Toddkaz Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 The Newark Star-Ledger reported Thursday that law enforcement sources told them that state wiretaps recorded Rick Tocchet and Hey Obvious their is an example of how media gets info. Same way in NHL and then printed. Do you understand now???
Toddkaz Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 -The Arlington Daily Herald says the Blackhawks are offering defensemen Jassen Cullimore and Todd Simpson and forwards Jim Dowd and Curtis Brown around the league. The newspaper said center Tyler Arnason interests the Maple Leafs, who could send Nik Antropov to Chicago in return. So Hopelesly you are saying the paper people are liers?
Toddkaz Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 Also available to the highest bidder are defensemen Jassen Cullimore and Todd Simpson and centers Jim Dowd and Curtis Brown.-Hawks' owner admits mistake Despite being one of the more active teams in the new NHL free-agent market, Chicago owner Bill Wirtz now feels the moves were a mistake. Todd Simpson is a tough Defenseman probably could be had for a 3rd. Wonder if Adrian Aucoin has any regrets?
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 So Hopelesly you are saying the paper people are liers? I just generally have a distrust of "sources say" Since the Star Ledger reported that law enforcement told them something, I would believe that law enforcement told them something. If they report something without a source, or say "sources say" I am a little more skeptical.
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Let me articulate my point a little better...The Star-Ledger says who their source is, I would find law enforcement officials in the investigation a credible source. The quote you posted says the newspaper reported, but there is no source for them...there is a difference.
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Once again, he's no more of a rental than Briere, Drury, or Biron. Our "biggest bargaining chip" is an example of the homerism. You're not going to get all that much for Marty Biron. He's a "rental", he's overpaid, he's fairly average, he has no playoff experience, and he's not seeing game action. As for the postion of need BS, it doesn't fly. We would be getting an elite center and trading a 3rd line center. That's a huge upgrade (so huge that it's completely unrealistic) at the cost of an overpaid backup and 20 draft slots. Anyone that wouldn't take this deal is overvaluing our players or just not all there. The whole point is a trade this uneven comes about once in 10 years. Even if you're completely content with our forward situation, not making this trade would be insane. We could easily trade Richards and a 2nd for any d-man not named Phaneuf, Pitkanen, and a few others. Roy, Biron, 1st would get you significantly less. Would you trade Peters and a 3rd for Kovalchuk? Sure in the short term Richards would be better than Roy. But in the long term, he is going to sign somewhere else over the summer, and we gave up a player who is showing a lot of potential for him. Tampa is not going to be having a firesale come March 9, other teams are. We can get some quality players at a much cheaper price once teams start having firesales in March.
Taro T Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Guys, Todd's right about this one. IF TB were willing to send BR to the Sabres for Marty and Roy and a DP, Darcy should snap it up in a second. He's 25 and a stud. He'd be Sabres property at least through next year (RFA this offseason) and he would be a player that I would not mind seeing the Sabres pseudo-"break the bank" for. At an absolute minimum, the Sabres could convert him into the top 4 (probably top 2) D-man that many of us think the Sabres need. Unfortunately, BtP is more right than Todd is. I don't see any way that TB trades BR within conference unless they get a heck of a lot more than the trade as proposed. IF the Sabres had Richards, their 4 centers would be some combination of Richards, Briere, Drury, Connolly, and Gaustad. I would rate that favorably with LaFontaine, Hawerchuk, and Ruuttu (primarily due to injuries) and ahead of Perreault, Luce, and McNabb.
deluca67 Posted February 10, 2006 Author Report Posted February 10, 2006 Would it make sense to go after a Richards now? All season I've heard people talking about the free agent crop coming up. I like Richards and he would be a great fit. But picking Richards up now takes you out of any free agent market. Despite the success this season the Sabres are still under a tight budget. If the Sabres decide to invest players and money into a Brad Richards they have to be 100% sure and get a 100% ROI. If not? It could set this team back a long way.
