Duchene to Sabres?

[WildCard]

We can argue whether the deals were smart or successful individually, but there is no argument that the overall strategy of moving out young assets to acquire highly compensated young vets was an abysmal failure and was a key factor in his dismissal. You can't spend to the cap (and over spend in real $ to 80 mill), have the 5th worst record in the league and call TM's strategy a success. Also, while we are not in the cap hell of Det or Chi, we are struggling going forward trying to fix the mess TM created because of the weight of the contracts TM acquired or gave, specifcally Gorges, Bogo, and Moulson.

What is the point of having assets if you never use them?How is this even remotely a bad strategy? Moving young prospects for proven, young talent is bad?

 

Also, that was not why he was dismissed, at all. 

 

Hockey Insider Darren Dreger broke away from his summer on Friday to join The Instigators on [/size]Buffalo’s WGR 550, who wanted to know about the possibility of Duchene being dealt to the Sabres.[/size]

 

“I can’t say Buffalo isn’t an option,” said Dreger. “I think that certainly Matt Duchene is willing to consider any option that is thrown his way.

 

“I know that CAA group pretty well. Pat Brisson, of course, is the lead agent for Matt Duchene in this. This guy is a deal maker. He’s a negotiator. I suspect that he’s not terrorizing Joe Sakic on a daily basis with text messages or phone calls, but he’s been persistent in his belief that the best outcome for both the Colorado Avalanche and for the client, Matt Duchene, is to get a deal done.

 

“Nobody wants to go through the awkwardness and potential ugliness of training camp opening and Matt Duchene perhaps not being there. I’m not suggesting that that is going to be the case, but sooner than later either Duchene or Pat Brisson or somebody from that side is going to step up and say, ‘Alright. Enough is enough. We’ve been really patient in this. We know that you expect and want a great return for Matt Duchene because he’s still a very, very good player in the National Hockey League. But it’s not going to be a good scene for anyone if he’s forced back into that dressing room.’

 

“Things are real strange around that Avalanche team and they have been for quite some time now. Joe Sakic is at some events, he’s not at other events in terms of following the young and developing players. He’s got an interesting management structure there.

 

“I was told the other day that Adam Foote has left the organization. Adam Foote was a player development guy, but highly respected. He was a guy that the management types of the Colorado Avalanche would lean on from time to time. Now, he’s got some focus elsewhere with his son Cal drafted high by the Tampa Bay Lightning. His younger son, Nolan, he’s going to be a high pick. Both are playing for the Kelowna Rockets this year. So there might be a level of distraction.

 

“But with a first-round pick being a defenseman and a high second-round pick being a defenseman, how do you allow Adam Foote to walk away from that organization.

 

“So there’s a lot of things that need to be corrected and perhaps straightened out in Colorado.”

 

The Avalanche drafted defensemen Cale Makar (fourth overall) and Conor Timmins (32^nd overall) in June.

https://www.fanragsports.com/nhl/dreger-things-real-strange-around-avalanche-team/

Edited August 11, 2017 by WildCard

[GASabresIUFAN]

Wild, the difference is you build with your prospects and then once you have your core, you add to where you have holes. TM and Regier before him weren't patient enough to let the core develop. Instead, they either tossed the kids into the NHL, like Grigorenko, or sent them packing.

 

From 2010 to 2016 we have made 59 draft picks and have only 5 current players on the roster. McCabe (2nd rd), Girgensons (1st), Eichel, Reinhart and Ristolainen. That is simply terrible player development. Only McCabe developed once drafted. Girgensons is now a JAG and the big 3 were and are sure fire stars.

 

You can argue that the trades needed to be made because of picks were developing. OK, Who's fault is that?

 

The bottomline for me is that Regier and TM, botched this rebuild from day one and only now do we have a GM committed to conducting this rebuild properly.

Edited August 11, 2017 by GASabresFan

[WildCard]

Wild, the difference is you build with your prospects and then once you have your core, you add to where you have holes. TM and Regier before him weren't patient enough to let the core develop. Instead, they either tossed the kids into the NHL, like Grigorenko, or sent them packing.

 

From 2010 to 2016 we have made 59 draft picks and have only 5 current players on the roster. McCabe (2nd rd), Girgensons (1st), Eichel, Reinhart and Ristolainen. That is simply terrible player development. Only McCabe developed once drafted. Girgensons is now a JAG and the big 3 were and are sure fire stars.

 

You can argue that the trades needed to be made because of picks were developing. OK, Who's fault is that?

 

The bottomline for me is that Regier and TM, botched this rebuild from day one and only now do we have a GM committed to conducting this rebuild properly.

But that's exactly what he did. We had Eichel, Reinhart, and Risto. To add to his core, he went out and traded garbage prospects and picks that never even see the NHL for RoR and what he believed to be a starting NHL goalie.

 

I really don't understand how you can compare Regier and Murray. Or how you can lump their rebuild efforts together and find any sort of commonality outside of tanking.

[LGR4GM]

Do you think we would be able to resign him and Kane if we no longer had Bogo?

