is that guy. Smooth and steady, still young, possibly undervalued, possibly available (because Werenski).

Edited by dudacek, 03 May 2017 - 07:48 PM.