Who should the Sabres Draft in the first and second round?

LastPommerFan · June 19, 2012

The trade is not:

Miller, Roy, Stafford, Sekera and two number one picks for Luongo and Kesler.

The Trade is

Miller for Luongo
Roy and Sekera for Kessler
Stafford and #21 to upgrade #12 to #2 and pick a true #1 Center (Galchenyuk)

The trade doesn't look that bad. I wouldn't do it, but I really don't like Luongo. I really like the 2nd and third bullets.

shrader · June 19, 2012

So Miller's going to waive his no trade clause to go to Columbus? Why?

LastPommerFan · June 19, 2012

So Miller's going to waive his no trade clause to go to Columbus? Why?

4x as many west coast games as buffalo.

dEnnis the Menace · June 19, 2012

So Miller's going to waive his no trade clause to go to Columbus? Why?

He'd rather know WAAAYYYY ahead of time that he can make early summer plans, rather than the way the Sabres do it currently.

inkman · June 19, 2012

So Miller's going to waive his no trade clause to go to Columbus? Why?

It's closer to Hollywood. :)

LGR4GM · June 19, 2012

Plus a decade of Luongo.

Thank god someone sees this problem. Who the hell wants a 43yr goaltender?

I took that out of the equation because you did in your post...but yeah, suppose that could be a bit of a turnoff, so that is why the new gm must get on Burke's good side right away :P And there is also an outside chance Lu could play just as well as Miller has in the past 5+ years.

Obviously this isn't the perfect blockbuster in terms of the sabres, but will there ever be one? At some point I'd like to see management identify a change that could really help the team, recognize the possible consequences/benefits, and just go for it, screw the fear of ramifications.

They need to make targeted trades or they would just be like Columus when it acquired Carter. Luongo is older and getting older and no I doubt he plays like Miller did over the last 5 years. Of course in Luongo's case we would also get another 5 years on top of the 5 years we just discussed...

I guess at the end of the day I don't have a problem trading Miller, I just don't want Luongo. He'd be a re-tread.

Again yes this is the problem. This is a sideways trade that hurts us in the long hall more than it helps.

Again...I don't get it. Look at the stats and the standings and playoff push for the past 6 years and please tell me how Luongo is even near considered worse than Miller....ok...maybe I will do it for us.

You don't get it because you don't want to. Miller has never in the last 6yrs had a team with the offense or defense that Vancouver has had. Last time miller had what luongo does was 07. You also fail to realize that Luongo is 33, miller is 31 both of them are starting to crest and begin the back ends of their careers. In 3 years miller will be gone so its no big deal and he will probably be decent at 34yrs old... Luongo will not be decent when his contract expires at 43yrs old. Luongo is falling apart now. If they were the same age and had the same amount of time left I would say sure why not but they dont.

ps I ran their sv% for the past 3 years... its the exact same. 0.920% and that is more important than GAA for this.

The only reason you don't get it is because you don't agree.

Miller and Luongo might as well be brothers. They're the same friggen guy, right down to the hair and the thousand mile stare. Luongo for Miller would be the same as going from an F150 to a Silverado. Might as well just stick with what you know.

Yea pretty much. I averaged their sv% over the last 3years and its exactly the same. Only difference in 3years we can say goodbye to Miller and replace... or in 10 years we can replace luongo... also luongo is older than miller as we speak. Getting luongo is just a horrendous idea even if ppl don't agree luongo is a choker.

nobody · June 19, 2012

Plus a decade of Luongo.

This is the new Sabres - they can send that contract down to Rochester in 5 year or whenever he is deemed washed up if needed.

TrueBlueGED · June 19, 2012

This is the new Sabres - they can send that contract down to Rochester in 5 year or whenever he is deemed washed up if needed.

If the CBA allows it. We don't know if buyouts or AHL dumping are going to change. Not to mention the next CBA after this one....the contract is 10 years, and unless the next CBA is also 10 years, it adds yet another layer of uncertainty into it.

nobody · June 19, 2012

If the CBA allows it. We don't know if buyouts or AHL dumping are going to change. Not to mention the next CBA after this one....the contract is 10 years, and unless the next CBA is also 10 years, it adds yet another layer of uncertainty into it.

