Rayzor32 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 From Mr. Reliability Eklund: Gaborik to Buffalo (e3) Hold your hats Sabres fans. According to three sources the Wild are shopping Gaborik and the Sabres are offring up the best package out there. He's due to make $7.5MM this year, and then he's an UFA...Does Max, Kotalik and a prospect (Stafford? Bernier? MacArthur?) land him? Is it worth it?
Kristian Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 From Mr. Reliability Eklund: Gaborik to Buffalo (e3) Hold your hats Sabres fans. According to three sources the Wild are shopping Gaborik and the Sabres are offring up the best package out there. He's due to make $7.5MM this year, and then he's an UFA...Does Max, Kotalik and a prospect (Stafford? Bernier? MacArthur?) land him? Is it worth it? Too expensive, and a UFA next year to boot. Plus he's another finesse player. Granted, most likely he would be the best offensive player on the team, but he's not really what we need. We need defense, we need a PP specialist on the blueline, plus we need a veteran forward who brings leadership and can pot 15 a year.
Buffalo Wings Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Too expensive, and a UFA next year to boot. Plus he's another finesse player. Granted, most likely he would be the best offensive player on the team, but he's not really what we need. We need defense, we need a PP specialist on the blueline, plus we need a veteran forward who brings leadership and can pot 15 a year. Agreed, but if he's out there and can be had for a decent package, I wouldn't be upset if Darcy made the deal.....as long as Stafford isn't part of it.
Kristian Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Agreed, but if he's out there and can be had for a decent package, I wouldn't be upset if Darcy made the deal.....as long as Stafford isn't part of it. What would a decent package involve? If it means Max and Connolly or perhaps Tallinder or Bernier, I'd say go for it, but I don't think the Wild are completely nuts.
Goodfella25 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 You see the glut of forwards we have...I think this is the year the Sabres need to decide if MacArthur is going to be part of this club moving forward. Clearly he can't go back to the minors, so is he part of the plan here? If not, he could be packaged with Max or maybe someone else.
Bmwolf21 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 From Mr. Reliability Eklund: Gaborik to Buffalo (e3) Hold your hats Sabres fans. According to three sources the Wild are shopping Gaborik and the Sabres are offring up the best package out there. He's due to make $7.5MM this year, and then he's an UFA...Does Max, Kotalik and a prospect (Stafford? Bernier? MacArthur?) land him? Is it worth it? If (and that is a huge IF) this happens and we don't get robbed blind by the Wild, then I will honor a self-imposed one-year ban on slamming Eklund. I will even put his prediction in my sig. They should make it a package deal and push for Harding to be included as Miller's backup.
stenbaro Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 If (and that is a huge IF) this happens and we don't get robbed blind by the Wild, then I will honor a self-imposed one-year ban on slamming Eklund. I will even put his prediction in my sig. They should make it a package deal and push for Harding to be included as Miller's backup. I would take him in a heartbeat..And then he would be priority number 2 to resign this offseason to an extension.. :nana:
nfreeman Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 If (and that is a huge IF) this happens and we don't get robbed blind by the Wild, then I will honor a self-imposed one-year ban on slamming Eklund. I will even put his prediction in my sig. They should make it a package deal and push for Harding to be included as Miller's backup. There is no way this is gonna happen, BUT, if it does, I think you need to impose your ban regardless of how much we have to give up for him. Eklund isn't "reporting" that we won't get robbed blind; he's just reporting that we've made the best offer.
Bmwolf21 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 There is no way this is gonna happen, BUT, if it does, I think you need to impose your ban regardless of how much we have to give up for him. Eklund isn't "reporting" that we won't get robbed blind; he's just reporting that we've made the best offer. True - I'm begging for Darcy to make a bold move, a splash, and this would qualify as a Fat Albert-sized cannonball, and you're right, Eklund isn't going into details about what we would be offering. I did see a blurb in a Minny paper last week that said they weren't sure what they were going to do with Bouchard, because he is a RFA and they aren't sure what they market will bear for a one-dimensional young scorer and are afraid someone will try to poach him with an offer sheet (Kevin Lowe, perhaps?) so maybe moving Gaborik for some players and cap space is what they're thinking. It's just I'm always leery of throwing away a bunch of good young players (not AHL/junior prospects) for one player.
ROC Sabres Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 True - I'm begging for Darcy to make a bold move, a splash, and this would qualify as a Fat Albert-sized cannonball, and you're right, Eklund isn't going into details about what we would be offering. I did see a blurb in a Minny paper last week that said they weren't sure what they were going to do with Bouchard, because he is a RFA and they aren't sure what they market will bear for a one-dimensional young scorer and are afraid someone will try to poach him with an offer sheet (Kevin Lowe, perhaps?) so maybe moving Gaborik for some players and cap space is what they're thinking. It's just I'm always leery of throwing away a bunch of good young players (not AHL/junior prospects) for one player. Well, I would also like the move too. The question is, if they aren't sure they will want their one-dimensional young scorer, what do we really have to offer them? It doesn't seem like a lot. I know not everyone on the team is a "Briere" type but we do have a good amount of forwards that play offense and not a lot of defense. Anyone have a guess as to what we would be offering?
mphs mike Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 I would do this IF we could force the Wild to take Connelly as part of a package with Max.
Swedesessed Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 In the three years prior to 2007-2008, Gaborik played in 65, 65, and 48 games respectfully....unless Connolly is part of the deal that goes back to Minnesota, do we really want to see the Sabres have $10+ million committed to 2 players who are injury prone?
