Place Your Bets! (Vanek, Miller trade edition)

[chileanseabass]

I'd take Read and #11 for Miller.

[deluca67]

Voracek and/or Read?

I'd take Read and #11 for Miller.

Read is 27and a UFA after this upcoming season.

[TrueBlueGED]

Read is 27and a UFA after this upcoming season.

 

Yea, I have limited interest in Read, although that's exactly the type of roster player I'd expect to be involved in a Miller deal. Doubt we could squeeze Philly for Voracek, although I'd love it if we could.

[Hoss]

ZERO chance we get Voracek unless we give them Vanek AND Miller for him alone. He just picked up nearly a point per game as a 23 year old. He's not going anywhere. Couturier and Schenn are more likely and the GM just said they're both untouchable.

 

I think Read and 11 would be a deal that Philly would say take it or leave it. I'm also a little bit iffy on getting Ready, but we could always sell him to the highest bidder at the deadline if he won't sign an extension.

[TrueBlueGED]

ZERO chance we get Voracek unless we give them Vanek AND Miller for him alone. He just picked up nearly a point per game as a 23 year old. He's not going anywhere. Couturier and Schenn are more likely and the GM just said they're both untouchable.

 

I think Read and 11 would be a deal that Philly would say take it or leave it. I'm also a little bit iffy on getting Ready, but we could always sell him to the highest bidder at the deadline if he won't sign an extension.

 

Seriously, look at Holmgren's history of public statements, followed by moves he makes. Him saying a player is untouchable has a better chance of meaning they're available than that they're actually untouchable.

[Hoss]

Seriously, look at Holmgren's history of public statements, followed by moves he makes. Him saying a player is untouchable has a better chance of meaning they're available than that they're actually untouchable.

 

Yea, that was sort of my point haha. I think Voracek is a true untouchable unless he's offered something unreasonably high.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think Read and 11 would be a very solid deal for us.

[JJFIVEOH]

Damn, if Miller AND Vanek are what it takes to get a player who had 4 average years followed by a breakout year in his 5th, imagine what we could have gotten for Stafford who had 4 average years followed by........................... oh wait. :P

[LGR4GM]

Voracek and/or Read?

I'd take Read and #11 for Miller.

I like Read and Voracek. I think I would target Voracek for age reasons and he is good. His size is nice but I am not that familiar with him. He could be a centerpiece of a trade involving Miller but we will have to wait and see how this goes.

[deluca67]

Yea, that was sort of my point haha. I think Voracek is a true untouchable unless he's offered something unreasonably high.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think Read and 11 would be a very solid deal for us.

Staying on this thought. Would you make this deal if the Flyers insisted on the Sabres taking Meszaros? Read only makes 900K and they would need to open more cap space to add Miller.

[Hoss]

Damn, if Miller AND Vanek are what it takes to get a player who had 4 average years followed by a breakout year in his 5th, imagine what we could have gotten for Stafford who had 4 average years followed by........................... oh wait. :P

 

Big difference between a 50 point year in a FULL season and a 50 point season in half a year... But good try.

 

Staying on this thought. Would you make this deal if the Flyers insisted on the Sabres taking Meszaros? Read only makes 900K and they would need to open more cap space to add Miller.

 

I think Read and 11 is fair for Miller, so for us to take Meszaros for buyout we'd have to get something else in return (maybe a future 2nd or a 3rd this year).

[LGR4GM]

ZERO chance we get Voracek unless we give them Vanek AND Miller for him alone. He just picked up nearly a point per game as a 23 year old. He's not going anywhere. Couturier and Schenn are more likely and the GM just said they're both untouchable.

 

I think Read and 11 would be a deal that Philly would say take it or leave it. I'm also a little bit iffy on getting Ready, but we could always sell him to the highest bidder at the deadline if he won't sign an extension.

So I guy who has 1 season of almost PPG pace is worth a 2 time 40 goal scorer 4 time 30 goal scorer and a goaltender who is widely touted around the league is one of the best. For that we get an unproven 23yr old with 1 season over 20 goals?

 

Think about this and get back to us.

 

Big difference between a 50 point year in a FULL season and a 50 point season in half a year... But good try.

Yea it is called consistency and getting 46pts in 48 games once is not consistency.

[Hoss]

So I guy who has 1 season of almost PPG pace is worth a 2 time 40 goal scorer 4 time 30 goal scorer and a goaltender who is widely touted around the league is one of the best. For that we get an unproven 23yr old with 1 season over 20 goals?

 

Think about this and get back to us.

 

Yeap. He just posted one of the highest point totals. And both of the players we're offering are on one year deals... The Vanek AND Miller thing was more of an exaggeration. You're not getting Voracek for either player, but you might be able to get Voracek and a 2nd + a mid-level prospect if you package both.

