Iron Crotch Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Carrier and Ullmark are dime-a-dozen players. Folks are over-valuing them if they think they're in any way indispensable. Ennis is worth keeping because he has sauce... and drinks chocolate milk with little kids... ;) Quote
WildCard Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 (edited) NHL Network radio did a mock draft for all teams, had Falk, Gorges, and COR as the guys they would take if they were Vegas Edited June 19, 2017 by WildCard Quote
apuszczalowski Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Carrier and Ullmark are dime-a-dozen players. Folks are over-valuing them if they think they're in any way indispensable. Ennis is worth keeping because he has sauce... and drinks chocolate milk with little kids... ;) just looking at the list of available goalies unprotected, unless a bunch of teams have deals in place to protect a bunch of them, Ullmark wouldn't even break the top 5. Outside of Buffalo he's not a hot commodity right now, and there a re much better options then a guy who has yet to prove anything in the nhl Quote
Derrico Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Yes, there are better goalies out there then ullmark. But I think we have to consider opportunity cost. Just because a team exposes a better goaltender than Linus doesn't mean he will be the pick if that same team has a better forward or d available. Quote
Eleven Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 (edited) NHL Network radio did a mock draft for all teams, had Falk, Gorges, and COR as the guys they would take if they were Vegas Cal O'Reilly? Really? What did they give as reasoning for that? Edited June 19, 2017 by Eleven Quote
inkman Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Cal O'Reilly? Really? What did they give as reasoning for that? Any of those 3 make no sense at all Quote
WildCard Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Any of those 3 make no sense at all Cal O'Reilly? Really? What did they give as reasoning for that? COR for the AHL team, Gorges cause he has a 1 year deal and can be a vet presence, and Falk because our forward groups sucks and they'd rather build from the back in Quote
inkman Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 COR for the AHL team, Gorges cause he has a 1 year deal and can be a vet presence, and Falk because our forward groups sucks and they'd rather build from the back in Are they really going to be stockpiling their farm system in the expansion draft? Quote
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Are they really going to be stockpiling their farm system in the expansion draft? Partly. They are sharing an AHL team next season and will need some organizational depth to have callups for injury purposes next season. Considering they have 30 picks and only 23 NHL roster spots. Some of these guys are either going to play in the AHL or be used as assets to acquire AHL players/prospects for the future. Carrier and Ullmark are dime-a-dozen players. Folks are over-valuing them if they think they're in any way indispensable. Ennis is worth keeping because he has sauce... and drinks chocolate milk with little kids... ;) Ullmark is very important to the Sabres. One, he could be a No.1 in the NHL in a few years and two, outside of Johansson we have no organizational depth at goalie if Petersen doesn't sign. Kasdorf isn't a real prospect anymore and we have no goalie draftees in the CHL, NCAA or Europe any longer. TM didn't think it was important to draft one with his 17 picks in the last 2 years. Quote
shrader Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Lots of Ennis hate on here. When healthy he's a dynamic goal scorer, slick puck handler, great is small areas. Even when he's not scoring he makes it difficult on opposing defensemen. If I'm Vegas I try to sign Kulikov during the exclusive window. He would become their pick from BUF. But then also try to trade them Moulson which they could use his veteran leadership and power play expertise. Could happen. That's a trade angle that really hasn't been mentioned much. I could see Vegas being interested in taking on one of the pending free agents like Kulikov in exchange for picking a guy like Moulson. I don't mean to suggest that as the entire trade, but they could take Moulson, and in exchange receive a pick and the rights to Kulikov. Insert any team and any bad contract/pending free agent combo you'd like. Vegas gets their pick and also an extended window to talk with that player. Quote