ROC Sabres Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 In the three years prior to 2007-2008, Gaborik played in 65, 65, and 48 games respectfully....unless Connolly is part of the deal that goes back to Minnesota, do we really want to see the Sabres have $10+ million committed to 2 players who are injury prone? Well, Garth confirmed it that Ek was right about the possible trade. Link Bottom of the article. Should be pretty interesting soon.
nfreeman Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 I would do this IF we could force the Wild to take Connelly as part of a package with Max. In the three years prior to 2007-2008, Gaborik played in 65, 65, and 48 games respectfully....unless Connolly is part of the deal that goes back to Minnesota, do we really want to see the Sabres have $10+ million committed to 2 players who are injury prone? Connolly and Gaborik are under contract for only one more year, so I don't think there is much urgency to unload Connolly. I also don't think there will be many takers for Connolly given his injury history. Finally, as I've said before, I think there is a reasonably good chance that Connolly has a big year in this, his contract year.
Goodfella25 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Well, Garth confirmed it that Ek was right about the possible trade. Link Bottom of the article. Should be pretty interesting soon. Since when is "Garth" a reliable source? Sure next to Eklund he looks reliable, but next to Eklund anybody can seem like they know what they're talking about.
ROC Sabres Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Since when is "Garth" a reliable source? Sure next to Eklund he looks reliable, but next to Eklund anybody can seem like they know what they're talking about. Right, but I really don't remember Garth ever putting something up that wasn't factual, even if it comes to trade rumors. Most of the time when he reports, its rarely speculation of his own, but he seems to be on point with his stuff. Not saying its going to happen, but I give him credit for what he has done since I started reading Eklund.
rtconner Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Agreed, but if he's out there and can be had for a decent package, I wouldn't be upset if Darcy made the deal.....as long as Stafford isn't part of it. Ya Stafford > Gaborik. Stafford and Vanek cannot leave this team if you are askng me.
Chief Enabler Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 I'd give next years first round & whoever we could dump. Stafford and Paille off the table. Under a contract year Gabby should play his balls off for us. If not, it turns into a Soupy or Hossa situation. Basically a full season rental deal. Kotalik-Max-Connolly involved with a youngster and/or a draft is what i say. Do it!
Goodfella25 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Here's some entertainment for you. This rumor is being discussed on the MinnesotaWild.com message board. Look at what some of these "fans" want in return for Gaborik... "How about Vanek, Roy, Afinogenov and a 2nd round pick?" "Roy and Pomminstein and a prospect." "Pomminstein and Roy would be nice, but Vanek would likely have to be included to purge salary." "Roy, Pominville, Stafford *crosses fingers*" "Roy, Spacek and a 1st rounder." "I would want Roy, Pomminstein and prospect or high pick" I just wanted to post some of the ridiculous ones. I know Gaborik must be important to Wild fans, but why in the world would we trade our #1 center, #1 right wing and a 1st round pick for an injury-prone softee? He's a sniper, but I don't think that answers my question.
Bmwolf21 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Well, I would also like the move too. The question is, if they aren't sure they will want their one-dimensional young scorer, what do we really have to offer them? It doesn't seem like a lot. I know not everyone on the team is a "Briere" type but we do have a good amount of forwards that play offense and not a lot of defense. Anyone have a guess as to what we would be offering? I'm trying to find that column, but here's an interesting piece from Wild beat writer Michael Russo (LINK) basically saying that the Wild have a lot of decisions to be made, including Gaborik, Bouchard and Brian Rolston. In the three years prior to 2007-2008, Gaborik played in 65, 65, and 48 games respectfully....unless Connolly is part of the deal that goes back to Minnesota, do we really want to see the Sabres have $10+ million committed to 2 players who are injury prone? He managed to be in the lineup for 77 games this year, so maybe he's turned the corner. Plus a lot of his issues are groin and hip deals from his power skating style, and he just had minor arthroscopic surgery to reduce the inflammation in his hip. Plus he's never missed a whole season like Connolly, so I woudl be willing to take the salary risk on Gaborik.
Goodfella25 Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Anyone who doesn't want Gaborik is insane. Well they're not just gonna give him away. You have to look at what's going in the other direction. And then look at the positives and negatives: Positives: - explosive player - sniper with 40+ goal potential - in his prime Negatives: - high salary - only one year left until UFA - injury-prone - softy The "x" factor is what you give up for this guy.
Chief Enabler Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 I just wanted to post some of the ridiculous ones. I know Gaborik must be important to Wild fans, but why in the world would we trade our #1 center, #1 right wing and a 1st round pick for an injury-prone softee? He's a sniper, but I don't think that answers my question. :lol: Because we are trying to dump a third line center, two third line wingers and draft? :lol:
Chief Enabler Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Well they're not just gonna give him away. You have to look at what's going in the other direction. And then look at the positives and negatives: Positives: - explosive player - sniper with 40+ goal potential - in his prime Negatives: - high salary hopefully you get what you pay for - only one year left until UFA - injury-prone Were use to that, no problems there - softy Our whole team is soft, no problem there The "x" factor is what you give up for this guy. first rounder and baggage is fair. who knows what direction they are going in Minnesota.
ROC Sabres Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 :lol: Because we are trying to dump a third line center, two third line wingers and draft? :lol: Care to tell us who these people are that we are trying to dump?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.