 

Damn, if Miller AND Vanek are what it takes to get a player who had 4 average years followed by a breakout year in his 5th, imagine what we could have gotten for Stafford who had 4 average years followed by........................... oh wait. :P

 

Also... 4 "average" years by Voracek? His point totals in those four years: 38, 50, 46, 49. Stafford's point total in his "breakout" year? 52. Hardly much better than Voracek's last three "average" years.

[LGR4GM]

Yeap. He just posted one of the highest point totals. And both of the players we're offering are on one year deals... The Vanek AND Miller thing was more of an exaggeration. You're not getting Voracek for either player, but you might be able to get Voracek and a 2nd + a mid-level prospect if you package both.

 

 

 

Also... 4 "average" years by Voracek? His point totals in those four years: 38, 50, 46, 49. Stafford's point total in his "breakout" year? 52. Hardly much better than Voracek's last three "average" years.

1st Thomas Vanek is = to Varacek, #11, 2nd round pick all day every day.

 

2nd Would you trade Stafford for Vanek? No so why would we trade Vanek for a similar player?

 

 

I like Voracek but he is young and unproven. He is not Vanek. Vanek is a guy who managed to put up good points with Roy and Connolly as his centers.

[Hoss]

1st Thomas Vanek is = to Varacek, #11, 2nd round pick all day every day.

 

2nd Would you trade Stafford for Vanek? No so why would we trade Vanek for a similar player?

 

 

I like Voracek but he is young and unproven. He is not Vanek. Vanek is a guy who managed to put up good points with Roy and Connolly as his centers.

 

Sure, if Vanek isn't on a one year deal.

[LGR4GM]

Sure, if Vanek isn't on a one year deal.

it doesn't matter. That is the point. Vanek gives you an entire year of his services and you have all that time to resign him. If things go south and you can't sign him and will miss the playoffs you trade him at the deadline.

 

I have cited 2 trades that occurred this past year. Iginla and Jagr both of which involved prospects and picks so you could have those guys for 2 months.

 

Vanek's value does not drop to Vanek + Miller for Voracek. The fact I am even having this conversation is insane. Hell Vanek straight up for Voracek at the deadline in 2014 without a contract is still a crappy deal.

 

Glad Darcy doesn't think like this.

[deluca67]

1st Thomas Vanek is = to Varacek, #11, 2nd round pick all day every day.

 

2nd Would you trade Stafford for Vanek? No so why would we trade Vanek for a similar player?

 

 

I like Voracek but he is young and unproven. He is not Vanek. Vanek is a guy who managed to put up good points with Roy and Connolly as his centers.

Voracek is 4 years younger than Stafford. You trade for a Voracek in hopes he develops beyond where Stafford ended up.

[LGR4GM]

Voracek is 4 years younger than Stafford. You trade for a Voracek in hopes he develops beyond where Stafford ended up.

I know, the issue here is saying that Vanek is not worth Voracek. That is so ludicrous and outlandish it isn't funny.

[That Aud Smell]

So, this pretty much guarantees they both get traded.

Right. I know GMs as a general rule just blow a bunch of smoke in public, but Holmgren seems to have especially little credibility.

[Hoss]

I know, the issue here is saying that Vanek is not worth Voracek. That is so ludicrous and outlandish it isn't funny.

 

For a team like Philly, Voracek is more valuable. They are tight against the cap. Voracek is 23 and just posted great numbers (top 20 in points this season). He's under control for three more years at just $4.25 mill which is just under $3 mill less than what Vanek will command. Vanek is only under control for one more season so there's clear risk there.

 

It's not JUST about the player's talent. There's a lot more that goes into it.

[LGR4GM]

For a team like Philly, Voracek is more valuable. They are tight against the cap. Voracek is 23 and just posted great numbers (top 20 in points this season). He's under control for three more years at just $4.25 mill which is just under $3 mill less than what Vanek will command. Vanek is only under control for one more season so there's clear risk there.

 

It's not JUST about the player's talent. There's a lot more that goes into it.

Let us try this one more time.

 

You said and I quote "ZERO chance we get Voracek unless we give them Vanek AND Miller for him alone. He just picked up nearly a point per game as a 23 year old."

 

In this statement you clearly mention 2 veteran players of the Buffalo Sabres who you state would get you Voracek and just Voracek. In the following sentence you specifically mention his talent. There for you are in fact saying that Voracek's talent is enough for him to be worth Vanek and Miller.

 

You then say "Yeap. He just posted one of the highest point totals. And both of the players we're offering are on one year deals... The Vanek AND Miller thing was more of an exaggeration." Again reaffirming that Voracek's point total gives him more value. You then follow this sentence with the first mention of contracts. In essence you are saying that Vanek (we will ignore Miller) is less than equivalent to Voracek because of his Point Total from 1 season and his shorter contract.

 

You then say "For a team like Philly, Voracek is more valuable. They are tight against the cap. Voracek is 23 and just posted great numbers (top 20 in points this season). He's under control for three more years at just $4.25 mill" So now you are discussing Philly which is buying out Bryz and Briere for cap relief is against the cap. You again mention Voracek's points being better and then you bring into play his contract.