Eleven Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 That's a trade angle that really hasn't been mentioned much. I could see Vegas being interested in taking on one of the pending free agents like Kulikov in exchange for picking a guy like Moulson. I don't mean to suggest that as the entire trade, but they could take Moulson, and in exchange receive a pick and the rights to Kulikov. Insert any team and any bad contract/pending free agent combo you'd like. Vegas gets their pick and also an extended window to talk with that player. Let's say they did that, and that Kulikov is signable at his 2017 salary. Now, Vegas is only going to do this if they want to sign Kulikov, right? They're not going to do it just for the hell of it. This ends up with Vegas tying up more than ten percent of its salary cap in two players--and not great players at that. And again, insert any team and any bad contract / pending UFA combo you'd like. It's just not very doable. Quote
nucci Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Lots of Ennis hate on here. When healthy he's a dynamic goal scorer, slick puck handler, great is small areas. Even when he's not scoring he makes it difficult on opposing defensemen. If I'm Vegas I try to sign Kulikov during the exclusive window. He would become their pick from BUF. But then also try to trade them Moulson which they could use his veteran leadership and power play expertise. Could happen. Veteran leadership from Moulson? Like when he showed up out of shape and had his worst year after signing a big contract? Quote
shrader Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Let's say they did that, and that Kulikov is signable at his 2017 salary. Now, Vegas is only going to do this if they want to sign Kulikov, right? They're not going to do it just for the hell of it. This ends up with Vegas tying up more than ten percent of its salary cap in two players--and not great players at that. And again, insert any team and any bad contract / pending UFA combo you'd like. It's just not very doable. It wouldn't even necessarily have to be the bad contract, but they're definitely going to wind up with at least one of those guys from around the league. It could instead be that guy team A wants them to take instead of another unprotected player. Either way, I could see some free agent rights being involved in these trades. They get moved each year anyway, so why not add in another option for potential Vegas moves. Quote
Eleven Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 It wouldn't even necessarily have to be the bad contract, but they're definitely going to wind up with at least one of those guys from around the league. It could instead be that guy team A wants them to take instead of another unprotected player. Either way, I could see some free agent rights being involved in these trades. They get moved each year anyway, so why not add in another option for potential Vegas moves. I think deals like this are much, much more likely, and I think we'll see many of them. Quote
pi2000 Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 That's a trade angle that really hasn't been mentioned much. I could see Vegas being interested in taking on one of the pending free agents like Kulikov in exchange for picking a guy like Moulson. I don't mean to suggest that as the entire trade, but they could take Moulson, and in exchange receive a pick and the rights to Kulikov. Insert any team and any bad contract/pending free agent combo you'd like. Vegas gets their pick and also an extended window to talk with that player. BUF wouldn't need to trade Kulikov's rights to Vegas. Vegas can negotiate with him right at this very moment and sign him if they agree on terms. He would become BUFs pick. If that happens, or whoever they decide to pick, there is always the option of trading them a Moulson or Bogosian, so I'm not going to be disappointed if neither one of them is the expansion "pick". Veteran leadership from Moulson? Like when he showed up out of shape and had his worst year after signing a big contract? precisely Quote
shrader Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 BUF wouldn't need to trade Kulikov's rights to Vegas. Vegas can negotiate with him right at this very moment and sign him if they agree on terms. He would become BUFs pick. If that happens, or whoever they decide to pick, there is always the option of trading them a Moulson or Bogosian, so I'm not going to be disappointed if neither one of them is the expansion "pick". No, the idea was that you give them the negotiation rights after the expansion draft has occurred in return for them taking a Moulson or Bogosian. A pick would probably be thrown in the deal as well. And I don't mean to say it's a Buffalo specific plan. They could work something like this out with anyone. I just use the Buffalo names as an example since I'm most familiar with them. It's the money requirements from the draft that complicate things. That may convince them to draft the bad contract guy as opposed to signing the UFA. I'd love to be a fly on that wall in order to see how ridiculously involved this whole process is. And just imagine if there was a second expansion team and it was a true "you go, I go" draft process. Quote
