sabills

For the record, I understand your point of view, I just disagree with it.

I know, he's killing me.

Or is Chiarelli just an idiot who has no idea of trade value. I think its that one.

I like that on this same board there are people who are really upset we lost Carrier and also people who want to trade ROR. Very diverse crowd.

Yes to all of the above.

It also assumes that Peterson will sign with the Sabres, which appears dubious at best at the moment.

I went with that because thats what was suggested above. I would absolutely trade him for a top-pair defensemen, even a top-4. I don't think he'll garnish that much, though.

I assume he asked them. He didn't just give them a 6th for the hell of it. Wowwwww

Again, even if you don't love Ullmark, he's basically the only goalie prospect we have. Tough to let that go. Didn't see this before I posted. Bingo.

All I'm saying is don't take nothing for him. This terrible fear of losing guys for nothing is overblown. We love prospects and picks because they're shiny objects down the road, but if you're telling me the deal is a 2nd and Bailey 2.0 I'd rather keep the guy I know can play. A second round pick has about a 25% chance of playing the equivilent of 2 NHL seasons (https://www.milehighhockey.com/2014/7/23/5931789/draft-percentages) EVER. Draft picks, outside of the top 10 or so, take what, 2-5 years before they make team full time? Bailey is good; is he a top-6 winger in the next 2 years? The next 5? No idea. Kane is a very good player, he can score and skate. I'd rather get one year out of that guy than the possibility of one of those two players turning into half of him in 2+ years. But that's just my opinion. THE ACTUAL PRICE ISN'T EVEN MY POINT. All I want is for Jbot to set a price in his head and try to go get it. If you don't, fine, take the 3/4 of a year that you get out of him, then either trade him at the deadline or lose him for, yes, nothing. Don't just take a 4th rounder and a 3rd rate goalie prospect because "Welp, it was the best we can get". With that, I've made my point as far as I think I need to, I'll read all responses by I don't think I can explain my position any further.

I think we can be good enough to make the playoffs. Maybe that is where we differ. Cup, probably no, but playoffs yes. The freakin' Senators made it to the Conference finals for chrissakes.

See, that's fine, all I'm saying is there is a line, and don't go back on it just because he might (even probably will) get hurt again or might (even probably will) not sign next year. I think my line is a little higher, but whatever. There isn't an absolute need to trade him now; unless he's injured at the trade deadline I think his value will be similar, if a little smaller, then, plus you get half a year of good production out of him. J-bot should define his value and not take anything less. I also think Kane wouldn't have an issue signing here, but that he'll cost more than we're willing to pay. People talk about players wanting to play somewhere warm, but I think they generally just want to maximise their money and to win, wherever that takes them. Only about 1/3 of the league is below the Mason/Dixon line, and most of those teams aren't that good.

They'll have to move them again when they get sponsored by "JUICY"

I mean, thats a pretty sweet hotel...

A) You have no idea that that is true. But fine. B) He missed as many games as you are complaining about last year, and still led the team in scoring. I'm sorry, that's what he is. I'm not talking goals per game, or goals per minute, or 5v5 production, or some theoretical standard that we feel like holding him to; the man scored more goals than anyone else on the team. He gets that belt until he doesn't have it any more. C) This doesn't affect this year. I'm not trading him out of fear that he won't sign. Guys don't re-sign all the time. You don't always HAVE to trade them. This is all mostly besides the point. I'm not taking a bag of pucks for him just because he MIGHT leave NEXT year. And neither are you. Obviously there is a minimum price that you would accept. Would you rather have a 7th round pick, or Evander Kane for a year? How about a 2nd rounder vs. Kane for a year? A second and a D prospect or Kane for a year? A first by itself? There is a line, wherever you want to place it. and all I'm saying is to stick to that

I'm not forced to trade him. If I don't get what I want for him then I get my top leading scorer back for another year and reassess at the trade deadline next year. Then the question will be less "what can I get for him" and more "am I in contention for the playoffs right now". I agree that his value is likely as high as its going to get, but that doesn't mean that the value is high enough for me to trade him.

They also don't have any on the shoulders, so I'd bet they'll still show up at some point.

My font of useless knowledge comes through once again.

This is the only reason to trade him for me. His value is as high as it will go. If you don't think you can get a deal done at a price you like, then you trade him now. But you still trade him for a value you think he's worth, and not a penny less.

I thought it was a Larry Quinn thing?

He knows something is up, that's for sure.

They were the first, and they are the last. Agreed. And I think I like it more now that we're the only ones with it. Its unique, and I dig that.

Ugh. Just make those stripes all blue!

I like this for the Sabres. They needed a cleaner look and they got it. Silver is gone. Pit stains are gone. I don't hate the split color stripes, but whatever. also, I like the front numbers even though most of Sabres twitter seems to hate them. Its a unique little thing. Still could use a shoulder patch. I don't love the Vegas look, but the addition of the red does a lot for the uniform for me.

Are they in the store already?