joe w bags Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Brian Burke yesterday announced for all to hear, he has full intentions of doing what it takes to move up in draft and get the perceived top pick John Tavares. It is conjectured that to do so would involve a package of something like Leafs first round pick this year at #7, this years second round pick, next years first and perhaps Luke Schenn. How far if at all would you be happy to hear Sabres would go , for such a player. Vanek, Roy, this and next years first round pick perhaps, and choice of best current player in organization. It is also said trading partner would need send Islanders a boat load of money. This no problem apparently for Leafs, this may be the largest stumbling block for Sabres. For comparison Tavares is compared as being somewhere between Crosby and Stamkos in terms of projected talent. Short of taking out Islanders general manager and getting him drunk and supplying him with loose women , it would take a substantial package to get Tavares, how far would you like to see the Sabres go, in light of many saying they would like to see a substantial change in culture of team.
RayFinkle Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 We already have solid young talent developing. I would not give up the house to land Tavares.
Pullup Champ Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Brian Burke yesterday announced for all to hear, he has full intentions of doing what it takes to move up in draft and get the perceived top pick John Tavares. It is conjectured that to do so would involve a package of something like Leafs first round pick this year at #7, this years second round pick, next years first and perhaps Luke Schenn. How far if at all would you be happy to hear Sabres would go , for such a player. Vanek, Roy, this and next years first round pick perhaps, and choice of best current player in organization. It is also said trading partner would need send Islanders a boat load of money. This no problem apparently for Leafs, this may be the largest stumbling block for Sabres. For comparison Tavares is compared as being somewhere between Crosby and Stamkos in terms of projected talent. Short of taking out Islanders general manager and getting him drunk and supplying him with loose women , it would take a substantial package to get Tavares, how far would you like to see the Sabres go, in light of many saying they would like to see a substantial change in culture of team. Roy MacArthur and 13th overall......
shrader Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Hedman would be a better option for this team.
joe w bags Posted April 15, 2009 Author Report Posted April 15, 2009 Either guy, how far would you like Sabres to go? A choice of Hedman suggests you think Sabres have in system a potential leader? Hedman would be a better option for this team.
tom webster Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Hedman would be a better option for this team. Not bad top 4 defense - Buter, Sekera, Myers and Hedman.
carpandean Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 A choice of Hedman suggests you think Sabres have in system a potential leader? Why? Who's to say that Tavares will be a great leader? Crosby isn't a great leader (despite being picked as Captain); Stamkos hasn't shown that he is (he still has a lot of time, but there's no guarantee). Top picks will likely be top performers, but it is difficult to predict who will be great leaders. Heck, Derek Roy was Captain of his Memorial Cup winning juniors team (Kitchener Rangers), so he should be our next leader, right? (I could actually see it in a few years, but he's definitely not there yet.)
Kristian Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Why? Who's to say that Tavares will be a great leader? Crosby isn't a great leader (despite being picked as Captain); Stamkos hasn't shown that he is (he still has a lot of time, but there's no guarantee). Top picks will likely be top performers, but it is difficult to predict who will be great leaders. Heck, Derek Roy was Captain of his Memorial Cup winning juniors team (Kitchener Rangers), so he should be our next leader, right? (I could actually see it in a few years, but he's definitely not there yet.) Please don't give management any great ideas.