Sabre fan Posted June 19, 2017 Author Report Posted June 19, 2017 The Leafs were so darn lucky to find idiots to take their bad contracts and it left them in a good place. We are dreaming if we think McPhee will be so dumb as to take big clinkers like Matty has (or even Bogo) when there are much better players available with better contracts. JBotto may be seemingly a pretty good GM, but he ain't no magician. Finding anyone to take bad contracts of Moulson, Bogo and/or Gorges will take a miracle I suspect. I think McPhee may look at someone like Ullmark as trade value down the road if nothing else... Quote
LGR4GM Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 The Leafs were so darn lucky to find idiots to take their bad contracts and it left them in a good place. We are dreaming if we think McPhee will be so dumb as to take big clinkers like Matty has (or even Bogo) when there are much better players available with better contracts. JBotto may be seemingly a pretty good GM, but he ain't no magician. Finding anyone to take bad contracts of Moulson, Bogo and/or Gorges will take a miracle I suspect. I think McPhee may look at someone like Ullmark as trade value down the road if nothing else... The argument with Moulson is that it is not a bad contract for Vegas. It is a higher cap hit but less salary. That is what they should do to start. Cap hits with less actual money going out until they get up and running (3-5years). That way they can get the revenue flowing and then add better contracts going forward. Now they really don't have to care about contracts with high cap but low actual pay. Quote
WildCard Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 The Leafs were so darn lucky to find idiots to take their bad contracts and it left them in a good place. We are dreaming if we think McPhee will be so dumb as to take big clinkers like Matty has (or even Bogo) when there are much better players available with better contracts. JBotto may be seemingly a pretty good GM, but he ain't no magician. Finding anyone to take bad contracts of Moulson, Bogo and/or Gorges will take a miracle I suspect. I think McPhee may look at someone like Ullmark as trade value down the road if nothing else... Clarkson, Kessel, and Phaneuf, right? By the way, how freaking dumb is Ottawa for taking that Phaneuf contract? He's got 4 more years left at a cap hit of $7M / year, when he'll be 35. You couldn't pay me to take on that contract. Quote
qwksndmonster Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Clarkson, Kessel, and Phaneuf, right? By the way, how freaking dumb is Ottawa for taking that Phaneuf contract? He's got 4 more years left at a cap hit of $7M / year, when he'll be 35. You couldn't pay me to take on that contract. Well, they made it to the ECF with Phaneuf's leadership *scoff* on the roster. That's basically winning the cup for an internal cap team like the Sens. Quote
WildCard Posted June 19, 2017 Report Posted June 19, 2017 Well, they made it to the ECF with Phaneuf's leadership *scoff* on the roster. That's basically winning the cup for an internal cap team like the Sens. Gotta love the people complaining about giving Karlsson one vote for the Conn Smyth. I'm not saying he should have won it, but he's definitely in my top 3-5 players who could have Quote
shrader Posted June 20, 2017 Report Posted June 20, 2017 (edited) Well, they made it to the ECF with Phaneuf's leadership *scoff* on the roster. That's basically winning the cup for an internal cap team like the Sens. Yeah, one of those bad contracts went to the conference finals and the other has back to back cups. They sure are idiots. I'll concede on Phaneuf, but that's it. Edited June 20, 2017 by shrader Quote
qwksndmonster Posted June 20, 2017 Report Posted June 20, 2017 Yeah, one of those bad contracts went to the conference finals and the other has back to back cups. They sure are idiots. I'll concede on Phaneuf, but that's it. Yeah I was talking about Phaneuf, not American Hero Kessel. Quote
Scottysabres Posted June 20, 2017 Report Posted June 20, 2017 Just looked at the Islanders ED situation. Words out they have a deal with Vegas not to touch their forwards. They left De Haan exposed. Dregger put out there they are working a deal to being in a top 6 forward. Could a Kane for De Haan deal be in the works? Also, what is Arizona going to do with their goalie situation now that Smith is gone? Chad Johnson most likely doesn't get re-signed and they are young LW heavy with Crouse, Perlini, Dvorak, Domi, Martinook and Pulkkinen. Any chance a Lehner deal to Arizona lands one of their LW young guns? Quote
shrader Posted June 20, 2017 Report Posted June 20, 2017 Yeah I was talking about Phaneuf, not American Hero Kessel. Strangely enough, I think it's safe to say that each of team teams for all three of those players mentioned are content with where they are right now. There might be some cap games to be played, but they're definitely not the idiots they were made to be earlier in the thread. 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.