2012 Trade RUMOR Thread. (Keep the deadline thread for substantiated stuff).

[darksabre]

Nothing and just so everyone's clear this ^ didn't come from me.

 

 

The season started on October 6 and it is now February 15 so its exactly 4 months and 9 days since the begining of the season... according to you he played 2 months at center and some here and there... so MOST of the season he has spent at center or I can't do math and this conversation is superfluous because we arent getting Kane or Nash or anyone else. Regier has never traded for a top player since the lockout ended... wake up ppl unless we draft the center of our dreams we will never get one.

 

Kane has 145 FOW in 57 games.

 

Jochen Hecht has 136 in 22 games.

 

Patrick Kane is not a center.

[LGR4GM]

Kane has 145 FOW in 57 games.

 

Jochen Hecht has 136 in 22 games.

 

Patrick Kane is not a center.

Pominville - 321 faceoffs taken and 3rd most on sabres... but hes not our 3rd center... hmm...

 

Kane 328 total faceoffs taken for 5th on his team and only 22 behind kruger and 10 behind morrison...

 

I am sorry but faceoff wins prove nothing especially considering that in Hecht's 22 games he played on the top line as a center even though he should be a LW. It makes more sense to try for 24 year old Kane who has some experience at center than to even entertain getting Nash who has none. That was all I was saying.

[darksabre]

Pominville - 321 faceoffs taken and 3rd most on sabres... but hes not our 3rd center... hmm...

 

Kane 328 total faceoffs taken for 5th on his team and only 22 behind kruger and 10 behind morrison...

 

I am sorry but faceoff wins prove nothing especially considering that in Hecht's 22 games he played on the top line as a center even though he should be a LW. It makes more sense to try for 24 year old Kane who has some experience at center than to even entertain getting Nash who has none. That was all I was saying.

 

Did you just try to imply that Pominville is center?

[LGR4GM]

Did you just try to imply that Pominville is center?

you're kidding right?

[BuffaloSoldier2010]

I think he's serious, boss.

[thesportsbuff]

Pominville - 321 faceoffs taken and 3rd most on sabres... but hes not our 3rd center... hmm...

 

Kane 328 total faceoffs taken for 5th on his team and only 22 behind kruger and 10 behind morrison...

 

I am sorry but faceoff wins prove nothing especially considering that in Hecht's 22 games he played on the top line as a center even though he should be a LW. It makes more sense to try for 24 year old Kane who has some experience at center than to even entertain getting Nash who has none. That was all I was saying.

 

Regardless of what your point is with the Pominville stat (which is lost on me as well), it makes NO SENSE to play either Kane OR Nash at center if we, by some grace of god, were lucky enough to acquire one of them. Why waste a premier talent in the league by playing him in a position they don't play? Another gem from WGR this morning... if you were managing a baseball team, and you have no pitchers, would you just plug in a shortstop and expect them to succeed? Of course not. Please just STOP with all the "this guy should play center!" and "we should try this guy at center!" I thought we were past that phase last year. :wallbash: :wallbash:

[JJFIVEOH]

Regardless of what your point is with the Pominville stat (which is lost on me as well), it makes NO SENSE to play either Kane OR Nash at center if we, by some grace of god, were lucky enough to acquire one of them. Why waste a premier talent in the league by playing him in a position they don't play? Another gem from WGR this morning... if you were managing a baseball team, and you have no pitchers, would you just plug in a shortstop and expect them to succeed? Of course not. Please just STOP with all the "this guy should play center!" and "we should try this guy at center!" I thought we were past that phase last year. :wallbash: :wallbash:

 

Where do you think Tim Wakefield came from? :P

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't mind chasing Parise but if you pass on Nash, Parise is certainly not a given to come to Buff. You risk losing both. And Nash brings something Parise doesn't that we lack. Size in the top 6. In the end, I guess the choice between Parise and Nash comes down to what kind of team do you want to build, a speed/finesse team or a a bigger team. Personally, I'd prefer Nash.

 

In my ideal end of the season and FA world I'd see Nash and Brassard or Vermette come to Buffalo and get Jarrett Stoll as an FA. We end up with Ennis, Brassard (vermette), and Stoll as our top 3 centers and we get to see if Nash and Vanek can work together on the top line. Can we afford all that? I dunno. I have no idea what Stoll is going to command on the open market. I assume we'll have to clear additional salary space to make it happen. If it is a sellers' market this season at the deadline maybe making that space is do-able?

