Jump to content

Trade for the 1st pick? Yakupov?


BuffaloBlood

Recommended Posts

Posted

Guilty.

 

 

:ph34r:

 

Which is fine if the positive or negative outcomes only effect you or a few other people on a micro scale. :angel:

 

But on the scale of a massive billion dollar business, which players making tons of money, and the loyalty of hundreds of thousands of fans as stake, doing something just to do it doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

Sounds like my night last night.

 

:blush:

Posted

Which is fine if the positive or negative outcomes only effect you or a few other people on a micro scale. :angel:

 

But on the scale of a massive billion dollar business, which players making tons of money, and the loyalty of hundreds of thousands of fans as stake, doing something just to do it doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

 

Let's just trade our whole club for the LA Kings. Straight up.

Posted

Wow, I check in this morning and see this thread is on the first page and look back now seeing it's on it's third?! My immidate thought was holy s*it did Darcy pull of a deal?! Nope, just bickering :wallbash:

 

I hate the offseason :wallbash:

Posted

When I saw it, my first thought was,"Hmmmm. Let me think about that...." I'm still not sure where I stand.

 

 

I guess I'm an idiot, too.

 

Well yeah. ;)

Posted

 

some people are too stupid to have a good time.

 

You think this is fun? Wait until the next game-day thread in the latter half of a failed season. Then you'll know what "fun" is.

Posted

So when harrington said to get Perry or Ryan it was Myers that had to go you said "yes" I assume. Semi-proven player for proven player. But you will trade Miller AND Myers for a prospective player? Bold move yes, the right one, no, overpaying one, yes.

Both of those are pure oppinion. I'm not sure that Miller and Myers can win us a cup. I would think that if they are as proven as I've been told that they would at least be able to get us into the playoffs. Early first round talent is special.

Well yeah. ;)

...[sigh and shoulder shrug]..

 

I know.

Posted

Both of those are pure oppinion. I'm not sure that Miller and Myers can win us a cup. I would think that if they are as proven as I've been told that they would at least be able to get us into the playoffs. Early first round talent is special.

 

...[sigh and shoulder shrug]..

 

I know.

IMO, fans look at Miller and Myers the same way. They don't see Miller for the goalie he is, they see the Miller of that one Olympic year. In Myers case they see the Rookie of the Year Myers, not the Myers of the past two seasons. I guess anyone who doesn't disagree is an "idiot." That's fine with me, it just gives me more opportunities for some "I told you so" posts in the future.

Posted

You want the team blown up and remade.

Most teams consider a franchise Dman a prerequisite for a rebuild.

How many guys 23 and under could be the player?

How many are better than Myers?

If he's gone, who is going to fill that role.?

Posted

You want the team blown up and remade.

Most teams consider a franchise Dman a prerequisite for a rebuild.

How many guys 23 and under could be the player?

How many are better than Myers?

If he's gone, who is going to fill that role.?

Myers isn't a franchise defenseman. The hope is that he regains the momentum of his rookie season and becomes a "franchise" player. Right now he is a player whose value is tied up in his "potential."

 

If the Sabres have anything, it's young blue liners with "potential." A player like McNabb is as likely to become that "franchise" blue liner as Myers is.

Posted

I agree with the first part, but you didn't really answer my questions.

I'm assuming your rebuild will be with younger players since you see little of value on the current roster.

Posted

IMO, fans look at Miller and Myers the same way. They don't see Miller for the goalie he is, they see the Miller of that one Olympic year. In Myers case they see the Rookie of the Year Myers, not the Myers of the past two seasons. I guess anyone who doesn't disagree is an "idiot." That's fine with me, it just gives me more opportunities for some "I told you so" posts in the future.

 

While I stick by my point that I'm sick of the same arguement being had time and time again on this board I'll say this:

 

Both have a huge amount to prove, but they have proven more than a 1st round pick. Also the culture with the Buffalo Sabres has been to rely on the goalie and defense or the last 20 years or so, to rebuild around a forward would require a change in culture from the top. We would need to replace absolutely everyone in my opinion and I think we would become the next 'joke of the league' if we did that.

 

Anyway, we know this isn't going to happen so why the hell is this discussion even happening?

Posted

Both have a huge amount to prove, but they have proven more than a 1st round pick.

 

Minor quibble. It isn't just any old 1st round pick. It is the 1st overall pick. The pick that overwhelmingly provides more bonafide superstars than any other pick in the draft.

 

Nonetheless, it is still a gamble to trade proven commodities for an 18 yr old that hasn't played against men yet. Definitely a buyer beware situation. If Darcy does this, it better pay off in spades.

 

And given what we heard at the end of the season it is probably a pointless (if not entertaining) discussion seeing as the end of season talk was about size and grit.

Posted

And given what we heard at the end of the season it is probably a pointless (if not entertaining) discussion seeing as the end of season talk was about size and grit.

 

This point always bugs me a bit. You can add size and grit without bringing in nothing but that type of player. I think that's lost in the shuffle quite a bit around here.

Posted

This point always bugs me a bit. You can add size and grit without bringing in nothing but that type of player. I think that's lost in the shuffle quite a bit around here.

 

I read your post 3 times and can't quite get the point you are making. Re-word please?

Posted

I read your post 3 times and can't quite get the point you are making. Re-word please?

 

I think he means you can increase the overall size and grit of your team without every addition having to fit those conditions. For a ridiculous example we can add Shea Weber, Lucic, and Patrick Kane and we still increased the size and grit of the Sabres even though Patrick Kane is slight in stature.

Posted

It's the Hodgson for Kassian argument.

Pretty well everyone on this board thinks we need more players that fit the concept of Kassian.

But many like the Hodgson deal because they think Hodgson is a better player.

And the team actually did get grittier because it called up Foligno to take Kassians roster spot.

Adding Yakupov doesn't stop you from adding grit through other means.

Posted

I think he means you can increase the overall size and grit of your team without every addition having to fit those conditions. For a ridiculous example we can add Shea Weber, Lucic, and Patrick Kane and we still increased the size and grit of the Sabres even though Patrick Kane is slight in stature.

 

Right, you can increase the overall level of grit on this team even if you add another skill guy. So often around here, it seems like people are saying every single player added to this team needs to be the physical type.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...