That is true Darcy.

shrader · June 19, 2012

Thank god someone sees this problem. Who the hell wants a 43yr goaltender?

Just out of curiousity, have you at any point talked about the possibility of bringing Hasek back?

If the CBA allows it. We don't know if buyouts or AHL dumping are going to change. Not to mention the next CBA after this one....the contract is 10 years, and unless the next CBA is also 10 years, it adds yet another layer of uncertainty into it.

His deal may be grandfathered in though. I'm not exactly sure how that is dealt with, most likely pre-existing contracts are handled specifically in the new CBA.

dEnnis the Menace · June 19, 2012

This is the new Sabres - they can send that contract down to Rochester in 5 year or whenever he is deemed washed up if needed.

If we plan to dump him in Rochester in 5 years as a waste of money, why bother to begin with? I doubt he'd make it 5 years before the fans want his head on a pike. Truth is, Luongo is not an upgrade. If we are going to get rid of Miller, it better be for a huge upgrade. i'm not against getting rid of Miller, but i want the return to be good, and I don't believe Luongo is good return.

Back to the topic on hand: I am all for taking the best player available for this draft, rather than reaching and drafting for need. This isn't a very deep draft (well, for defensemen it's top heavy). Get the best available, or make a couple trades to move around.

26CornerBlitz · June 19, 2012

Bob Mckenzie's Draft Rankings:

http://watch.tsn.ca/nhl/clip702740#clip702740

nobody · June 19, 2012

If we plan to dump him in Rochester in 5 years as a waste of money, why bother to begin with? I doubt he'd make it 5 years before the fans want his head on a pike. Truth is, Luongo is not an upgrade. If we are going to get rid of Miller, it better be for a huge upgrade. i'm not against getting rid of Miller, but i want the return to be good, and I don't believe Luongo is good return.

I'm not saying I want Luongo either. But you make the trade if you think he will help you to win in the next year or 2 or 3. Many trades are made with similar players being traded for each other with the idea that a change of scenery is all that is needed for the player to step their game up a notch and to shake up the lineup just enough to make the other players step up their games.

dEnnis the Menace · June 19, 2012

I'm not saying I want Luongo either. But you make the trade if you think he will help you to win in the next year or 2 or 3. Many trades are made with similar players being traded for each other with the idea that a change of scenery is all that is needed for the player to step their game up a notch and to shake up the lineup just enough to make the other players step up their games.

See, that's just the thing, I don't think a change in scenery is going to help him (Luongo). I think he has motivation issues, and like someone else said, takes nights off. I'm not saying Miller doesn't take nights off, but at least you know what you're getting night-in and night-out when he's not concussed. IMO Miller is above average, and shows flashes of greatness here and there, and has the ability to steal games. Luongo at his best, is great, but that seems to be a lot less often these days. he has been replaced by Schneider often the past two years, and on top of that, this past year, he wasn't even put back in, that's how little trust the coach had in him.

Weave · June 19, 2012

If we plan to dump him in Rochester in 5 years as a waste of money, why bother to begin with? I doubt he'd make it 5 years before the fans want his head on a pike. Truth is, Luongo is not an upgrade. If we are going to get rid of Miller, it better be for a huge upgrade. i'm not against getting rid of Miller, but i want the return to be good, and I don't believe Luongo is good return.

Back to the topic on hand: I am all for taking the best player available for this draft, rather than reaching and drafting for need. This isn't a very deep draft (well, for defensemen it's top heavy). Get the best available, or make a couple trades to move around.

Not that I am advocating the suggested trade (I'm not) but, that trade isn't about upgrading Miller. If you are taking it as make the move because Luongo > Miller than you are taking the concept of that trade incorrectly (at least, that's how I read it). The whole idea behind that trade is to use moving Luongo (a Miller comparable with pressure issues) to pry out the type of players the team lacks. Maybe Luongo is a downgrade, maybe it is break even. But if it gets us a gritty #2 center and a franchise type forward (#2 overall pick) then it could very well be that the team is an overall upgrade even if the goalie position still retains a level of concern among some folks. Who wouldn't want that as a big next step towards the ultimate goal?