joe w bags Posted April 15, 2009 Author Report Posted April 15, 2009 Right you are about Roy. Watched him all his years as Kitchener Ranger. Still think he is a very excellent leader and in right situation would be in Buffalo or elsewhere. Regarding Tavares have watched him since youth, and now in London, the difference between he , Crosby and Stamkos for instance is Crosby and Stamkos came up through systems as hockey princes , seeming assured hockey futures, groomed to do and say the right things, both excellent and talented players , but where Tavares differs in my opinion is Tavares has a edge that the others don't. I compare Tavares attitude to being similar to Drury. Of course in drafting players projecting their futures a crapshoot to some extent. Its what general managers are paid to do and what their jobs should hinge on. You do agree interestingly that Derek Roy can be captain and leader. What is at issue with this player is , are there communication problems with he and management , coaching that he has not perhaps developed as quickly as hoped, or has Roy plateaued and reached his peak as player, does he need more time or other environment to reach his potential? Frankly bringing in a player from elsewhere and making him captain, says not a great deal about how Sabres do regard Roy as leader, in my opinion he along with top goalie in minors should be two chips used to improve team. Roy is a leader just not in Buffalo under current coaching staff. Why? Who's to say that Tavares will be a great leader? Crosby isn't a great leader (despite being picked as Captain); Stamkos hasn't shown that he is (he still has a lot of time, but there's no guarantee). Top picks will likely be top performers, but it is difficult to predict who will be great leaders. Heck, Derek Roy was Captain of his Memorial Cup winning juniors team (Kitchener Rangers), so he should be our next leader, right? (I could actually see it in a few years, but he's definitely not there yet.)
shrader Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Why? Who's to say that Tavares will be a great leader? Crosby isn't a great leader (despite being picked as Captain); Stamkos hasn't shown that he is (he still has a lot of time, but there's no guarantee). Top picks will likely be top performers, but it is difficult to predict who will be great leaders. Heck, Derek Roy was Captain of his Memorial Cup winning juniors team (Kitchener Rangers), so he should be our next leader, right? (I could actually see it in a few years, but he's definitely not there yet.) Exactly. When looking for leadership, 18 year olds generally aren't the place you begin your search. You go the route they did last year with the Rivet deal.
joe w bags Posted April 15, 2009 Author Report Posted April 15, 2009 We totally disagree on this one. It tells the current players on team a great deal when you go outside your organization to get someone else. In hockey circles while acknowledging the good work Lindy and Darcy have done, many shook their heads at this Sabres move. Rivet is a stop gap solution at best, that only has served to tell remaining players management does not believe in their potential. It is such moves as why this team was not in playoffs. It dispirits the team. Exactly. When looking for leadership, 18 year olds generally aren't the place you begin your search. You go the route they did last year with the Rivet deal.
Stoner Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Islander fans will revolt if they trade the pick.
shrader Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 We totally disagree on this one. It tells the current players on team a great deal when you go outside your organization to get someone else. In hockey circles while acknowledging the good work Lindy and Darcy have done, many shook their heads at this Sabres move. Rivet is a stop gap solution at best, that only has served to tell remaining players management does not believe in their potential. It is such moves as why this team was not in playoffs. It dispirits the team. So wait, if a team is lacking leadership, they're just supposed to stick with what they have? They can't look somewhere else to help in that department? Oh wait, you're suggesting just that by picking up Tavares. Don't go calling me out for suggesting that the Sabres have an in system leader and then call me out again for suggesting they try to bring one in. Contradictions sure are fun, aren't they? My point wasn't specifically about Rivet. It's just that if a team is looking to improve in that department, that is the kind of deal that needs to be made. But then again, if we stick with your idea, the team is not allowed to make any changes at all and must focus on what they have. Good luck with that leading to any results. And also, if bringing in Rivet was so demoralizing to the team, remind me again why exactly they voted him captain.
tom webster Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Islander fans will revolt if they trade the pick. I would focus on Tampa and let the Islanders make their choice. They're bound to screw it up anyway thus inceasing the second team's chances of success.
LabattBlue Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 If the Sabres gave up a package of #13, next years first and second, and say for instance Tyler Myers, I'm not sure I'd be very happy. How do Tavares or Hegman rate compared to other former #1 overall picks? Can't miss? Daigle or Stefan possibilities?
thesportsbuff Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 2009 first rounder (13) 2010 first rounder, third rounder MacArthur/Paille Hecht and maybe eno/enroth??
Mbossy Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 We already have solid young talent developing. I would not give up the house to land Tavares. Maybe the vacation home, but not my residence.
