Jump to content

Vanek Traded to NYI for Matt Moulson, 1st in 2014 (or 2015!), 2nd in 2015; 4 Months Later: Moulson to MN for 2014/2016 2nd Rounders


Recommended Posts

Posted

At almost the new year, both Moulson and Vanek are 13-13-26. They're also both #26. Coincidence? I think not.

 

This from the worst poster on the board. Not bad, eh?

Posted

OK, let assume we continue down our path of destruction and end up winning the lottery for the #1 pick.

 

If the Islanders end up with the 2nd pick in this years draft, do they keep the pick and risk the 2015 draft?

 

If they option it to Buffalo and we pick 1-2 do we pick both Reinhart and Ekbland?

Do we pick Reinhart and then maybe gamble with Michael Dal Colle?

Do we pick Reinhart and then try to trade the #2 pick?

 

Any way you look at it, I want Reinhart, the guy got a great combination of offense and defense. He's a play maker with a little grit and leadership?

 

If we only we lose the lottery and pick #2, let's hope the Islanders pick #3 and we could grab Ekbland and Dal Colle and maybe use both of those picks to move to #1.

 

what do you all think?

Posted

If the Islanders end up with the 2nd pick in this years draft, do they keep the pick and risk the 2015 draft?

 

If they option it to Buffalo and we pick 1-2 do we pick both Reinhart and Ekbland?

Do we pick Reinhart and then maybe gamble with Michael Dal Colle?

Do we pick Reinhart and then try to trade the #2 pick?

 

what do you all think?

 

Def keep the pick if it's ours. I would go with option B. Draft Reinhart and then take a risk on another forward. Not sure if Dal Colle would be that guy, mayber Nylander or the German Leon, but def Reinhart and another forward... would be musts to add to this historically bad offense and who knows how much longer Matt Moulson remains here.

Posted

I think the islanders will use there pick this year if it's top 10, why else would they have put that provision in. A top ten, more likely five, this year is better than an unknown pick next year.

Posted (edited)

I think the Islanders will use their pick as well.

But the provision is not in there to protect against a top 10 pick, it is in there to protect them in case that pick ended up winning the lottery.

 

If by some bizarre chance we end up with one and two, I work a deal that nets us a talents young forward with a team that wants Ekblad.

Edited by dudacek
Posted

I'd just take ekblad and trade myers for that talented young forward.

Depends on what you think are the ceilings for each.

I think you are going to have to wait five years for Ekblad to be where Myers is now.

Posted

I'd just take ekblad and trade myers for that talented young forward.

 

I'd take Ekblad and trade Risto. But who knows what other teams would offer for who.

Posted

If the Sabres end up with #1 and pretty much anything in the top 10, I would draft 2 forwards unless there is a trade opportunity for an immediately ready top-line forward.

Yes. If they are in a position where the BPA is a D then offer that pick up to the highest bidder and move down a slot or two picking up more assets.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

If we trade Moulson at the deadline, I'm bringing that into this thread and going for the SabreSpace record for longest thread title of all time.

 

Now if he is traded and those picks are spun for other assets, we have a first novel of a title.

Posted

Stubits at CBS's Eye on Hockey starts the blogosphere rumours about how Moulson might be a natural fit for what the Senators are looking to add.

 

http://www.cbssports...ing-for-veteran

I find it more fun to read the comments people post after the trade rumor articles on websites, far more entertaining

 

On TSNs website, under their rumors for today the article mentioned Volchenkov of the Devils being someone the Habs should be looking at to get for Briere, because Brieres kids are close by in jersey and the Habs appear to want him out. Somone in the comment section said that the Habs don't need defence and need scoring, and that for Briere they should be able to get Moulson or Ott from Buffalo. The Habs would be lucky right now to get anything more then a mid draft pick for their healthy scratch, I think right now even giving up Stafford for him would be overpaying on the Sabres part just because its so well known the Habs want to get rid of him.

 

Personally, I would be shocked to see Murrays first trade not be made with the Sens. Since he is so familiar with that team and what they are looking for/need, he could probably work out a really good deal for both teams and start getting the players he wants here.

Posted (edited)

Speaking of Ottawa... This was hockey prospectus' breakdown of the top 10 prospects of Ottawa's at the beginning of the year.

 

http://www.hockeypro...?articleid=1572

 

Ottawa Senators Top 10 Prospects

1. Cody Ceci, Defense

2. Robin Lehner, Goaltender

3. Mark Stone, Right Wing

4. Curtis Lazar, Center

5. Jean-Gabriel Pageau, Center

6. Shane Prince, Left Wing

7. Mikael Wikstrand, Defense

8. Matt Puempel, Left Wing

9. Stephane Da Costa, Center

10. Mike Hoffman, Left Wing

 

 

If I trade with Ottawa I am taking a long hard look at RW Mark Stone... RW is the biggest cluster #### right now on the Sabres.

Edited by LGR4GM
Posted

We may see an Ottawa trade but depending on who it is, I'm always a little leery about trading within the division.

 

Given our position, we can't afford to rule out teams just because they're within the division. We need to maximize the value of the assets we have. Especially considering most are pending UFAs and might not be very effective by the time we're competing (which is part of the reason they should be traded now anyways).

Posted

We may see an Ottawa trade but depending on who it is, I'm always a little leery about trading within the division.

We're last in the league. We should trade the entire team within the division.

Posted

We may see an Ottawa trade but depending on who it is, I'm always a little leery about trading within the division.

I understand and agree with you, it can be leery to trade withing your division when dealing with prospects because if your the one dealing the prospect, you don't want that prospect to develop into something great and have it come back to bite you over and over, and if your the one getting the prospect, it makes you wonder why that team was willing to give up someone that could come back and bite them
Posted

I understand and agree with you, it can be leery to trade withing your division when dealing with prospects because if your the one dealing the prospect, you don't want that prospect to develop into something great and have it come back to bite you over and over, and if your the one getting the prospect, it makes you wonder why that team was willing to give up someone that could come back and bite them

 

woah, we're not talking about trading Jarkko Ruutu.

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...