Saber61 Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 hey what does it mean when you have a 20% warning??? Hey when I said that trade for Richards most people that I was insane and Buffalo was getting ripped off. it means the crusade to rid this board of you is underway... hoplessly... sorry i couldn't chime in earilier... was away from the pc for a good number of hours last night... oh and after catching up on this thread i can see its TSR Vs. ReTodd... an entire board agains't one man... thats when you KNOW your wrong todd.... the WHOLE board thinks your wrong. stop your useless drival now! before you and your IP get the kick ban... im sorry im speaking as an admin... thats not my place i apologize to the entire administrator and moderator team. i have confidence in there ability to resolve the issue.
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Would it make sense to go after a Richards now? All season I've heard people talking about the free agent crop coming up. I like Richards and he would be a great fit. But picking Richards up now takes you out of any free agent market. Despite the success this season the Sabres are still under a tight budget. If the Sabres decide to invest players and money into a Brad Richards they have to be 100% sure and get a 100% ROI. If not? It could set this team back a long way. That's kind of what I was getting at. Of course when you suggest something like that some people who rename nameless think I wouldn't want Richards on our team.
Taro T Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Would it make sense to go after a Richards now? All season I've heard people talking about the free agent crop coming up. I like Richards and he would be a great fit. But picking Richards up now takes you out of any free agent market. Despite the success this season the Sabres are still under a tight budget. If the Sabres decide to invest players and money into a Brad Richards they have to be 100% sure and get a 100% ROI. If not? It could set this team back a long way. If he was available for Marty, Roy, and a swap of draft picks, I think it would make sense to get him. Even at this point in time when a D-man is a more pressing need. Richards is a very good player and brings playoff experience to a team that doesn't have a lot of it. He is young enough that he will (in all probability) continue to improve. The Sabres would retain his rights for at least one more season, and if it looked like they could not extend him, could look at keeping him as a "rental" player at next year's deadline or send him packing to fill some other need. Any time you bring a player into the organization, you do not have a 100% guarantee that the player will fit into the system. But that is true whether the player is picked up in mid-season or in the off-season. What you gain with Richards vs. an UFA is Brad will be younger than almost anyone that the Sabres could pick up AND the Sabres would have "exclusive" negotiating rights for the next year. Until he becomes an UFA, the Sabres ARE the market if they hold his rights. An UFA would have to be offered a package that he felt was better than anyone elses. The Sabres lost out on Aucoin on that matter and the perception was that the Sabres had to overpay to get Teppo; they could likely find themselves in either situation again this off-season. If the Sabres are not active in next year's FA market, but re-sign Danny, Grier, McKee, and Teppo (I think they are the only UFA's on the roster currently and I can't remember if Teppo's deal was 1 or 2 year (and am too lazy at the present time to look it up)), then I don't have a huge problem with that. Especially if the team has added another D-man at this year's deadline (I assume the D-man would be a top 6, not a top 4, if the team brings in Richards, but that is definitely not set in stone). The team is at a point age wise, that the talent level should rise simply by having all the players one year older and more experienced. (Assuming the Kovalev goals this week were a function of a great shooter beating a young goalie, and not exposure of a here-to-fore unnoticed flaw in Ryan's game; Ryan should be better next year than he has been this year, and this year has been pretty good to date.) Also, even though the team is "inactive" in next year's FA derby, it doesn't mean the team won't be able to pluck a Teppo quality player. It just means they won't be able to compete for the "big names". All that said, I believe the issue is moot, as I do not see TB trading Brad for the discussed package.
