LastPommerFan Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 The field of teams willing to trade for Vanek is also thinned out if they wait until the deadline. Right, the value goes down, I'm just saying it doesn't go down significantly, and the Sabres may attempt to resign him.
Weave Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 No way they are trading Miller(you didn't list blueline and goalie so I am not sure about Miller) AND Vanek without getting a top 6 player or two back, even if they are guys on the tail end of their career. I'm not saying Vanek level of player, but at least someone who can pass for a top 6 player more so than Ott, Grigs, and Armia. Grigs showed he is nowhere near ready for top 6 duty, and I can't believe one offseason is going to change that. Same goes for Armia coming across the pond. Team mgt has made it clear they are reloading with picks/prospects. I would be surprised if the team dilutes the level of prospect/pick they get for Vanek by requesting a top 6 level current player. Maybe, maybe not. Granlund was playing in the same league and putting up better numbers, and he's struggled for Minnesota this season. I'd start Armia in Rochester and pencil him in for at least a half-season down there. We may not have that luxury. I am assuming that Vanek is gone this Summer. If so, we won't have enough wingers.
Robviously Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 We may not have that luxury. I am assuming that Vanek is gone this Summer. If so, we won't have enough wingers. If Vanek and Miller are gone, it's possible we'll get someone NHL ready in return. And if not, who cares? Let Flynn play. We're not trying to win next year anyway. The decision should be about Armia's development, not the Sabres needing a guy. That's the dumb mistake they made with Grigorenko this year.
TrueBlueGED Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Not by Hockey's Future, what are you looking at? HF has Larsson with a higher probability of hitting his potential and Hackett with a higher ceiling than either of the Iginla trade prospects. Also, HF has different writers for different teams so the raw rankings themselves may not be comparable and you have to look elsewhere. Reading through the boards on the prospects as well as detailed writeups on Hockey Prospectus, I think it's pretty clear the Sabres haul was significantly better for a lesser player than what Calgary got for the superior player.
Weave Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 If Vanek and Miller are gone, it's possible we'll get someone NHL ready in return. And if not, who cares? Let Flynn play. We're not trying to win next year anyway. The decision should be about Armia's development, not the Sabres needing a guy. That's the dumb mistake they made with Grigorenko this year. I think the only thing dumb about what we did with Grigo was playing him 10 minutes per game. Given that we are not planning on playoffs next year and there is no depth, I don't think playing time will be an issue. And as mentioned before, Armia plays against men and against a higher level of competition than the AHL. I bet he develops just fine at the NHL level.
LabattBlue Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Team mgt has made it clear they are reloading with picks/prospects. I would be surprised if the team dilutes the level of prospect/pick they get for Vanek by requesting a top 6 level current player. If so, then bring in an aging F/A vet or two to fill the top 6. That arena will become a ghost town pretty quick with a bad team. I remember many games prior to the 04-05 lockout where the arena was half full(despite what reported attendance was), and those teams were not rock bottom....just mediocre.
Weave Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 If so, then bring in an aging F/A vet or two to fill the top 6. That arena will become a ghost town pretty quick with a bad team. I remember many games prior to the 04-05 lockout where the arena was half full(despite what reported attendance was), and those teams were not rock bottom....just mediocre. Have you perused the FA list for 2013? The cupboards are pretty bare.
LastPommerFan Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 HF has Larsson with a higher probability of hitting his potential and Hackett with a higher ceiling than either of the Iginla trade prospects. Also, HF has different writers for different teams so the raw rankings themselves may not be comparable and you have to look elsewhere. Reading through the boards on the prospects as well as detailed writeups on Hockey Prospectus, I think it's pretty clear the Sabres haul was significantly better for a lesser player than what Calgary got for the superior player. I think small differences in the prospects are more affected by ignila's NTC than the year left for pommer. Also, A summer deal still only affects 1 season, as opposed to pommer, which is for 2.
LabattBlue Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Have you perused the FA list for 2013? The cupboards are pretty bare. Then like I said, get some stop gap forwards in here for a year as part of a Miller or Vanek package. I won't speak for all STH, but I for one am not going to pay to see the Sabres get throttled while watching prospects get overmatched because they are not ready for top 6 roles.
Trettioåtta Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 I think small differences in the prospects are more affected by ignila's NTC than the year left for pommer. Also, A summer deal still only affects 1 season, as opposed to pommer, which is for 2. Compare what Staal got to Iginla
SabresBillsFan Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 I would love to see the Sabres pull off MacKinnion and Drioun that would be awesome just like Burke did with both Sedins. Rebuild would move alot faster if they could land both.
TrueBlueGED Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Then like I said, get some stop gap forwards in here for a year as part of a Miller or Vanek package. I won't speak for all STH, but I for one am not going to pay to see the Sabres get throttled while watching prospects get overmatched because they are not ready for top 6 roles. Honestly I don't think a couple of stop-gap forwards improves that portrait much. We're likely to spend the better portion of the next two seasons getting beaten pretty handily.