 

 

Assuming we can unload both Roy and Stafford at some point (be it at the deadline or draft) I really don't think the cap is an issue. My point with Parise wasn't that I think we have a great chance of luring him here, just that I don't think getting Nash to waive his no-trade to come here is any more likely, and if I'm going to go after highly unlikely scenarios I'm picking the one that only costs money as opposed to money and valuable assets. Also, I think Parise is the better player. I do realize that having Nash in hand would make us far more attractive to Parise, but then the cap actually does get really complicated. Even if we ship Myers and his extension off, we're still probably adding a net of about $10 million between Parise and Nash. With all of our pending UFAs off the books, and assuming Myers is traded, we free up roughly $12.3 million from where we are currently. Nash adds $7.8, Parise I'll just say 7. At this pint we'd be about $2.5 million in the hole with other roster slots to fill out, plus signing some centers. If both Roy and Stafford or Leino (haha right) come off the books in trades, it's doable, but it will be real tight.

 

My guess is we'd have to target Stoll as a clear #3 center, as Ruutu is probably too rich for our situation. I don't think Stoll is going to cost a whole heck of a lot (relatively speaking) in free agency, he's going to be 30 and is only a 40-point guy for his career. Making $3.6 mil this season and having statistically his worst since his rookie year, I think factoring in inflation in the market he'll get 4ish. If the bidding gets higher than that, might as well go after Ruutu at that point for 5 per season since I think he's the better player (cap troubles notwithstanding). In this dream scenario, our team would look something like:

 

Parise-Ennis-Nash

Vanek-Adam-Pominville

Leino-Stoll-Kassian

Gerbe-McCormick/Ellis-Kaleta

 

Ehrhoff-McNabb

Regehr-Leopold

Sekera-Weber

 

Certainly not terrible.

 

Edited to fix the lines since I forgot Leino...or maybe I was subconsciously hoping we get an amnesty clause in the new CBA?

[LGR4GM]

hold up because its clear ppl cant read. The point was that pommers has played center 0% of the time this year and has the same number (almost) of faceoffs as Kane who has played some center this year. That was simply the point, that faceoffs do not necessarily indicate amount of time at center. That is all.

[darksabre]

hold up because its clear ppl cant read. The point was that pommers has played center 0% of the time this year and has the same number (almost) of faceoffs as Kane who has played some center this year. That was simply the point, that faceoffs do not necessarily indicate amount of time at center. That is all.

 

So a winger that takes 5 face offs per game is comparable to a winger that takes 5 face offs per game? But you want him to play center, but you don't want to compare him to someone who actually centers lines?

 

Where, exactly, are you trying to go with this?

[Bmwolf21]

wake up ppl unless we draft the center of our dreams we will never get one.

hold up because its clear ppl cant read.

 

Not to derail the thread, but this stuff is a good example of why posters harass, hammer, and pick at you. It is uncalled for, unnecessary, adds nothing to the conversation, and you come across as a condescending dbag.

[LGR4GM]

So a winger that takes 5 face offs per game is comparable to a winger that takes 5 face offs per game? But you want him to play center, but you don't want to compare him to someone who actually centers lines?

 

Where, exactly, are you trying to go with this?

Lets try this 1. more. time.

 

Kane has played center this year. We know that because a) we've (well I watch any game thats on) have seen it and b) people in the media have discussed how his numbers have been down since being switched to the pivot spot. So all I was saying is that if we were to cash our chips in for a player of the "elite" variety why not go for Kane instead of Nash because at least Kane has played some center. Its really not that hard of a concept and I do not think it is possible to spell that out anymore but I will try.

 

The discussion was lets get Nash. Someone said what about Kane. I am saying if it were btw those 2 players I would take Kane because of his age, proven ability, and recent stint as a center.

 

Goodnight.

 

Not to derail the thread, but this stuff is a good example of why posters harass, hammer, and pick at you. It is uncalled for, unnecessary, adds nothing to the conversation, and you come across as a condescending dbag.

yup ik

[wonderbread]

 

 

Where do you think Tim Wakefield came from? :P

 

His mother?

[Two or less]

 

The guys on WGR made several good points this morning on the radio.. the first of which being that we hear again and again how there are "lots of buyers and not enough sellers" from sources around the league. So BE a seller. Over charge for players. There are teams out there that will trade for our "garbage."

 

They also mentioned how Ruutu was supposed to be one of the premier names available at the deadline... and now he is injured until after the deadline. He's off the market. Maybe a team wants a Drew Stafford or a Derek Roy just THAT much more now that Ruutu isn't available.

 

First I will say, Jeremy White may be this cities biggest sports clowns.

 

Second, the Roy and Stafford being wanted more has no effect on Ruutu. Ruutu will only miss about a week after the deadline, but he plays a different style. He hits, fights in the corners, goes to the net and can score. Stafford is just a bum. I doubt anybody will want him without sending a similar bum back. And Roy, has value. Don't fool yourself.

[thesportsbuff]

Lets try this 1. more. time.

