qwksndmonster Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Trading one of our top 2 picks, which we suffered so long to get, to get Lucic would be a terrible nightmare. Quote
spndnchz Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 I'm picturing myself having a cup of coffee with Tim Murray. I ask him this question and he spews coffee out his nose Quote
deluca67 Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 I just don't see why you'd sacrifice assets to get him now when you can wait 12 months and he's a UFA. If the answer is he won't sign here as a UFA, then you can be damn sure he won't sign an extension to facilitate the trade. I just don't see a right price to make this work. Now if Boston is willing to do something more rental-like, like Foligno and a 2, then I'm game. It's always a gamble to let players hit free agency. I prefer working a deal with Boston and trying to work deal with Lucic without 28 other teams ringing his agents phone off the hook. I wish you had my ability to evaluate talent but we all can't be this badass. Oh well then we should trade McEichel for Lucic? Right? I mean why not? Lucic has a better NHL resume. So, you think McEichel and Reinhart are of equal value? Quote
Hoss Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 I ###### hate Lucic. I want him on the Sabres. And he could help us with that pesky cap floor. This is not and probably never will be an issue. Quote
Weave Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Wow... just wow. You know what would make the other team change their game? Being better than them in lines 1-4 so they can't possible get any matchup where they have an advantage. Our ideas arent mutually exclusive. How does adding Lucic prevent us from fielding 4 superior lines? I'd simply rather force the other team to try to address my team's speed than physical strength--Kane forces game planning as much as Lucic does. Someone like Simmonds is much more enticing to me than Lucic because he's a much better skater while bringing a physical presence. I also have false hope that the NHL with resume calling penalties, which will make that speed more important. We have lots of speed. I dont think Lucic by himslef turns us into a slow team. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 We have lots of speed. I dont think Lucic by himslef turns us into a slow team. I dunno, our only real speed on the wings in the entire top-9 is Kane and Ennis. Quote
Weave Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 (edited) I dunno, our only real speed on the wings in the entire top-9 is Kane and Ennis.Whats funny is, i feel like you and i are having this convo and there is a bunch of drunken slobs yelling about the same subject all around us. Add McEichel to the speed too. Edited April 18, 2015 by weave Quote
LGR4GM Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Our ideas arent mutually exclusive. How does adding Lucic prevent us from fielding 4 superior lines? Because adding Lucic would mean we are paying roughly 21.6million for just LW. Kane, Moulson, Ennis, Lucic. (I left out Foligno and Deslauriers). Meaning the average salary for the remaining 19 roster spots is 2.65 million. Or you could take that 6million, keep the assets you have, and sign a veteran 20g scoring RW in free agency. That goes further to creating 4 solid lines than adding Lucic would. So, you think McEichel and Reinhart are of equal value? Really? I mean you think Lucic is god but really? No DeLuca I don't think Connor and Jack are equal to Samson because surprisingly, I'm not a idiot. Quote
Weave Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Because adding Lucic would mean we are paying roughly 21.6million for just LW. Kane, Moulson, Ennis, Lucic. (I left out Foligno and Deslauriers). Meaning the average salary for the remaining 19 roster spots is 2.65 million. Or you could take that 6million, keep the assets you have, and sign a veteran 20g scoring RW in free agency. That goes further to creating 4 solid lines than adding Lucic would. Really? I mean you think Lucic is god but really? No DeLuca I don't think Connor and Jack are equal to Samson because surprisingly, I'm not a ###### idiot. I prefer an RW as well. But I do believe there is room for a Lucic if he were to be sprung loose. Quote
deluca67 Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Because adding Lucic would mean we are paying roughly 21.6million for just LW. Kane, Moulson, Ennis, Lucic. (I left out Foligno and Deslauriers). Meaning the average salary for the remaining 19 roster spots is 2.65 million. Or you could take that 6million, keep the assets you have, and sign a veteran 20g scoring RW in free agency. That goes further to creating 4 solid lines than adding Lucic would. Really? I mean you think Lucic is god but really? No DeLuca I don't think Connor and Jack are equal to Samson because surprisingly, I'm not a ###### idiot. Wow it took you this long to say something reasonable! I knew you had it in you. Not wanting to overpay for one position is a reasonable concern. Many Bills fans feel the same way about the money spent on the D-line. Next time lead with you best and leave all the other BS out of your posts. They are not equal which means I wouldn't treat their trade values as equals. I would bring Lucic in because we are going to have a young stud center that can use a man beast patrolling his wing as a deterrent. A Deterrent that can also play the game. If I were to trade "McEichel" than I have no use for Lucic at this time. It's about building a team fitting different pieces together and taking advantage of opportunities when they come along. There is a long list of quality players that ended up moving because the Sabres where in no position to make a move on them. If Lucic did become available I would hate for the Sabres to miss out on another quality player. Quote
LGR4GM Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Wow it took you this long to say something reasonable! I knew you had it in you. Not wanting to overpay for one position is a reasonable concern. Many Bills fans feel the same way about the money spent on the D-line. Next time lead with you best and leave all the other BS out of your posts. They are not equal which means I wouldn't treat their trade values as equals. I would bring Lucic in because we are going to have a young stud center that can use a man beast patrolling his wing as a deterrent. A Deterrent that can also play the game. If I were to trade "McEichel" than I have no use for Lucic at this time. It's about building a team fitting different pieces together and taking advantage of opportunities when they come along. There is a long list of quality players that ended up moving because the Sabres where in no position to make a move on them. If Lucic did become available I would hate for the Sabres to miss out on another quality player. See this is how I know you can't read. I've been saying for awhile it makes no sense to add yet another LW. As for the rest. You guys really think the current Buffalo Sabres will not literally up any team that messes with one of the kids? We watched a different teams this year I guess. Quote
