Trade ideas and speculation

[Crusader1969]

 

Those are all valid and understandable points, and I agree it is probably an unlikely scenario. But I personally don't share those same concerns. He won't come here and win a cup immediately, so yes a few years of his prime would be wasted and it may not be the best career choice for Phil. But it could make some sense for the Sabres. While I will acknowledge that he is probably not a great vocal leader, he would still be one of few Sabres with nearly a decade's experience in the league, including a few playoff runs, by the time the team is ready to compete. At around 30, 31 years old, he would still have a couple good years left as a top 6 caliber forward. And learning how to win becomes a little easier when you have a proven NHL sniper on your team.

 

His contract doesn't really scare me either, as it kind of goes hand in hand with my last point. He will only be 34 at the end of the deal-- it isn't like we would be paying a washed up has-been for several years while he fights off retirement. I would expect him to be a very good player through out the duration of the deal.

 

Just some other thoughts:

• Phil Kessel is tied for 4th in goals scored over the past five seasons. That stat is slightly skewed by the fact that he's played as many as 20 more games than some of the players around him on the list, but I wouldn't necessarily call that a bad thing either -- he hasn't missed a single game in those five years. 
• While putting up pretty impressive offensive numbers in Toronto, he has never had a legitimate #1 center to play with there. Bozak is an okay player and Kadri is a pretty good player, but no one comes close to what we expect Eichel to be. Or even Reinhart. I love JVR as a player as well, but I think it's a no brainer that he would be surrounded with a lot more talent here in Buffalo.
• Piggybacking off that thought: We've all heard the stories about his run ins with media, and how he maybe doesn't like to be the center of attention. He certainly wouldn't have to be here. Not with Eichel, Kane, etc. 
• More fuel to the Toronto rivalry fire. It is hardly even a significant rivalry anymore because of how bad the teams both have been, and it may not get any better soon since the Leafs are rebuilding. The Babcock ordeal helps us hate them a little more. Can you imagine how much more they would hate us if we snagged Kessel? Especially when he's scoring/winning games at the ACC with a star studded Sabres team? That would be fun. I also think it would serve as some motivation for Kessel who was called out, belittled, and probably somewhat embarrassed at times by the TO med

 

Kessle is all about speed. What happens to his speed and explosiveness if he continues down the path of not working out and eating donoughts. He is already chubby and will only put on more weight.

 

newtons law:

 

F = m a

So the more force you supply, the more acceleration you get. But the same equation tells us that a = F / m, so the more massive an object, the less it will be accelerated by a force of the same size

 

or said another way: the fatter Phil gets the slower he becomes and the he becomes a less productive hockey player. Maybe we started to witness this law this past season?

Edited June 8, 2015 by Crusader1969

[Brawndo]

Dreger on the Goalie Trade Market for Ottawa.

 

http://www.todaysslapshot.com/from-the-ice/dreger-on-sabres-oilers-interest-in-lehner/

 

Dreger on TSN1200 says asking price for Lehner could be a draft pick + young potential top-6 F, or just a proven top-6 F.

Edited June 8, 2015 by BRAWNDO

[thesportsbuff]

You give yet another reason why the deal wouldn't happen. If Kessel is as sunshine and rainbows as you say why would the leafs trade him to an immediate division rival?  Also what would we have to spend to get this paragon of goal scoring?

•  
   

Also you aren't going to motivate Kessel to be anything other than what he is now.  Remember Thomas Vanek?  We all thought for years Vanek was going to break through this magical ceiling and actually be an all around impact player but nope. Kessel is a goal scorer for sure but that's it.  That's all he brings to the table. 

 

I don't agree that Phil Kessel makes any sense for the Buffalo Sabres. I am fairly certain we just spent 3 years getting rid of a squishy core of players.  Not to mention you bring in Kessel and he is the highest paid player on the team.  That will matter in that locker room especially if Kessel clashes with his teammates.   

 

1. The Leafs are rebuilding. They will take the best offer they can get for Kessel. I can pretty much guarantee that Shanahan and Co. are not concerned in the least about whether or not a potential trade partner is in their division. Lol. 

 

2. Not sure how you came up with all that stuff about Vanek based on what I said about Kessel being motivated to play vs his former team. :blink:  Motivation does not equal "he's going to transform into a sick two way forward who hits hard, backchecks and is a great leader." 

