Around the NHL 2011-2012

[Bullwinkle]

here we go I will crunch the numbers and make the Weber trade work just for SaG...

 

Shea Weber to Buffalo

 

Vanek 7.1, Sekera 2.75, 2012 first round pick to Nashville (9.85 in salary gone)

 

Buffalo extends Weber for 8.25mil a year for 8 years or 66million$ contract

 

Tyler Myers gets 4.75 mil a year for 4 years or 19mill$ contract

total beginning next year is 13million in 2 defenders plus the rest of your defense ='s 24.97mil leaving 39.33 for forwards and GT

 

So then you have roughly 27.955 tied up in 10 forwards after new contracts for Goose, Ennis and Kaleta

 

and then you have 6.925 tied up in GT leaving 4.45 million for 3 more forwards and then any call ups or injuries

 

Your lines next year are then as follows:

 

Pommers - Roy - Ennis

Stafford - Leino - Gerbe

Kassian - Adam - Foligno

Kaleta - Goose - McCormick

 

Shea Weber - Myers

Mike Weber - Ehrhoff

Leopold - Regehr

 

... I think i did that right at least but...

 

so yup we could do it... what happens then in 2 years when we have to resign Roy... hope Catenacci stops playing games and develops a lot faster...http://www.sabresprospects.com/2011/08/reports-out-of-sault-ste.html

 

Myers is going to cost you more than that. 5 mil a year is minimum.

[Bullwinkle]

Didn't the Sabres and the Bruins each trade for a scoring winger last year without giving up much?

 

As for Kassian, it's possible that Nashville would rather have an NHL-ready defenseman like Sekera or Leopold, plus perhaps McNabb or Pysyk, than Kassian, which would certainly work better for the Sabres for the reasons you point out.

 

 

Yeah, but I don't think Boyes is even half the player Vanek is - especially in the playoffs.

 

Now dealing one or more of our D is what I've been talking about all along. We deal from our strength, which is D. But I would still hesitate to trade away our nr. 1 forward to reinforce a position we are already strong in.

[Bullwinkle]

It does depend on when this hypothetical trade takes place. If we're talking right now, then they would have some trouble working such a deal. If we're talking the trade deadline, then young Dman for experienced winger trades do happen. If we're talking next June (acquiring Weber's rights before he becomes a free agent), then there's the draft, free agency, and the trading periods between and after each that could be used to acquire offensive help. I don't expect Weber to be on the block right now, but the other two cases are more likely (most likely is still "does not happen.") I don't see Darcy making such a big change to the roster at the deadline unless, somehow, several younger wingers really step up. So, next June would be my guess, if at all.

 

I agree with you. Timing means a lot and was not discussed previously.

[nfreeman]

Yeah, but I don't think Boyes is even half the player Vanek is - especially in the playoffs.

 

Now dealing one or more of our D is what I've been talking about all along. We deal from our strength, which is D. But I would still hesitate to trade away our nr. 1 forward to reinforce a position we are already strong in.

I certainly agree on Boyes' worth relative to Vanek's. However, (i) I think the Sabres are better with Weber and another Boyes than with Vanek and (ii) guys in Vanek's class become available more often than guys in Weber's class (like, for example, Heatley and Havlat).

 

If the scenario was:

 

- Vanek and Sekera to Nashville for Weber

- Pysyk and a #2 to XYZ team for XYZ forward who could be penciled in for, say, 18-26-44 and was under contract for, say, 2 years x $3MM

- in summer 2012, when Hecht's and Boyes' contracts expire, allocating some of that $8MM to a high-end scoring forward

- Kassian coming online in 2012-13

 

What would you say to that?

[LGR4GM]

Myers is going to cost you more than that. 5 mil a year is minimum.

it would be his second contract and unless he becomes and All-Star no it wont. 5mil is the max not the minimum he has not proven hes worth top defender pay yet. Myers is not going to cost you 6mil.... that is in his future not his present. Not to mention at the most he could elect arbitration and I doubt he gets a 400% raise there. We own his rights no matter what so yea 4.75 is the number

 

I certainly agree on Boyes' worth relative to Vanek's. However, (i) I think the Sabres are better with Weber and another Boyes than with Vanek and (ii) guys in Vanek's class become available more often than guys in Weber's class (like, for example, Heatley and Havlat).If the scenario was:- Vanek and Sekera to Nashville for Weber- Pysyk and a #2 to XYZ team for XYZ forward who could be penciled in for, say, 18-26-44 and was under contract for, say, 2 years x $3MM- in summer 2012, when Hecht's and Boyes' contracts expire, allocating some of that $8MM to a high-end scoring forward- Kassian coming online in 2012-13What would you say to that?