LabattBlue Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 If the Sabres are not active in next year's FA market, but re-sign Danny, Grier, McKee, and Teppo (I think they are the only UFA's on the roster currently and I can't remember if Teppo's deal was 1 or 2 year (and am too lazy at the present time to look it up)), then I don't have a huge problem with that. Teppo signed a 1 year contract. http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=sabr...ov=st&type=lgns
Taro T Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Teppo signed a 1 year contract. http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slug=sabr...ov=st&type=lgns Labatt's, Thanks for the link. I'm confused now, though. Have we decided that linked articles are bad or is it lying linked articles are bad or is it lying unlinked articles are bad or is it unlinked articles by liars that link to nonlying articles by nonlying liars are bad or ... oh nevermind. :lol:
MLH Posted February 10, 2006 Report Posted February 10, 2006 Would it make sense to go after a Richards now? All season I've heard people talking about the free agent crop coming up. I like Richards and he would be a great fit. But picking Richards up now takes you out of any free agent market. Despite the success this season the Sabres are still under a tight budget. If the Sabres decide to invest players and money into a Brad Richards they have to be 100% sure and get a 100% ROI. If not? It could set this team back a long way. The entire thing doesn't make sense at any level. TB is in no hurry to get rid of Richards. I don't understand this "rumor" at all. Are we looking to move Lydman? Briere? Drury? We're a lot closer to our "salary cap" than Tampa is to $46 million. They aren't going to trade him unless it improves their playoff chances this year. It doesn't make sense for us because we're not going to win a bidding war on Richards, we'd be reluctant to sign him long term, and it's not in Darcy's trading style. Todd made this proposal, it's not supposed to be logical. The point is, that if a deal that is this unfair comes up, you have to take it. There's no ifs ands or buts; you make this trade if it's offered to you. Trade packages have value, if we're looking at a certain stud d-man, we're more likely to get him for Richards and a mid 2nd than Biron, Roy and a late 1st. You can't pass when these deals come up, no matter the needs of your team. We're going to pick up a couple of vetrans for mid level prospects and picks, much like we got Brown and Grier "last" season.
hopeleslyobvious Posted February 11, 2006 Report Posted February 11, 2006 The entire thing doesn't make sense at any level. TB is in no hurry to get rid of Richards. I don't understand this "rumor" at all. Are we looking to move Lydman? Briere? Drury? We're a lot closer to our "salary cap" than Tampa is to $46 million. They aren't going to trade him unless it improves their playoff chances this year. It doesn't make sense for us because we're not going to win a bidding war on Richards, we'd be reluctant to sign him long term, and it's not in Darcy's trading style. Todd made this proposal, it's not supposed to be logical. The point is, that if a deal that is this unfair comes up, you have to take it. There's no ifs ands or buts; you make this trade if it's offered to you. Trade packages have value, if we're looking at a certain stud d-man, we're more likely to get him for Richards and a mid 2nd than Biron, Roy and a late 1st. You can't pass when these deals come up, no matter the needs of your team. We're going to pick up a couple of vetrans for mid level prospects and picks, much like we got Brown and Grier "last" season. This isn't really a rumor at all...The thread started with Deluca saying that Richards is available. Todd, proposed sending Biron, Roy and a draft pick to Tampa for Richards and a draft pick, and the argument started. I don't see Tampa moving Richards, if they are going to the playoffs, they definately want a playoff performer like him on their team. If they were to move him, I highly doubt it would be in conference. The reason I would be reluctant to give up Roy is because I see a lot of potential there. This isn't to say that if we picked up Richards, I wouldn't be excited. I just don't see Richards as the best long term pickup for this team. Even if he is a RFA, are the Sabres going to be able to afford him? I'm not thinking about the cap, but more about the team budget. The team is supposed to turn a profit this year (I'm sorry I read it in several articles, I don't remember a link, so I think I am going to have to argue that this is common knowledge, and a footnote is unnecessary). My understanding of the RFA situation is that the Sabres make a qualifying offer to a player, and another team can offer him more money...The Sabres then have the opportunity to match the other offer. If they don't want to pay that much, then the other team has to compensate them with a draft pick (Correct me if I am wrong). So it isn't that far fetched to see him go out of our price range. If that is the case, I wouldn't want to give up someone who is 22 and is showing a lot of potential. But the important part of what I said is the wording. I said I wouldn't want to, not that I wouldn't. This doesn't mean that my mind can't be changed with a good argument. And this doesn't mean I wouldn't rather have Roy on my team than Richards. I think I am done rambling about this. By the way, I wonder if someone else is going to read this thread and go to another message board and say "There is chatter that Tampa has offered Richards and a 2nd Round pick to the Sabres for Biron, Roy and a first round pick." :lol:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.