 

3. Kessel is light years better than any of the core we got rid of, including Vanek. "Highest paid player on the team" -- so what? He has earned his money and will continue to do so. Which Sabre deserves more money than Kessel right now? Not even going to address the "clashing with team mates" part because there is exactly zero reason to believe that would be the case.

 

 

Anyway just an idea, since that's what this thread is for. I'll let you get the last word in since I know that's what you really want.

[thewookie1]

Dreger on the Goalie Trade Market for Ottawa.

 

http://www.todaysslapshot.com/from-the-ice/dreger-on-sabres-oilers-interest-in-lehner/

 

Dreger on TSN1200 says asking price for Lehner could be a draft pick + young potential top-6 F, or just a proven top-6 F.

 

 

If that's the case then I'm no longer interested in Lehner. 

 

I'll take Eddie Lack for a 2nd

[Hoss]

I take Eddie Lack over Lehner if the price is even close. If the price leans toward Lehner then I definitely take Lack.

 

The only "proven" top 6 forwards we have are Moulson and Ennis. And Kane but no.

If they consider Hodgson that then okay. Foligno? Maybe.

[Ogre]

Yep and they don't come any more squishy that ol jelly donut Kessel. We are building a heavy, tough, fast team. We don't need Phil 'doughboy' Kessel.

I like this. He will forever be "Squishy Phil" in my little brain now.

I take Eddie Lack over Lehner if the price is even close. If the price leans toward Lehner then I definitely take Lack.

 

The only "proven" top 6 forwards we have are Moulson and Ennis. And Kane but no.

If they consider Hodgson that then okay. Foligno? Maybe.

Being a part of an offseason out of two years of tank I'd use whatever goalies we have on contract. There will be opportunity to trade for someone if it looks like the other pieces are coming together. IMO the size of today's goalies and the amount of padding makes them more of a dime a dozen than any other position.

[LGR4GM]

If that's the case then I'm no longer interested in Lehner. 

 

I'll take Eddie Lack for a 2nd

I wouldn't pay that for Lehner.  That's steep for an unproven commodity. 

[WildCard]

I take Eddie Lack over Lehner if the price is even close. If the price leans toward Lehner then I definitely take Lack.

 

The only "proven" top 6 forwards we have are Moulson and Ennis. And Kane but no.

If they consider Hodgson that then okay. Foligno? Maybe.

Not even sure I'd do either of those when we get just go after Niemi. Murray said in his interview that along with looking at trading for a young goalie he's looking at getting an older UFA as a potential short term solution if Ulmark or Makarov pan out

[Hoss]

Not even sure I'd do either of those when we get just go after Niemi. Murray said in his interview that along with looking at trading for a young goalie he's looking at getting an older UFA as a potential short term solution if Ulmark or Makarov pan out

I think we'll have two new goalies. I'm not sure if Niemi will be one since I imagine he'll get overpaid somewhere. But, as far as I remember, Murray had to be reminded to name Makarov when he talked about young goalies. Also, him saying he would consider a goalie early tells me he's not too confident in what we have (nor should he be).

[dejeanneret]

Malkin and Nash have both been mentioned. I would say no, particularly to Malkin. The cost would be Reinhart, Zadorov, 21 and another prospect. At this point in time I would rather have the young core grow together and add pieces to it, not subtract them.

 

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/05/welcome-to-the-trade-rumor-mill-evgeni-malkin-and-rick-nash/

No frickn way would I do this deal. Malkin hasn't scored more than 28 goals since 2011-12 and he'll be 29 when the season starts which means he may have only a few years left.  And you want to give up Reinhart, Zadorov, 21st and another prospect for a guy who avg 53 games & 20 goals the last 3 seasons???

 

anyone that wants that deal is on serious crack.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2015 by dejeanneret

[Hoss]

It seems like every player 27/28+ is thrown in a category of nearing the end of their runs... When was the last time a truly great player didn't continue their success deep into their 30s?

 

(I get that guys at that age are riskier for us because it'll be 2-3 years before we'd be able to take full advantage of their skill, but "wrong side of 30" and saying Malkin has a few years left has been a theme here)

[dejeanneret]

It seems like every player 27/28+ is thrown in a category of nearing the end of their runs... When was the last time a truly great player didn't continue their success deep into their 30s?