Your trade scenario is more preposterous than my Malkin one.... Apparently Vanek is easily replaceable and we can trade this player for Shea Weber a franchise guy... just saying I find it interesting that some players are worth Vanek and a defensemen and others are worth Vanek, Defensemen, prospect picks harry potters beard... I am done with this conversation now, we are not getting Weber and I am glad.

 

o and negate my posts more I havent reached minus 200 yet :thumbsup:

[nfreeman]

Your trade scenario is more preposterous than my Malkin one.... Apparently Vanek is easily replaceable and we can trade this player for Shea Weber a franchise guy... just saying I find it interesting that some players are worth Vanek and a defensemen and others are worth Vanek, Defensemen, prospect picks harry potters beard... I am done with this conversation now, we are not getting Weber and I am glad.

 

o and negate my posts more I havent reached minus 200 yet :thumbsup:

 

1. The notion of Pittsburgh trading Malkin is preposterous. The possibility of Nashville trading Weber is very real.

 

2. Vanek has more value than Stafford. It's certainly possible that Vanek/Sekera would need to be sweetened with prospects/picks to get Weber, but there is NFW that Nashville would accept a package with Stafford (who has 1 30-goal season in a contract year after years of underperforming) as its centerpiece -- to say nothing of Pittsburgh accepting that package for Malkin. OTOH, Nashville might go for a package with Vanek (who has 2 40-goal seasons and 2 more 30-goal seasons) as the centerpiece.

 

3. I don't know if you think I'm the one who's been giving you negative ratings, but I assure you that I ain't (although I'm starting to understand the feelings of those who do).

[...]

After following and pondering the imaginery Weber trade, I just don't see the wisdom in trading away your top forward for a D man when your D is already potentially awesome.

 

Why not wait and see what the D looks like first before considering more moves there?

 

And why isn't Roy a part of this discussion? If anyone on the team is prime for trading, it's Roy.

[waldo]

 

 

 

What about my Myers jersey?

 

You raise an interesting question, and I'm not sure if I would do the deal if the Sabres had to include Myers. I probably would if it were Myers straight up for Weber, but that is unlikely and I'd have a hard time adding much to the package (or for that matter parting with Myers).

 

 

Possible Answer: Nashville gets cap relief with Myers . They get to resign Myers for 5-6 mil a year. Weber costs them 7.5 and on the open market will cost them 8-8.5 to resign. They pick up Myers present compentancies and all of his "future potential": Heck, some guys here will tell you he is already a top ten defenseman. What other option does Nashville have to shed Webers load and replace him with a "TOP TEN" defensman? :D The Sabres upgrade (an understatement) and try to resign him before he hits the market. The truth: it is still a silly unecessary trade or acquistion.

[thesportsbuff]

A little off-topic but has anyone heard anything about the Adult Hockeyfest tournament (Puck Drop 2011) this year? Seems like in past years it has been announced much earlier... it's usually mid-September, which is less than a month from now..

[Taro T]

After following and pondering the imaginery Weber trade, I just don't see the wisdom in trading away your top forward for a D man when your D is already potentially awesome.

 

Why not wait and see what the D looks like first before considering more moves there?

 

And why isn't Roy a part of this discussion? If anyone on the team is prime for trading, it's Roy.

I COULD see Nashville making a trade involving Weber, but I don't see it happening until after January 1. Although a team would still have the rights to him at the end of this season w/out him signing an extension, I don't see anybody putting the type of package necessary to land him until after they can be (nearly) certain that they can agree to an extension w/ him.

[Bullwinkle]

I certainly agree on Boyes' worth relative to Vanek's. However, (i) I think the Sabres are better with Weber and another Boyes than with Vanek and (ii) guys in Vanek's class become available more often than guys in Weber's class (like, for example, Heatley and Havlat).

 

If the scenario was:

 

- Vanek and Sekera to Nashville for Weber

- Pysyk and a #2 to XYZ team for XYZ forward who could be penciled in for, say, 18-26-44 and was under contract for, say, 2 years x $3MM

- in summer 2012, when Hecht's and Boyes' contracts expire, allocating some of that $8MM to a high-end scoring forward

- Kassian coming online in 2012-13

 

What would you say to that?

 

Well, if you want my opinion, here it is.

 

You are working out hypothetical details around a concept that I question. Right now we have a very good defense and a good offense IMO. With the addition of Weber and the subtraction of Vanek we would have an excellent defense and a fair offense.

 

The efforts to improve our offense from fair to good again are by no means guaranteed and although other teams have improved themselves, there are many others who have not been able to do that via trade. Can Pysyk and a nr. 2 give us someone who can make the top 6? I doubt it unless the reports on Pysyk have improved from the time of his being drafted. Can Kassian break into the NHL in 2012? Another question mark. Theoretically he should, but he has to get his head in order. We don't want another Keith Tkachuk.