 

What is the point to everything I am saying? You originally Said Voracek was worth Vanek and Miller alone because of Voracek's recent point total to which I said bullsh#t. You then added continuing and different facets to the argument to get it to this point. My response if you look at everything you are now discussing, Vanek is still worth more than Voracek to a team like Philly because he is more reliable, a proven top 3 winger, under contract for all of next year (an entire year of exclusive negotiation rights) and they will in fact have the necessary cap space because they are going to save roughly 12mil I believe with their buyouts. You are assuming Philly is also rebuilding and I doubt highly they look at it that way. They are looking to make moves and be in the hunt this upcoming season.

[Eleven]

I'm confused.

[MattPie]

Let us try this one more time.

 

In this statement you clearly mention 2 veteran players of the Buffalo Sabres who you state would get you Voracek and just Voracek. In the following sentence you specifically mention his talent. There for you are in fact saying that Voracek's talent is enough for him to be worth Vanek and Miller.

 

An example always helps:

Getzlaf and Quick for Cody Hodgson. I'm ignoring contract status, and there are probably better examples, so I may be a bit off. But two "name" players for a prospect. Seems a little one-sided, no?

[LGR4GM]

An example always helps:

Getzlaf and Quick for Cody Hodgson. I'm ignoring contract status, and there are probably better examples, so I may be a bit off. But two "name" players for a prospect. Seems a little one-sided, no?

Basically yea, sub Jeff Carter and Quick for Hodgson or even for Voracek. If Quick and Carter had 1 year left on their deals and we could get them for Cody Hodgson... that is a severely lopsided trade regardless of both players coming back only having 1 yr on their deals.

[Hoss]

That comparison is a joke, right? Quick won a Vezina two seasons ago, had a great playoffs and is five years younger.

And we're not trying to say Hodgson is equal to Voracek, are we?

 

 

Let us try this one more time.

 

You said and I quote "ZERO chance we get Voracek unless we give them Vanek AND Miller for him alone. He just picked up nearly a point per game as a 23 year old."

 

In this statement you clearly mention 2 veteran players of the Buffalo Sabres who you state would get you Voracek and just Voracek. In the following sentence you specifically mention his talent. There for you are in fact saying that Voracek's talent is enough for him to be worth Vanek and Miller.

 

You then say "Yeap. He just posted one of the highest point totals. And both of the players we're offering are on one year deals... The Vanek AND Miller thing was more of an exaggeration." Again reaffirming that Voracek's point total gives him more value. You then follow this sentence with the first mention of contracts. In essence you are saying that Vanek (we will ignore Miller) is less than equivalent to Voracek because of his Point Total from 1 season and his shorter contract.

 

You then say "For a team like Philly, Voracek is more valuable. They are tight against the cap. Voracek is 23 and just posted great numbers (top 20 in points this season). He's under control for three more years at just $4.25 mill" So now you are discussing Philly which is buying out Bryz and Briere for cap relief is against the cap. You again mention Voracek's points being better and then you bring into play his contract.

 

What is the point to everything I am saying? You originally Said Voracek was worth Vanek and Miller alone because of Voracek's recent point total to which I said bullsh#t. You then added continuing and different facets to the argument to get it to this point. My response if you look at everything you are now discussing, Vanek is still worth more than Voracek to a team like Philly because he is more reliable, a proven top 3 winger, under contract for all of next year (an entire year of exclusive negotiation rights) and they will in fact have the necessary cap space because they are going to save roughly 12mil I believe with their buyouts. You are assuming Philly is also rebuilding and I doubt highly they look at it that way. They are looking to make moves and be in the hunt this upcoming season.

 

Okay, so that was ridiculously long and confusing.

Of course I'm going to bring other "facets" into the ###### debate. That's what people do. You discuss the many reasons why you made a statement when prompted to. Is this new to you, or something?

 

I already said that the Vanek + Miller for Voracek alone was an intentional exaggeration. What I was getting at with that is that neither Vanek nor Miller would get us Voracek.

 

 

 

I apologize for not thinking that our players are worth insane packages. They're both valuable, but they're not going to bring in elite youth (not calling Voracek elite, calling him elite for his age group so settle down). We'll be able to bring in an elite, unproven prospect who has either little or no NHL time and picks. Or guys who have proven themselves to be solid and consistent 2nd/3rd liners and picks/prospects.

[LGR4GM]

That comparison is a joke, right? Quick won a Vezina two seasons ago, had a great playoffs and is five years younger.

And we're not trying to say Hodgson is equal to Voracek, are we?

No he didn't, he won the Conn Smythe.

 

Miller won a Vezina in 2010. He is of less value than Quick but again it is the concept.

 

Also I would rather have Cody Hodgson than Jakub Voracek. Hard to say who will end up a better player.

 

I could easily argue Vanek is better than Carter and that evens out Quick being better than Miller. I could say right now Voracek could be argued as being better than Hodgson. SO no that comparison is actually fairly accurate.