 

(I get that guys at that age are riskier for us because it'll be 2-3 years before we'd be able to take full advantage of their skill, but "wrong side of 30" and saying Malkin has a few years left has been a theme here)

It's more about how many quality years he has left.

 

It would be one thing if he was putting up 4o goals a year.  But he has been declining the last 3 years.  Because he may play to 35 doesn't mean hes going to be a scorer for the next 7 years.

 

But to say your giving up a potential 40 goal scorerr in Reinhart, a stud on D in Zadorov for the next 10-15 years, the 21st and a prospect for him?  That is beyond ridiculous.

 

Would I give up a 21st for him and maybe a player like Larsson or Foligno (who are young yet haven't reached their potential yet) sure. But that's it. Even with that, your risking giving up too much in a deep draft where you can pick up a 30 goal scorer for years at 21 and if Larsson or Foligno start putting up 20+ you lost the deal.

 

But because right now Larsson and Foligno are spare parts and Malkin gets you there way sooner I'd do it.

Edited June 8, 2015 by dejeanneret

[qwksndmonster]

It's more about how many quality years he has left.

 

It would be one thing if he was putting up 4o goals a year.  But he has been declining the last 3 years.  Because he may play to 35 doesn't mean hes going to be a scorer for the next 7 years.

 

But to say your giving up a potential 40 goal scorerr in Reinhart, a stud on D in Zadorov for the next 10-15 years, the 21st and a prospect for him?  That is beyond ridiculous.

 

Would I give up a 21st for him and maybe a player like Larsson or Foligno (who are young yet haven't reached their potential yet) sure. But that's it. Even with that, your risking giving up too much in a deep draft where you can pick up a 30 goal scorer for years at 21 and if Larsson or Foligno start putting up 20+ you lost the deal.

 

But because right now Larsson and Foligno are spare parts and Malkin gets you there way sooner I'd do it.

Nobody scores 40 anymore.  28 goals is practically the new 40.  And Reinhart is much more a setup man than a goal scorer.  I think he'll be between a 50-60 point player, hopefully 70.  But he still has a long way to go to get even there.  Zadorov hasn't even grown up yet, and we don't know that he'll be a Stud D man or a 3rd pairing guy.

 

Malkin is one of the top 10 players in the league, and he plays the most important position.  Your idea of what it what take to get Malkin is absurd (even though it does read as what you'd prefer to give up).

[Hoss]

It's more about how many quality years he has left.

 

It would be one thing if he was putting up 4o goals a year. But he has been declining the last 3 years. Because he may play to 35 doesn't mean hes going to be a scorer for the next 7 years.

 

But to say your giving up a potential 40 goal scorerr in Reinhart, a stud on D in Zadorov for the next 10-15 years, the 21st and a prospect for him? That is beyond ridiculous.

 

Would I give up a 21st for him and maybe a player like Larsson or Foligno (who are young yet haven't reached their potential yet) sure. But that's it. Even with that, your risking giving up too much in a deep draft where you can pick up a 30 goal scorer for years at 21 and if Larsson or Foligno start putting up 20+ you lost the deal.

 

But because right now Larsson and Foligno are spare parts and Malkin gets you there way sooner I'd do it.

My comment wasn't really about the trade. I agree that it's probably not worth it (even though I disagree with Reinhart being a potential 40-goal scorer or that you should consider the absolute ceiling in deals like this).

I'm just saying that there's been a lot of throwing away of guys that likely still have 6/7 years left at a high level. And I disagree that Malkin has been declining over the last three years. Went from 33 points in 31 games to 72 in 60 to 70 in 69. This year was a down year but he scored more. The whole team was down this year in Pittsburgh. I do not think Malkin is already on the downside nor do I think he is Pittsburgh's problem (nobody said this, just noting because it's something some think when trade rumors bubble up). I hope a deal happens because I want to see him anchor a new team.

[dejeanneret]

Nobody scores 40 anymore.  28 goals is practically the new 40.  And Reinhart is much more a setup man than a goal scorer.  I think he'll be between a 50-60 point player, hopefully 70.  But he still has a long way to go to get even there.  Zadorov hasn't even grown up yet, and we don't know that he'll be a Stud D man or a 3rd pairing guy.

