TrueBlueGED Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 I don't see the disconnect here. They offered a 1st, a conditional pick and Jones for Lucic. Who was turned into a 1st. If we cannot get 11 and something like Clague and a secondary pick there is no point. Lucic had one year left, was older and is not as highly potent a scorer. Lucic is every bit the scorer Kane is, while being far more durable and a better playmaker. Is E3 more likely than E5? :lol: Nah, it's the opposite of the defcon system. 1 least likely, 5 practically imminent. Quote
Eleven Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Agreed, he should be traded for Prospects if you can't get an established NHL player. Hence Kempe and Clague in LA. He should not be traded at all if they can't get an established NHL player. Quote
LGR4GM Posted June 23, 2017 Author Report Posted June 23, 2017 Lucic is every bit the scorer Kane is, while being far more durable and a better playmaker. Nah, it's the opposite of the defcon system. 1 least likely, 5 practically imminent. Kane: 157g, 496games = 0.317 Lucic: 182g, 729games = 0.250 Kane is a better goal scorer, but the other points are def correct. He should not be traded at all if they can't get an established NHL player. I would trade Kane for a top prospect and a emerging NHL player like Kempe. Quote
Eleven Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Kane: 157g, 496games = 0.317 Lucic: 182g, 729games = 0.250 Kane is a better goal scorer, but the other points are def correct. I would trade Kane for a top prospect and a emerging NHL player like Kempe. Can't we live in the now a little bit? Do we always have to be planning three years ahead? I want to see this team make the playoffs and win a series. Quote
LGR4GM Posted June 23, 2017 Author Report Posted June 23, 2017 Can't we live in the now a little bit? Do we always have to be planning three years ahead? I want to see this team make the playoffs and win a series. Kempe is ready now. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Kane: 157g, 496games = 0.317 Lucic: 182g, 729games = 0.250 Kane is a better goal scorer, but the other points are def correct. I would trade Kane for a top prospect and a emerging NHL player like Kempe. Not unfair, but when a guy misses time every single season, is goals per game necessarily the best measure? Quote
WildCard Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Kempe is ready now. Nowhere near as good as Kane though Quote
LGR4GM Posted June 23, 2017 Author Report Posted June 23, 2017 Nowhere near as good as Kane though Not currently. How do we trade Kane for another 25 goal scorer straight up? Quote
WildCard Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Not currently. How do we trade Kane for another 25 goal scorer straight up? Get a top 4 d-man Quote
Tondas Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Not currently. How do we trade Kane for another 25 goal scorer straight up? Trade Kane for Jonathan Marchessault. Quote
LGR4GM Posted June 23, 2017 Author Report Posted June 23, 2017 Get a top 4 d-man Show me a trade recently that has been a top 4 d for a wing straight up and I am all ears. Quote
WildCard Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Show me a trade recently that has been a top 4 d for a wing straight up and I am all ears. I didn't say straight up Quote
Eleven Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Or just keep him? Why are people so eager to see him traded? Quote
LGR4GM Posted June 23, 2017 Author Report Posted June 23, 2017 Or just keep him? Why are people so eager to see him traded? Im fully on board with keeping him if you can't get good value in a trade. Quote
darksabre Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Or just keep him? Why are people so eager to see him traded? Why do people keep asking this question? Quote
Samson's Flow Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Or just keep him? Why are people so eager to see him traded? Again, from my perspective there is no contract that Kane would agree to sign where I would be happy with the terms long term. It's just going to cost too much from a team building perspective that I don't think we need more than one high cap wingers. Why do people keep asking this question? because they don't like the answer the rest of us are giving. :unsure: Quote
Weave Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Again, from my perspective there is no contract that Kane would agree to sign where I would be happy with the terms long term. It's just going to cost too much from a team building perspective that I don't think we need more than one high cap wingers. because they don't like the answer the rest of us are giving. :unsure: Not to speak for Eleven, but I am pretty sure his point is, irrespective of ability to sign Kane, why trade now and potentially sacrifice actually winning games for a change. I tend to agree with it. If we all think he's not garnering a team need or a blue chip pick, the value we waste isnt all that high really, is it? So lets just start winning and let the chips fall where they may. Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Or just keep him? Why are people so eager to see him traded? Read. The. Thread. Not to speak for Eleven, but I am pretty sure his point is, irrespective of ability to sign Kane, why trade now and potentially sacrifice actually winning games for a change. I tend to agree with it. If we all think he's not garnering a team need or a blue chip pick, the value we waste isnt all that high really, is it? So lets just start winning and let the chips fall where they may. How many wins do you think he's worth over replacement? Without even glancing at any models, I'd say around 2. Quote
Eleven Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Not to speak for Eleven, but I am pretty sure his point is, irrespective of ability to sign Kane, why trade now and potentially sacrifice actually winning games for a change. I tend to agree with it. If we all think he's not garnering a team need or a blue chip pick, the value we waste isnt all that high really, is it? So lets just start winning and let the chips fall where they may. Yes. I realize that he's a UFA next July. There's this theory that if they don't re-sign him or trade him right now, they'll be "losing him for nothing." But that's simply not correct. There is value in having him play the season here. Read. The. Thread. Really? Quote
TrueBlueGED Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Yes. I realize that he's a UFA next July. There's this theory that if they don't re-sign him or trade him right now, they'll be "losing him for nothing." But that's simply not correct. There is value in having him play the season here. Really? Yes, really. You need not agree, but the reasoning for wanting to move him has been laid out numerous times by different posters. Should we really have to keep re-explaining every page? Quote
sabills Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Yes, really. You need not agree, but the reasoning for wanting to move him has been laid out numerous times by different posters. Should we really have to keep re-explaining every page? For the record, I understand your point of view, I just disagree with it. Quote
Samson's Flow Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Not to speak for Eleven, but I am pretty sure his point is, irrespective of ability to sign Kane, why trade now and potentially sacrifice actually winning games for a change. I tend to agree with it. If we all think he's not garnering a team need or a blue chip pick, the value we waste isnt all that high really, is it? So lets just start winning and let the chips fall where they may. I'm all for winning, I really am. I'd love to see the Sabres do well this year and make the playoffs. My speculation is that this is the highest value for Kane that we are going to get, as waiting to the deadline or keeping him all year introduces injury and/or production regression that will lower the value for 2018 and beyond. If i'm the GM, I am targeting being truly competitive (i.e. Cup) in the next few years, before we have to pay our young players their big money contracts. Quote
Doohicksie Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Or just keep him? Why are people so eager to see him traded? There may be a point where the Sabres have to decide to keep or trade him, based on salary cap considerations and how much he, Jack and Samson will sign for, along with cap space taken up by the rest of the team. But he's definitely not the first move I make, and I would try to fit him under the cap before I moved him. Quote
JohnRobertEichel Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 So one more time now: we're going to be penny-pinchers with the team's leading goal scorer entering his prime years, hoping for maybe a middle-pair defenseman and/or a completely unproven 18-year old or two in return, while Ennis + Bogosian + Gorges + Moulson still exist on the payroll? Quote
Samson's Flow Posted June 23, 2017 Report Posted June 23, 2017 Yes. I realize that he's a UFA next July. There's this theory that if they don't re-sign him or trade him right now, they'll be "losing him for nothing." But that's simply not correct. There is value in having him play the season here. Really? There is value in having him play the season here - I agree. I just think that value is less than the value received in a possible trade in the off-season. Less value in the short term for more value in the long term. I really like Kane as a player too, I just think what we can get for him makes us a better team than his 1 year impact. 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.