 

In short, I would rather have a very good defense and good offense than excellent D and fair O. We have a lot of sorting out to do on this team before we make any dramatic moves. Will someone step up and become a legitimate 1st line center? Can Boyes return to his old form? Will Gerbe and Ennis jump to the next level? How will the new guys gel with the rest of the team and Lindy? Can we get Sekera, Weber, and MAGS the ice time they need to improve and will they do so? Will Leino be a center or a wing?

 

Weber isn't going anywhere...at least not for now. As Taro pointed out, Jan 1st might be the time of his first availability unless they receive an amazing offer before then. I am sure Nashville wants to work this out with him. So I say, let's let it sit for a while and see exactly what we have at home before making another big change.

 

Parise is another matter. I think everyone knows by now how high I am on getting him. A telling sign on his future in NJ will be if they offer him the C. I don't think they will. If things don't change there, he will be changing teams after this season, I believe. I remember when he was drafted. We chose Vanek that year. Interesting.

 

BTW, I don't know if you know this or not, but MAGS must play 58 games for the Sabres this season or else he becomes a UFA (as a Group Six free agent), instead of an RFA next summer. This is why I think he may be a sweetener in a bigger deal because this puts pressure on Darcy/Lindy to give him that time when competition for ice time at D will be fierce.

[waldo]

Buffalo ranked 13th in prospects. not an espn insider so i could not read the complete article. I like soniers stuff. He was a most excellent scout.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/story?id=6853047&_slug_=nhl-florida-panthers-chicago-blackhawks-detroit-red-wings-top-2011-organizational-rankings&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnhl%2fstory%3fid%3d6853047%26_slug_%3dnhl-florida-panthers-chicago-blackhawks-detroit-red-wings-top-2011-organizational-rankings

 

 

 

http://hotsportz.blogspot.com/2011/08/according-to-espn-nhl-franchise-in-most.html

[Andrew Amerk]

So, who will we have to give up to get Gretzky?

 

We need a decent center, after all.

[LGR4GM]

1. The notion of Pittsburgh trading Malkin is preposterous. The possibility of Nashville trading Weber is very real.

 

2. Vanek has more value than Stafford. It's certainly possible that Vanek/Sekera would need to be sweetened with prospects/picks to get Weber, but there is NFW that Nashville would accept a package with Stafford (who has 1 30-goal season in a contract year after years of underperforming) as its centerpiece -- to say nothing of Pittsburgh accepting that package for Malkin. OTOH, Nashville might go for a package with Vanek (who has 2 40-goal seasons and 2 more 30-goal seasons) as the centerpiece.

 

3. I don't know if you think I'm the one who's been giving you negative ratings, but I assure you that I ain't (although I'm starting to understand the feelings of those who do).

Let us see here... Crosby, Malkin, Staal.... you have 2 top centers an a very good 2nd line center... so you are right pittsburg has no reason in the next 1-3 years to trade a center off their roster when they just saw what happens when they dont have any talent outside of those guys... Vanek, Sekera, Kassian, 2 first rounders gets you malkin because its too good to pass up (personally I think that Stafford could be put in place instead but then I would remove sekera and put in Ehrhoff). I used Stafford the first time because Pitts has Neal at LW so they might want a RW who shown that he can get 30 goals to play on a line with staal or crosby... my bad for thinking positionally <_<

 

Thank you for giving credit to the troll which I know who it is fyi, who continually negates anything I post because of the Gerbe center debate from 4 freaking months ago... also Boston sucks

 

Finally, Weber has not said he wants out of Nashville and also, the sabres wouldnt be in on him if he was because it would be PREPOSTEROUS for them to trade the few forwards they have for 1 defensemen... just saying if it doesnt make sense for Pitts to trade Malkin than it really does not make sense for Buffalo to trade their only 40 goal scorer for a defender...

 

I love that I'm getting hated on for the Weber trade talk when I didn't start this stupid superfluous conversation... some days this board is priceless. :clapping:

[BuffaloSoldier2010]

Let us see here... Crosby, Malkin, Staal.... you have 2 top centers an a very good 2nd line center... so you are right pittsburg has no reason in the next 1-3 years to trade a center off their roster when they just saw what happens when they dont have any talent outside of those guys... Vanek, Sekera, Kassian, 2 first rounders gets you malkin because its too good to pass up (personally I think that Stafford could be put in place instead but then I would remove sekera and put in Ehrhoff). I used Stafford the first time because Pitts has Neal at LW so they might want a RW who shown that he can get 30 goals to play on a line with staal or crosby... my bad for thinking positionally <_<

 

Thank you for giving credit to the troll which I know who it is fyi, who continually negates anything I post because of the Gerbe center debate from 4 freaking months ago... also Boston sucks

 

Finally, Weber has not said he wants out of Nashville and also, the sabres wouldnt be in on him if he was because it would be PREPOSTEROUS for them to trade the few forwards they have for 1 defensemen... just saying if it doesnt make sense for Pitts to trade Malkin than it really does not make sense for Buffalo to trade their only 40 goal scorer for a defender...