inkman Posted April 18, 2015 Author Report Posted April 18, 2015 See this is how I know you can't read. I've been saying for awhile it makes no sense to add yet another LW. As for the rest. You guys really think the current Buffalo Sabres will not literally ###### up any team that messes with one of the kids? We watched a different teams this year I guess. The LW thing could be an issue but I'll never not want to add toughness, even if we have it in spades. Quote
Taro T Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Because adding Lucic would mean we are paying roughly 21.6million for just LW. Kane, Moulson, Ennis, Lucic. (I left out Foligno and Deslauriers). Meaning the average salary for the remaining 19 roster spots is 2.65 million. Or you could take that 6million, keep the assets you have, and sign a veteran 20g scoring RW in free agency. That goes further to creating 4 solid lines than adding Lucic would. ... But this team will have the VERY unusual condition of have center locked up with quality players for ~9MM/yr for the next 3 or so years (ballparking it as Reinhart and McEichel will have a lot of bonuses that they could qualify for). Personally, I'd be fine w/ them going after either ROR or ML but don't want them even thinking about it until after July 1 when they can work out long term deals. This team is overflowing w/ (in all reasonable likelihood) quality youth. Some would go out the door in a trade. I don't want to lose youth for a rental. Quote
Weave Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 (edited) See this is how I know you can't read. I've been saying for awhile it makes no sense to add yet another LW. As for the rest. You guys really think the current Buffalo Sabres will not literally ###### up any team that messes with one of the kids? We watched a different teams this year I guess. Apparently. I saw Delauriers, a 4th liner getting 4th line minutes, and a handful of guys with grit and game that don't scare anyone, but try plenty hard. Noone on this team right now is ###### up anyone. Literally. Edited April 18, 2015 by weave Quote
drnkirishone Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 the whole idea of intimidation is stupid to me. we do not need to intimidate the other team. you know what the sabres need to do? Forecheck relentlessly, throw body checks when given the chance, take away the time and space of the opposing team. Lucic really does not do any of that. He is not fast enough to be a good forechecker, I would argue that he does not body check when given chances instead he just throws checks whenever he wants, and again not fast enough to take away time and space. Sure if you want to make the other team wonder if they are going to have a nut removed Lucic is your guy. Also keep in mind Lucic points are very much a product of the system he plays within. I fully expect his point production to drop off a cliff if he goes to a new team with a up tempo pace or if a new bruins coach installs such a game. also this myth that Lucic will stop teams from crossing the line on our young stars..... horseshit. You know what stops that? The NHL. either by punishing players and teams for crossing said line or by not punishing the sabres for following them over said line. Quote
LGR4GM Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Apparently. I saw Delauriers, a 4th liner getting 4th line minutes, and a handful of guys with grit and game that don't scare anyone, but try plenty hard. Noone on this team right now is ###### up anyone. Literally. did you see anyone take advantage of any Sabres forward this year and what was the response if you did? IMO, You don't have 1 guy intimidate, you have a team behind you. Quote
Taro T Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 did you see anyone take advantage of any Sabres forward this year and what was the response if you did? IMO, You don't have 1 guy intimidate, you have a team behind you. Didn't Gionta pretty much get his head taken off? And, yes, Foligno retailiated (he'd better, it was his pass that hung him out to dry) but didn't he break his hand in that fight? Quote
LGR4GM Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 Didn't Gionta pretty much get his head taken off? And, yes, Foligno retailiated (he'd better, it was his pass that hung him out to dry) but didn't he break his hand in that fight? hmm maybe. I dont remember that specifically. Quote
Randall Flagg Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 The Tampa and St Louis games stood out for me this past year, in terms of sticking up for teammates. Quote
LGR4GM Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 LOL I wasn't trying to be snarky. I was really curious if people don't see the Sabres as having the ability to as a team defend eachother. Quote
Weave Posted April 18, 2015 Report Posted April 18, 2015 I wasn't trying to be snarky. I was really curious if people don't see the Sabres as having the ability to as a team defend eachother. They have some guys that will defend each other. They don't have a deterrent. They don't have an answer to the real beasts that still patrol the league (although their population is getting smaller). And they don't have what I keep bringing up in this thread, a player that other teams have to react to. I get that we have some guys that will join the scrum. I don't think it is as many as you think (Risto, for example, or Zemgus, who has not shown any of that kind of aggression to date). But what I really want this team to have is a guy that is going to force the OTHER team to decide if they want to join the scrum, IOW a guy who instigates nasty play. I don't want guys that react to a Dustin Brown borderline play as much as I want a guy who initiates borderline plays like Brown does. Looch does all that and pots 25 goals a season. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted April 19, 2015 Report Posted April 19, 2015 Whats funny is, i feel like you and i are having this convo and there is a bunch of drunken slobs yelling about the same subject all around us. Add McEichel to the speed too. Not to disappoint, but I'm halfway to drunk and may join the fray. You're a doodoo head for disagreeing with me! Quote
Weave Posted April 19, 2015 Report Posted April 19, 2015 Not to disappoint, but I'm halfway to drunk and may join the fray. You're a doodoo head for disagreeing with me! I don't think you've got what's been getting tossed around in you, even all the way to drunk. And we thank you for it. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.