Taro T Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 I would love to see the Sabres pull off MacKinnion and Drioun that would be awesome just like Burke did with both Sedins. Rebuild would move alot faster if they could land both. A lot of people talking about trading up to land them both. One slight difference in the 2 situations is that the Sedins were (credibly) threatening to stay out of NA if they couldn't play on the same team; I haven't seen MacKinnion and Drouin make a similar threat. I very highly doubt that even if the Sabres do manage to net themselves the 2nd or 3rd pick on merit that they'll be able to convert other assets into the other necessary pick. (Of course, they do still have that valuable Stafford chit, perhaps that and a 2015 2nd along with the Wild's 1st could get it done. :rolleyes: :lol: (PS - the side comment was not, and should not be construed as, being directed at you in any way shape or form.))
LabattBlue Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Honestly I don't think a couple of stop-gap forwards improves that portrait much. We're likely to spend the better portion of the next two seasons getting beaten pretty handily. Did you watch Grigs this year? His play wasn't AHL worthy let along NHL top 6. Believe me, it can get a LOT worse....especially if we put together another team that can't get any scoring from the 3rd and 4th lines.
LGR4GM Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 A lot of people talking about trading up to land them both. One slight difference in the 2 situations is that the Sedins were (credibly) threatening to stay out of NA if they couldn't play on the same team; I haven't seen MacKinnion and Drouin make a similar threat. I very highly doubt that even if the Sabres do manage to net themselves the 2nd or 3rd pick on merit that they'll be able to convert other assets into the other necessary pick. (Of course, they do still have that valuable Stafford chit, perhaps that and a 2015 2nd along with the Wild's 1st could get it done. :rolleyes: :lol: (PS - the side comment was not, and should not be construed as, being directed at you in any way shape or form.)) So who was it directed at?
LabattBlue Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 People need to stop worrying about MacKinnon AND Drouin, and worry about the Sabres getting NEITHER of them... While I am still hoping the Sabres lose every last game this season, I still think our grand plans for a superstar are going to get ruined when the Sabres finish 7th or 8th from the bottom by going .500 or so the rest of the way. If that happens, I can easily see Carolina, Dallas, and even Phoenix falling past us.
SabresBillsFan Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Okay here goes in all fairness. Bring in Housley (since there will be alot of youth) to coach next year and somehow get Lafontaine into the front office. Trade Miller at the draft for prospects and picks and somehow get Vanek to buy into this just like Spezza did in Ottawa. Draft either MacKinnon or Drioun and or both if they can swing it. And if u only get one then so be it then don't unload picks especially if this is a deep draft. Load up on skilled Offensive players with size, skill and skating ability. I would love for this team to be a tough skilled team to play against. I want players here that are going to play hard for 60 min. To many guys here that aren't skilled and don't skate hard. With Detriot in the division next year this team has to do this rebuild right.
Trettioåtta Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 People need to stop worrying about MacKinnon AND Drouin, and worry about the Sabres getting NEITHER of them... While I am still hoping the Sabres lose every last game this season, I still think our grand plans for a superstar are going to get ruined when the Sabres finish 7th or 8th from the bottom by going .500 or so the rest of the way. If that happens, I can easily see Carolina, Dallas, and even Phoenix falling past us. We weren't a .5 team with our best forward...why would we be a .5 team without him?
Taro T Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 So who was it directed at? Though it should be obvious, that comment was directed at the sort of poster that would actually propose that trade in a non-lighthearted manner. Why do you ask?
LabattBlue Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 We weren't a .5 team with our best forward...why would we be a .5 team without him? Just a gut feeling that they will f*** this up by going on a winning streak.
TrueBlueGED Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 We weren't a .5 team with our best forward...why would we be a .5 team without him? In before "because it's Buffalo and that's how we roll" :rolleyes:
LGR4GM Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 Though it should be obvious, that comment was directed at the sort of poster that would actually propose that trade in a non-lighthearted manner. Why do you ask? just curious if you had someone specifically in mind.
Weave Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 just curious if you had someone specifically in mind. It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.
Taro T Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 We weren't a .5 team with our best forward...why would we be a .5 team without him? As for the 1st part, because if the NBCSN pregame graphic Tuesday was correct they are now 8-7-3 under Rolston; which after his 1st 2 games would be 8-5-3 (aka, a legit 0.500). As for the 2nd part, because these are the Sabres and that seems to be what they do. (Not saying that's what I expect, but I wouldn't put it past them at any rate.) just curious if you had someone specifically in mind. :rolleyes:
LGR4GM Posted April 4, 2013 Report Posted April 4, 2013 As for the 1st part, because if the NBCSN pregame graphic Tuesday was correct they are now 8-7-3 under Rolston; which after his 1st 2 games would be 8-5-3 (aka, a legit 0.500). As for the 2nd part, because these are the Sabres and that seems to be what they do. (Not saying that's what I expect, but I wouldn't put it past them at any rate.) :rolleyes: just fyi my suggestion was not Stafford and MN to X for the 3rd pick.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.