Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

After tomorrow I doubt our best roster player has that potential. Like I said, I have no problem with trying to get him, but I question why Ottawa would be willing to put him on waivers and lose him for nothing when he could be packaged in a deal or traded if he doesn't have issues/bagage

 

But why not just include him in the trade?

 

Multiple trades happening? I was more musing than suggesting it as a viable option. However, it would be an interesting way to give a player to a team if number of contracts were an issue

Posted

Multiple trades happening? I was more musing than suggesting it as a viable option. However, it would be an interesting way to give a player to a team if number of contracts were an issue

I understand, I just don't see the logic in doing it when they could just include him in the deal.

If a deal is being made with the Sens for Stewart, and the expected return is a prospect, the Sabres are clearing a roster spot already by giving up Stewart and the prospect will be going to the minors somewhere so theres already a spot on the active roster. If they need to clear up a spot for some reason, I could see it being a 3 way deal, or the Sabres waiving someone instead.

Posted

I understand, I just don't see the logic in doing it when they could just include him in the deal.

If a deal is being made with the Sens for Stewart, and the expected return is a prospect, the Sabres are clearing a roster spot already by giving up Stewart and the prospect will be going to the minors somewhere so theres already a spot on the active roster. If they need to clear up a spot for some reason, I could see it being a 3 way deal, or the Sabres waiving someone instead.

 

There is the 23-man limit for roster space and also the 49 (or 50?) limit for number of contracts a team can have (which will make our abundance of picks in the last few years a small problem in the future).

 

If they have room to accept another contract but we do no - i.e. they have 23 players on the roster and 47 players under contract but we have 22 players on the roster and 49 under contract - and the deal was Stewart for Conacher and Lazar. They wave Conny (making room on the roster), trade Stewart for Lazar (contract number remains the same, the Sens are back to 23 roster players), we then make room by trading D'Agostini for a 5th and then claim Conacher from waivers.

Posted

There are multiple Hockey Media Pros suggesting that the sabres would need to retain salary to trade Halak.

 

The Sabres already have the max of 3 salaries retained.

 

How do professional media personalities screw that up?

Posted

There are multiple Hockey Media Pros suggesting that the sabres would need to retain salary to trade Halak.

 

The Sabres already have the max of 3 salaries retained.

 

How do professional media personalities screw that up?

 

They should know that already. :doh:

Posted

There are multiple Hockey Media Pros suggesting that the sabres would need to retain salary to trade Halak.

 

The Sabres already have the max of 3 salaries retained.

 

How do professional media personalities screw that up?

Capgeek has started correcting the dumbasses. Its sad when fan knows more than guy paid to cover hockey.

Posted

There are multiple Hockey Media Pros suggesting that the sabres would need to retain salary to trade Halak.

 

The Sabres already have the max of 3 salaries retained.

 

How do professional media personalities screw that up?

It may be a lingo issue, where the media guys are talking about taking on a salary dump type player (i.e. Heatley) from the Wild. Not an actual "retain salary" but similar effect.

 

that's the only defense I got to their buffoonery

Posted

It may be a lingo issue, where the media guys are talking about taking on a salary dump type player (i.e. Heatley) from the Wild. Not an actual "retain salary" but similar effect.

 

that's the only defense I got to their buffoonery

 

I don't think it's a language issue, but I'm positive that's what they'll all use to explain away their ignorance.

Posted

There are multiple Hockey Media Pros suggesting that the sabres would need to retain salary to trade Halak.

 

The Sabres already have the max of 3 salaries retained.

 

How do professional media personalities screw that up?

well they aren't saying its possible, just that its what the wild would want if they are going to get Halak which will probably mean the Sabres will have to sweeten the deal to get them to remove this clause or take on a salary form the wild to unload Halak
Posted

Just a year ago Conacher had 24 points in 35 games. Our worst roster player (whoever you think it is) doesn't have that kind of scoring potential.

Wasn't he playing with Stamkos or at worst Lecavalier at that point? I think I could have put up 15 points playing with those guys.

Posted

Wasn't he playing with Stamkos or at worst Lecavalier at that point? I think I could have put up 15 points playing with those guys.

 

Just angle those calves towards the net and let the puck deflect in.

Posted

You need to go back to worrying whether the Sabres are going to pick up Conacher.

Never said I minded it, I actually encourage it as I don't think he helps them win at all

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...