 

Kane has played center this year. We know that because a) we've (well I watch any game thats on) have seen it and b) people in the media have discussed how his numbers have been down since being switched to the pivot spot. So all I was saying is that if we were to cash our chips in for a player of the "elite" variety why not go for Kane instead of Nash because at least Kane has played some center. Its really not that hard of a concept and I do not think it is possible to spell that out anymore but I will try.

 

The discussion was lets get Nash. Someone said what about Kane. I am saying if it were btw those 2 players I would take Kane because of his age, proven ability, and recent stint as a center.

 

Goodnight.

 

But why does Kane's experience at center have ANYTHING to do with it? Especially when it's regarded league wide as a FAILED experiment? Their "experience" at center means NOTHING because neither of them would play center here.

 

That said, I'm sure everyone here would agree that if it were between Kane and Nash, we'd take Kane... not because of his hypothetical center experience but because he's an elite young WINGER in the league with 10+ years of hockey ahead of him..

[thesportsbuff]

First I will say, Jeremy White may be this cities biggest sports clowns.

 

Second, the Roy and Stafford being wanted more has no effect on Ruutu. Ruutu will only miss about a week after the deadline, but he plays a different style. He hits, fights in the corners, goes to the net and can score. Stafford is just a bum. I doubt anybody will want him without sending a similar bum back. And Roy, has value. Don't fool yourself.

 

You're reading it backwards. It's not Stafford and Roy being "wanted more" that has any effect on Ruutu. It's Ruutu being OFF the market that makes teams want a Stafford or Roy more, as it's one less good player available. Lots of buyers, not enough sellers.... Ruutu was one of the most notable players available-- now he isn't. If a team is looking for a playoff rental, Gaustad may have just became the best one on the market. Or a team that wanted a Ruutu type rental might now think more long term and take a Roy or Stafford.

 

No team is going to pay the desired price for an injured forward. It's way too big of a risk. Sure, he's only expected to miss one week after the deadline... until all of the sudden there's a set back, and he misses two weeks after the deadline. Or he re-aggravates his injury shortly after. Now you just overpaid for a rental player who played all of 10 games and didn't get your team over the hump and into the playoffs... yeah nobody is taking that risk.

[darksabre]

Lets try this 1. more. time.

 

Kane has played center this year. We know that because a) we've (well I watch any game thats on) have seen it and b) people in the media have discussed how his numbers have been down since being switched to the pivot spot. So all I was saying is that if we were to cash our chips in for a player of the "elite" variety why not go for Kane instead of Nash because at least Kane has played some center. Its really not that hard of a concept and I do not think it is possible to spell that out anymore but I will try.

 

The discussion was lets get Nash. Someone said what about Kane. I am saying if it were btw those 2 players I would take Kane because of his age, proven ability, and recent stint as a center.

 

Goodnight.

 

 

yup ik

 

So because Kane played "some" center, you want to bring him here to play center? Rather than bringing in a winger...who plays on the wing...

 

That makes absolutely zero sense. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA.

 

Do you even think about this ###### before you say it?

[Koomkie]

just read the article on the main page...i am really happy with the way pommers has responded to being our captain. but since he has shown so must reliability and constant effort, should we trade him with his value being arguably very high right now? he is a great player, but he does have a high cap hit. i wouldn't say grossly over paid because he has been consistent over the years, but the question is would you trade him away and who would you expect to get back for him. obviously not a rumor, but hopefully you agree it fits in this thread.

[stenbaro]

Lets try this 1. more. time.

 

Kane has played center this year. We know that because a) we've (well I watch any game thats on) have seen it and b) people in the media have discussed how his numbers have been down since being switched to the pivot spot. So all I was saying is that if we were to cash our chips in for a player of the "elite" variety why not go for Kane instead of Nash because at least Kane has played some center. Its really not that hard of a concept and I do not think it is possible to spell that out anymore but I will try.

 

The discussion was lets get Nash. Someone said what about Kane. I am saying if it were btw those 2 players I would take Kane because of his age, proven ability, and recent stint as a center.

 

Goodnight.

 

 

yup ik

Kane isnt a center and if they do somehow get him here I hope to god they dont bring him here with the thoughts of him being the answer at the center position....We need 2 real centers not some hope to the lord above they can make them into one...Go get the best players u can this year and then bag ur centers in the offseason...Either thru the top pick we will get and a free agent move or thru trades..We need 2 real centers not wanna b's

[darksabre]

Kane isnt a center and if they do somehow get him here I hope to god they dont bring him here with the thoughts of him being the answer at the center position....We need 2 real centers not some hope to the lord above they can make them into one...Go get the best players u can this year and then bag ur centers in the offseason...Either thru the top pick we will get and a free agent move or thru trades..We need 2 real centers not wanna b's

 

Maybe we could trade them center for center, Leino for Kane? ;)

[billsrcursed]

Maybe we could trade them center for center, Leino for Kane? ;)

 

.... or Gerbe. Didn't he fill in for his High School top line Center after injury a couple of games once?