Ghost of Dwight Drane · June 19, 2012

Not that I am advocating the suggested trade (I'm not) but, that trade isn't about upgrading Miller. If you are taking it as make the move because Luongo > Miller than you are taking the concept of that trade incorrectly (at least, that's how I read it). The whole idea behind that trade is to use moving Luongo (a Miller comparable with pressure issues) to pry out the type of players the team lacks. Maybe Luongo is a downgrade, maybe it is break even. But if it gets us a gritty #2 center and a franchise type forward (#2 overall pick) then it could very well be that the team is an overall upgrade even if the goalie position still retains a level of concern among some folks. Who wouldn't want that as a big next step towards the ultimate goal?

That's the jist of it. Of course nothing of that magnitude is likely to happen, but in the scenario.....all 3 teams get what they are looking for and have to make do with other aspects of the deal.

If you ever have a chance to pull something like this off.....this is the year. Vancouver can't trade straight for Nash and give up a center and they probably don't have a way of making it happen without extra picks. Luongo, Raymond and a 1st might come up short....and people are valid in their concern over a long contract. Miller would probably agree to go to Columbus before Luongo would. You can sell a lot of designer skinny-jeans at Ohio St.!

Personally I don't think Darcy is even capable of thinking this big.....let alone having the moxie to pull it off. I'm sure he has 12 calls out to teams where he is offering Roy and #21 for their top 2 center. That's probably the only type of splash you may see.

dEnnis the Menace · June 19, 2012

Not that I am advocating the suggested trade (I'm not) but, that trade isn't about upgrading Miller. If you are taking it as make the move because Luongo > Miller than you are taking the concept of that trade incorrectly (at least, that's how I read it). The whole idea behind that trade is to use moving Luongo (a Miller comparable with pressure issues) to pry out the type of players the team lacks. Maybe Luongo is a downgrade, maybe it is break even. But if it gets us a gritty #2 center and a franchise type forward (#2 overall pick) then it could very well be that the team is an overall upgrade even if the goalie position still retains a level of concern among some folks. Who wouldn't want that as a big next step towards the ultimate goal?

That's the jist of it. Of course nothing of that magnitude is likely to happen, but in the scenario.....all 3 teams get what they are looking for and have to make do with other aspects of the deal.

If you ever have a chance to pull something like this off.....this is the year. Vancouver can't trade straight for Nash and give up a center and they probably don't have a way of making it happen without extra picks. Luongo, Raymond and a 1st might come up short....and people are valid in their concern over a long contract. Miller would probably agree to go to Columbus before Luongo would. You can sell a lot of designer skinny-jeans at Ohio St.!

Personally I don't think Darcy is even capable of thinking this big.....let alone having the moxie to pull it off. I'm sure he has 12 calls out to teams where he is offering Roy and #21 for their top 2 center. That's probably the only type of splash you may see.

I guess I just latched onto that portion of the trade. I do like the idea of kesler over Roy and Sekera (although I'd rather dump Weber than Sekera).

TrueBlueGED · June 19, 2012

That's the jist of it. Of course nothing of that magnitude is likely to happen, but in the scenario.....all 3 teams get what they are looking for and have to make do with other aspects of the deal.

Regardless of the rest, I just don't think Columbus gets what they want in this scenario. Even if the Sabres and Canucks would do it, I think Howson balks--he may take this deal for only Nash, but not for Nash and #2. The reports are he wants two top young roster players, two top prospects, and a 1st round pick for Nash. Sekera certainly fits the criteria, as does one of the picks. Miller isn't young, but because of the name recognition and their need in net maybe he qualifies as the other rostered player. BUT, a few mid-first picks are not equivalent to two top prospects who are closer to the NHL and maybe have a higher ceiling than what you could draft with those picks.