 

I love that I'm getting hated on for the Weber trade talk when I didn't start this stupid superfluous conversation... some days this board is priceless. :clapping:

I think you take everything on this message board a little too personally.

[Andrew Amerk]

I think you take everything on this message board a little too personally.

 

I like KTN's contributions, just as much as everyone elses.

 

The differing opinions and various personalities are what make this a good board.

[Bullwinkle]

On another note...there seems to be a serious buyer for the Coyotes. A Canadian based group (unidentified) which is offering to pay 100 million to relocate the team. The mayor of Glendale (who thinks there are 30 teams in the league) says that it might be best if they go, but the people should dwell on it first.

 

If relocated to Canada, the only two spots I can think of would be Quebec and Hamilton. Oh oh.

[Bullwinkle]

I think you take everything on this message board a little too personally.

 

I think what KTN is referring to is the way in which disagreement is voiced...with respect or with ridicule.

[Jeanbe]

On another note...there seems to be a serious buyer for the Coyotes. A Canadian based group (unidentified) which is offering to pay 100 million to relocate the team. The mayor of Glendale (who thinks there are 30 teams in the league) says that it might be best if they go, but the people should dwell on it first.

 

If relocated to Canada, the only two spots I can think of would be Quebec and Hamilton. Oh oh.

 

Yet not a work here in Phoenix from the local fish wrap. That is the problem IMO. No coverage for hockey by media. I can drive home from work and catch the DVR of a Sabre playoff game in progress and not worry about the score being announced on Phoenix radio.

 

There are many fans here but in Phoenix like me but the only reason I go to Coyotes games is to see east coast hockey. Very few here care if there is an NHL team. Another Bettman failure.

[Eleven]

On another note...there seems to be a serious buyer for the Coyotes. A Canadian based group (unidentified) which is offering to pay 100 million to relocate the team. The mayor of Glendale (who thinks there are 30 teams in the league) says that it might be best if they go, but the people should dwell on it first.

 

If relocated to Canada, the only two spots I can think of would be Quebec and Hamilton. Oh oh.

 

Where are you seeing/hearing this?

[LGR4GM]

I think what KTN is referring to is the way in which disagreement is voiced...with respect or with ridicule.

bingo

[Andrew Amerk]

I think what KTN is referring to is the way in which disagreement is voiced...with respect or with ridicule.

 

Board imitates life.

[shrader]

On another note...there seems to be a serious buyer for the Coyotes. A Canadian based group (unidentified) which is offering to pay 100 million to relocate the team. The mayor of Glendale (who thinks there are 30 teams in the league) says that it might be best if they go, but the people should dwell on it first.

 

If relocated to Canada, the only two spots I can think of would be Quebec and Hamilton. Oh oh.

 

Am I missing something with this one?

[BetweenThePipes00]

On another note...there seems to be a serious buyer for the Coyotes. A Canadian based group (unidentified) which is offering to pay 100 million to relocate the team. The mayor of Glendale (who thinks there are 30 teams in the league) says that it might be best if they go, but the people should dwell on it first.

 

If relocated to Canada, the only two spots I can think of would be Quebec and Hamilton. Oh oh.

 

Where are you seeing/hearing this?

 

Am I missing something with this one?

 

this is the only recent thing I can find that sounds kind of like what bullwinkle is talking about: http://www.bizjourna...r.html?page=all

 

However, they would be buying the team with a 7-year out clause, not to move it immediately.

 

here is a story about THAT story out of canada with the quote from the mayor: http://www.theglobea...article2128028/

 

But I didn't take from that quote that it might be better if they go ... i took it as she doesn't want them to go but the city has to have a plan as if they might because the NHL controls it.

 

Whatever the case it certainly seems like Canadian groups are the ones taking runs as the troubled franchises ... Quebec my get one before Southern Ontario, but whether it's 5 or 20 years from now it's certainly possible that there may be another team between Buffalo and Toronto. As long as Pegula is around it's not quite as scary.

 

EDIT: I found the quote about the "other owners," I almost missed it: "The decision is with the NHL, the other, I think it is 29 other owners, who they want to be an owner of the team."

So bullwinkle was pointing out she's not SURE how many other owners there are ... she THINKS it's 29 others. (in her defense, the NHL owns the team in her city, perhaps she thinks this is going on elsewhere also ...)

[Andrew Amerk]

Where are you seeing/hearing this?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/27694626/31271758