 

Malkin is one of the top 10 players in the league, and he plays the most important position.  Your idea of what it what take to get Malkin is absurd (even though it does read as what you'd prefer to give up).

Then I wouldn't make the deal, which is my point.  Reinhart and Zadorov can be centerpieces to any franchise and they aren't even able to drink legally yet.  Even when the was talk of ROR to Sabres the price was Zadorov & the 21st, or even Grigorenko & Zadorov.  That's for a player who is 4 years younger, a way better two way game, and scores as much as Malkin with nothing but upside in front of him. 

 

I think we both agree that Zadorov, Reinhart, 21st and prospect is too much to give up for Malkin.  We can agree to disagree what IS the right price.

 

***and because "no one" scores 40 anymore doesn't mean Reinhart, who was arguably the 1st pick in the draft, won't.  Some players still are, and still will.  He may be one of them.  Even at 30-35 he'd be worth more than Malkin. 

My comment wasn't really about the trade. I agree that it's probably not worth it (even though I disagree with Reinhart being a potential 40-goal scorer or that you should consider the absolute ceiling in deals like this).

I'm just saying that there's been a lot of throwing away of guys that likely still have 6/7 years left at a high level. And I disagree that Malkin has been declining over the last three years. Went from 33 points in 31 games to 72 in 60 to 70 in 69. This year was a down year but he scored more. The whole team was down this year in Pittsburgh. I do not think Malkin is already on the downside nor do I think he is Pittsburgh's problem (nobody said this, just noting because it's something some think when trade rumors bubble up). I hope a deal happens because I want to see him anchor a new team.

Talkin 3 years bro.  He's avg 53 games and 20 goals the last 3 years.  It is what it is.  Connolly was supposed to be a stud but he couldn't stay on the ice.  It's about production.  Plus, having Crosby I'm sure didn't hurt his stats.  Hodgson might have put up similar numbers than Malkin if he was playing next to Crosby.  In my mind that's what makes a guy like Ennis even more valuable than Malkin, which some may laugh at but I believe so.

 

I'm not against acquiring Malkin.  I just wouldn't give up 2-3 future studs for him.

Edited June 9, 2015 by dejeanneret

[Weave]

nitpick

 

Reinhart wasn't arguably the 1st pick in the draft.  There is no way anyone can argue this.  The proof that he was the 2nd pick is right there in front of us.

 

/nitpick

 

Too old at 30 seems to me to be very dependent on how much a players game relies on strong skating.  Generally, guys that are superb skaters have a fruitful career far longer than guys who rely on other attributes.  If Malkin can keep the injury bug at bay I could see him hanging on like Fedorov, or James Patrick.

 

For example, Dustin Brown at 34 is a much bigger risk than Malkin at 34.

[Hoss]

Then I wouldn't make the deal, which is my point. Reinhart and Zadorov can be centerpieces to any franchise and they aren't even able to drink legally yet. Even when the was talk of ROR to Sabres the price was Zadorov & the 21st, or even Grigorenko & Zadorov. That's for a player who is 4 years younger, a way better two way game, and scores as much as Malkin with nothing but upside in front of him.

 

I think we both agree that Zadorov, Reinhart, 21st and prospect is too much to give up for Malkin. We can agree to disagree what IS the right price.

 

***and because "no one" scores 40 anymore doesn't mean Reinhart, who was arguably the 1st pick in the draft, won't. Some players still are, and still will. He may be one of them. Even at 30-35 he'd be worth more than Malkin.

 

Talkin 3 years bro. He's avg 53 games and 20 goals the last 3 years. It is what it is. Connolly was supposed to be a stud but he couldn't stay on the ice. It's about production. Plus, having Crosby I'm sure didn't hurt his stats. Hodgson might have put up similar numbers than Malkin if he was playing next to Crosby. In my mind that's what makes a guy like Ennis even more valuable than Malkin, which some may laugh at but I believe so.

 

I'm not against acquiring Malkin. I just wouldn't give up 2-3 future studs for him.

You're including the lockout in an average of three seasons... Bro.

Also, ROR does NOT have a better two-way game. He's better defensively, probably, but he's light years behind offensively (and that's not a knock).