Eleven Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 We totally disagree on this one. It tells the current players on team a great deal when you go outside your organization to get someone else. In hockey circles while acknowledging the good work Lindy and Darcy have done, many shook their heads at this Sabres move. Rivet is a stop gap solution at best, that only has served to tell remaining players management does not believe in their potential. It is such moves as why this team was not in playoffs. It dispirits the team. But the players elected Rivet captain--he wasn't appointed.
shrader Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 2009 first rounder (13)2010 first rounder, third rounder MacArthur/Paille Hecht and maybe eno/enroth?? Ok, now that I've finished laughing at this suggestion, I'll ask a question. Sure, the Islanders need to rebuild, but why would they accept a pick heavy offer when they're staring into the face of as close to a guarantee as you'll ever find? They'd be giving up essentially a known quantity in return for a bunch of questionable picks with no guarantee of ever panning out. If either of these picks are moved, it's going to be for actual, NHL proven or ready bodies. And now, it won't be the likes of MacArthur, Paille, and Hecht. In terms of Sabres players, it would take at least someone of Roy's status and then a few more higher level players, mixed in with a couple prospects. In other words, it's not happening.
jimiVbaby Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 If the Sabres gave up a package of #13, next years first and second, and say for instance Tyler Myers, I'm not sure I'd be very happy. How do Tavares or Hegman rate compared to other former #1 overall picks? Can't miss? Daigle or Stefan possibilities? There's a reason these kids are number 1 and 2 picks and it is because they're seen as the best can't miss prospects. I've been beating the Evander Kane drum for a little while now, and I really believe he is going to be more of an offensive force in the league in 5+ years.
Stoner Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Ok, now that I've finished laughing at this suggestion, I'll ask a question. Sure, the Islanders need to rebuild, but why would they accept a pick heavy offer when they're staring into the face of as close to a guarantee as you'll ever find? They'd be giving up essentially a known quantity in return for a bunch of questionable picks with no guarantee of ever panning out. If either of these picks are moved, it's going to be for actual, NHL proven or ready bodies. And now, it won't be the likes of MacArthur, Paille, and Hecht. In terms of Sabres players, it would take at least someone of Roy's status and then a few more higher level players, mixed in with a couple prospects. In other words, it's not happening. Come on. Don't ruin the fun.
shrader Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Come on. Don't ruin the fun. Ok, fine. Pominville + the last couple weeks of Peters' contract + the wire from Vanek's jaw
joe w bags Posted April 15, 2009 Author Report Posted April 15, 2009 Enough of the grand terms, I don't see you as some sort of hockey yoda. Seldom are leaders dropped into teams from outside, most come up there systems, were placed in situations to succeed, developed by and given the support of management. Waiting and looking around outside to find who someone else has developed to be your leader and captain ludicrous. I would more than enjoy further discussion providing it can be done with some respect. Otherwise I will not waste my time. So wait, if a team is lacking leadership, they're just supposed to stick with what they have? They can't look somewhere else to help in that department? Oh wait, you're suggesting just that by picking up Tavares. Don't go calling me out for suggesting that the Sabres have an in system leader and then call me out again for suggesting they try to bring one in. Contradictions sure are fun, aren't they? My point wasn't specifically about Rivet. It's just that if a team is looking to improve in that department, that is the kind of deal that needs to be made. But then again, if we stick with your idea, the team is not allowed to make any changes at all and must focus on what they have. Good luck with that leading to any results. And also, if bringing in Rivet was so demoralizing to the team, remind me again why exactly they voted him captain.
X. Benedict Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Hedman would be a better option for this team. Hedman is a bloody frickin' miracle.....I really think he'd be better for any team. Seriously.
shrader Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 Hedman is a bloody frickin' miracle.....I really think he'd be better for any team.Seriously. I could think of a few teams that would be better served going for the elite forward, but yeah, I'm with you on this one. Obviously any team would love to have either, but this team definitely needs that warhorse defenseman more than they need a forward. But then again, I may just be blinded by the last 6'6 defenseman that went 2nd overall (hopefully this year's #1 works out better than that year's).
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.