 

Oh, hai Shrader!

[stenbaro]

Maybe we could trade them center for center, Leino for Kane? ;)

Darcy aint there gm... :sick: Just kidding in reality..He would want more for Leino...lol

[deluca67]

Can't really disagree with that. I'm just hesitant to blow our "asset wad" on Nash and his awful contract, although I'm not completely opposed depending on what we could do with the rest of the roster to supplement the move--I think most would agree we're more than a Nash away from a deep playoff run. I'd much prefer to pursue Parise in free agency who only costs us money as opposed to assets, and I think getting him to agree to come here is about as likely as convincing Nash to waive his no trade clause for us.

 

 

 

 

Genuine questions: How close do you think we are to being a legitimate Cup contender? I'd be surprised if you thought that acquiring Nash morphs our team into a deep playoff contender, so how many more moves (that could actually be made) would be required to make us legitimate? If we include Myers as trade bait, we really only have the assets to pull off 2 big trades, everything else would have to be done through small moves or free agency. Are you willing to bet the next 5 years of the franchise that we can win in the next 2? Because given the age of our top players and some of the contracts, in a couple more years it's going to have to be blown up and started all over again with a crippled pipeline, whether it works or not. If we could get a Cup in those 2 years I'd do it in a heartbeat and deal with the fallout, I'm just not sold on Nash as the centerpiece of that approach.

Nash is 27 and Vanek is 28, they both have many years of hockey left in them, well beyond 5 years. Does trading for Nash make the Sabres a instant contender? No! I doubt even a healthy Crosby could accomplish that. What Nash does do is make the team better, a lot better. A Sabres team with Nash is better than a Sabres team with Myers. I wouldn't consider Nash a "center piece", I would consider Nash an important piece to turning this team around.

[Weave]

Assuming we can unload both Roy and Stafford at some point (be it at the deadline or draft) I really don't think the cap is an issue. My point with Parise wasn't that I think we have a great chance of luring him here, just that I don't think getting Nash to waive his no-trade to come here is any more likely, and if I'm going to go after highly unlikely scenarios I'm picking the one that only costs money as opposed to money and valuable assets. Also, I think Parise is the better player. I do realize that having Nash in hand would make us far more attractive to Parise, but then the cap actually does get really complicated. Even if we ship Myers and his extension off, we're still probably adding a net of about $10 million between Parise and Nash. With all of our pending UFAs off the books, and assuming Myers is traded, we free up roughly $12.3 million from where we are currently. Nash adds $7.8, Parise I'll just say 7. At this pint we'd be about $2.5 million in the hole with other roster slots to fill out, plus signing some centers. If both Roy and Stafford or Leino (haha right) come off the books in trades, it's doable, but it will be real tight.

 

My guess is we'd have to target Stoll as a clear #3 center, as Ruutu is probably too rich for our situation. I don't think Stoll is going to cost a whole heck of a lot (relatively speaking) in free agency, he's going to be 30 and is only a 40-point guy for his career. Making $3.6 mil this season and having statistically his worst since his rookie year, I think factoring in inflation in the market he'll get 4ish. If the bidding gets higher than that, might as well go after Ruutu at that point for 5 per season since I think he's the better player (cap troubles notwithstanding). In this dream scenario, our team would look something like:

 

Parise-Ennis-Nash

Vanek-Adam-Pominville

Leino-Stoll-Kassian

Gerbe-McCormick/Ellis-Kaleta

 

Ehrhoff-McNabb

Regehr-Leopold

Sekera-Weber

 

Certainly not terrible.

 

Edited to fix the lines since I forgot Leino...or maybe I was subconsciously hoping we get an amnesty clause in the new CBA?

 

Other than Adam as 2nd line center I really like the way that lineup looks. Too bad it is a pipe dream.

[FolignosJock]

Nash is 27 and Vanek is 28, they both have many years of hockey left in them, well beyond 5 years. Does trading for Nash make the Sabres a instant contender? No! I doubt even a healthy Crosby could accomplish that. What Nash does do is make the team better, a lot better. A Sabres team with Nash is better than a Sabres team with Myers. I wouldn't consider Nash a "center piece", I would consider Nash an important piece to turning this team around.

 

A healthy crosby def makes us a contender.....

 

 

 

As to all of this LGR drama, everyone is bashing him for talking about wingers moving to center and their time spent in that position. You are all acting like Lindy and management hasnt been putting wingers at center all year long and for their entire duration of their time here. Kane over nash 100% of the time, he is younger, better, from buffalo and has won a cup.