[LGR4GM]

Talkin 3 years bro.  He's avg 53 games and 20 goals the last 3 years.  It is what it is.  Connolly was supposed to be a stud but he couldn't stay on the ice.  It's about production.  Plus, having Crosby I'm sure didn't hurt his stats.  Hodgson might have put up similar numbers than Malkin if he was playing next to Crosby.  In my mind that's what makes a guy like Ennis even more valuable than Malkin, which some may laugh at but I believe so.

 

I'm not against acquiring Malkin.  I just wouldn't give up 2-3 future studs for him.

No one uses Bro anymore so stop.

 

Malkin typically only plays with Crosby on the PP and in rare circumstances.  

 

I have no desire to acquire Malkin but the Hodgson point is, well the filter would block most of it so I will call it hyperbole.  

[dudacek]

Conversation starters:

 

Cody Hodgson plus a B-level pick or prospect for Lehner

Mike Gregaranko and a B-level pick or prospect for Brandon Gormley and pick #32 this year

Pick #21 for Malcolm Subban and Chris Kelly

Hodgson and #21 for Ryan Ellis

[thewookie1]

BRO

 

That will be all...  :flirt: 

[Hoss]

Conversation starters:

 

Cody Hodgson plus a B-level pick or prospect for Lehner

Mike Gregaranko and a B-level pick or prospect for Brandon Gormley and pick #32 this year

Pick #21 for Malcolm Subban and Chris Kelly

Hodgson and #21 for Ryan Ellis

I would considering the Lehner deal and the Subban deal. That's far too much to give up for Ryan Ellis considering he'd be in our bottom pairing (would need to trade Pysyk after making that deal). Another right hander doesn't make much sense. It's not like it's unheard of to have opposite hands on opposite sides, but I think many prefer to go lefty-righty for flexibility's sake.

[dudacek]

#31 for Jake Gardiner.

As long as a guy can play the PP, I'd move him to the off-side.

I really think these are the kinds of trades we are going to see Murray targeting this summer - decent secondary pieces for young guys that fill needs that may be available for whatever reason.

I think we are really going to start seeing guys he likes and guys he doesn't.

Cowen is another one, although I'm not a huge fan. (love Ellis)

Edited June 9, 2015 by dudacek

[Thorner]

Then I wouldn't make the deal, which is my point.  Reinhart and Zadorov can be centerpieces to any franchise and they aren't even able to drink legally yet.  Even when the was talk of ROR to Sabres the price was Zadorov & the 21st, or even Grigorenko & Zadorov.  That's for a player who is 4 years younger, a way better two way game, and scores as much as Malkin with nothing but upside in front of him. 

 

I think we both agree that Zadorov, Reinhart, 21st and prospect is too much to give up for Malkin.  We can agree to disagree what IS the right price.

 

***and because "no one" scores 40 anymore doesn't mean Reinhart, who was arguably the 1st pick in the draft, won't.  Some players still are, and still will.  He may be one of them.  Even at 30-35 he'd be worth more than Malkin. 

Talkin 3 years bro.  He's avg 53 games and 20 goals the last 3 years.  It is what it is.  Connolly was supposed to be a stud but he couldn't stay on the ice.  It's about production.  Plus, having Crosby I'm sure didn't hurt his stats.  Hodgson might have put up similar numbers than Malkin if he was playing next to Crosby.  In my mind that's what makes a guy like Ennis even more valuable than Malkin, which some may laugh at but I believe so.

 

I'm not against acquiring Malkin.  I just wouldn't give up 2-3 future studs for him.

 

 

You're including the lockout in an average of three seasons... Bro.

Also, ROR does NOT have a better two-way game. He's better defensively, probably, but he's light years behind offensively (and that's not a knock).

 

 

No one uses Bro anymore so stop.

 

Malkin typically only plays with Crosby on the PP and in rare circumstances.  

 

I have no desire to acquire Malkin but the Hodgson point is, well the filter would block most of it so I will call it hyperbole.  

 

I'm away from home for a while and got to check in to SS for a bit tonight, and after reading these three posts I just felt...home. You guys are awesome. B-)

[Huckleberry]

All these grigorenko trade proposals make me sad :(

[LGR4GM]

All these grigorenko trade proposals make me sad :(

Me too. I really want to see what he can do after 3 years of development.