Apparently last year he rejected an offer from the Rangers consisting of Dubinsky (decent roster player), Miller (top-6 prospect), McIlrath (top-4 D prospect), 1st round pick...and I think there was another component. But all-told, that's a decent offer. What did he actually want? One of McDonagh/Del Zotto/Stepan, Kreider, McIlrath or Erixon, 1st round pick. And that's just for Nash, let alone the #2 as well.

Simply put, Howson's demands for Nash are outrageous (components he wants should land Crosby/Malkin/Giroux, not a slightly better Vanek). But ya know what? With competition for his services, and if Parise stays in Jersey or goes somewhere like Minnesota, I think he gets some team to bite.

Bullwinkle III · June 19, 2012

Keeping our picks, if we get Faksa and Wilson I will be happy. Although I'd love to go after Galchenyuk.

LGR4GM · June 19, 2012

Just out of curiousity, have you at any point talked about the possibility of bringing Hasek back?

I did post in regards to that I no I am firmly opposed to bringing Hasek back in any regards unless it was as a coach of some kind. He is 47 and maybe its because I was a lot younger in 1999 then most of the people around here but Hasek 12yrs ago is not the same guy who wants back in today. The guy was great, the key word being WAS. He is not anymore. Gretzky was great but I don't want him playing hockey for the Sabres next season. Hasek/Enroth duo is one of the worst ideas I have ever read on this board. Its sad that so many want to change it up but are ok or even open to the idea of bringing back I player who hasn't been good in a decade.

As for the Luongo/Kesler deal I understand exactly what its purpose is. The problem is Luongo's contract and his crap play. I somehow think that burrying him in Rochester for 5years is a lot different than burrying Kotalik for one even to Pegula. Luongo is a head case and will hurt more than anything and its rare these days for a team with crappy goaltending to win. Kesler is better than Roy and getting the 2nd overall pick would be great too but this isnt the draft to do that. Next year I would be much more inclined to like this trade because of who will go first overall. Timing is everything and this isnt the time.

spndnchz · June 19, 2012

Oh Sweet Chz'r...........while 75% of the world would post the same thing, thinking there is no way those players could be acquired for so little.........you stand true.

I admire that......you need to bleed for something in this world.

I wanted Ryan and Hiller for Miller last year. Ryan had to get all "Lucic'd"

LGR4GM · June 20, 2012

so looking at TSN's mock draft I had to laugh a little... Hampus Lindholm goes to the Sabres and they pass on Grigorenko... Now I am not a fan of Grigs but your joking right? The Sabres who have major scoring and center issues pass on a great chance to pick up both things so they can get a defenders who will "move all the way up to 12th" As jar jar binks would say "meesah thinking no"

also I think Tanner Pearson would be a great pickup. He seems highly motivated and has been passed over in the previous 2 drafts so I think at 19 we should definitely risk it on a kid who just dropped a 91pt season and 6' 198lbs...

Lanny · June 20, 2012

If he doesn't crack the lineup next year does he leave and go to the KHL? If he goes to the KHL does he ever come back? And when? I could see it not being worth the risk.

dudacek · June 20, 2012

I think Grigorenko would be very difficult to pass up at 12.

But after listening to Devine and Regier, I would find it hard to see them taking himat 21.

Bullwinkle III · June 20, 2012

I think Grigorenko would be very difficult to pass up at 12.

But after listening to Devine and Regier, I would find it hard to see them taking himat 21.

If they pass Grigorenko up at 21 or even 12, they both should be fired.

Sign In

Who should the Sabres Draft in the first and second round?

Recommended Posts

LastPommerFan

shrader

LastPommerFan

dEnnis the Menace

inkman

LGR4GM

nobody

TrueBlueGED

nobody

shrader

dEnnis the Menace

26CornerBlitz

nobody

dEnnis the Menace

Weave

Ghost of Dwight Drane

dEnnis the Menace

TrueBlueGED

Bullwinkle III

LGR4GM

spndnchz

LGR4GM

Lanny

dudacek

Bullwinkle III

Archived

Browse

Activity