No

[dudacek]

This is simply not true. TM traded away 6 prospects drafted in the 1st 3 rounds including 3 former 1st rd picks and only replaced them with 2 prospects in former 2nd rd pick Carrier and 4th rd pick Fasching. He was also a net -3 top 3 rd draft picks, including 1 1st, 1 2nd and 1 3rd. That's a net loss of 7 prospects from our organization or potentially 1/3 of a roster.

 

 

OK GA, you made me do this again:

 

Murray acquired:

* a 1st, 2nd and Carrier (Miller deal)

* two 2nds (Moulson deal)

* Fasching

* 3rd (Enroth)

* Kasdorf

* 2nd (Stewart)

* 3rd (Neuvirth)

* 3rd (Weber)

* 3rd (McGinn)

 

Murray traded away

* a 3rd (Halak deal)

* two 2nds (Fasching)

* 2nd (Gorges)

* 1st, Armia, Lemieux (Kane)

* 1st (Lehner)

* Zadorov, Compher, Girgorenko, 2nd (ROR)

* 3rd (Vesey)

* 3rd (Pysyk)

* 3rd (Bylsma)

 

The net result: He's -1 in first rounders and -2 in prospects (-1 if you choose to include Vesey)

Not sure how that adds up to -7.

 

And its pretty specious  to suggest 1/3 of our roster was thrown away while neglecting to mention what was acquired for those futures.

[pi2000]

OK GA, you made me do this again:

 

Murray acquired:

* a 1st, 2nd and Carrier (Miller deal)

* two 2nds (Moulson deal)

* Fasching

* 3rd (Enroth)

* Kasdorf

* 2nd (Stewart)

* 3rd (Neuvirth)

* 3rd (Weber)

* 3rd (McGinn)

 

Murray traded away

* a 3rd (Halak deal)

* two 2nds (Fasching)

* 2nd (Gorges)

* 1st, Armia, Lemieux (Kane)

* 1st (Lehner)

* Zadorov, Compher, Girgorenko, 2nd (ROR)

* 3rd (Vesey)

* 3rd (Pysyk)

* 3rd (Bylsma)

 

The net result: He's -1 in first rounders and -2 in prospects (-1 if you choose to include Vesey)

Not sure how that adds up to -7.

 

And its pretty specious  to suggest 1/3 of our roster was thrown away while neglecting to mention what was acquired for those futures.

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

I'm not sure how you do math, but .....

 

Prospects traded away: Grigorenko, McNabb, Compher, Armia, Zadorov, and Lemieux - six prospects out (3 1sts, 2 high 2nd and 1 3rd)

Legit Prospects in: Carrier (2nd) and Fasching (4th) - Kasdorf wasn't a legit prospect

 

Net - 4 prospects

[sabresparaavida]

Add Vessey

[dudacek]

I'm not sure how you do math, but .....

 

Prospects traded away: Grigorenko, McNabb, Compher, Armia, Zadorov, and Lemieux - six prospects out (3 1sts, 2 high 2nd and 1 3rd)

Legit Prospects in: Carrier (2nd) and Fasching (4th) - Kasdorf wasn't a legit prospect

 

Net - 4 prospects

 

If you are counting McNabb, you have to count Deslauriers — who, by the way, is right there with McNabb and Girgorenko for most NHL games played among that bunch.

 

So, Carrier, Fasching, Kasdorf and Vesey in, Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher, Armia, Lemieux out -1.

 

But pick and choose which guys are worth counting to bolster your argument.

 

And ignore the draft pick part of my post.

[nfreeman]

#Hammymath strikes again!

[LGR4GM]

I feel like not counting actual players we got is weird too. Sure we traded 3 prospects and a pick but we got ROR.

[Huckleberry]

Counting players only matters if they ever even make it to the NHL.

 

Grigorenko is in the KHL, so he doesn't count any more.

[Rasmus_]

I honestly don't see this as a realistic possibility.  The Sabres need to jettison money before this could happen in Moulson or Bogosian.  Otherwise you're looking at a near 26-27 year old entering his UFA seasons shortly who may or may not walk.  As well as the fact you're trading youth when we need to supplement that in instead of sending it out.  I don't see this as making sense, unless we were to move Kane for value.

[sweetlou]

Revisiting this topic since Duchene is still in Colorado.  How about a three way team trade.

 

Buffalo sends Kane to Vancouver.

Buffalo sends Baptiste, Moulson and Falk to Colorado.

 

Vancouver sends Colorado Tanev and 2nd rd pick.

 

Colorado sends Buffalo Duchene and Comeau.

 

 

 

So from Buffalo's standpoint you trade Kane, Baptiste, Moulson, and Falk for Duchene and Comeau.

From Colorado's standpoint you trade Duchene and Comeau for Baptiste, Moulson, Falk, Tanev, and a 2nd rd pick.

From Vancouver's standpoint you trade Tanev and 2nd rd pick for Kane.

[WildCard]

Dreger on Duchene

 

https://www.fanragsports.com/avalanche/dreger-duchene-trade-talks-shifting-front-burner-mode/

[Pokey Jones]

lol - like anyone is going to trade anything for Moulson. 

[LGR4GM]

What are we gonna do with a center that isn't as good as our top two centers? And trading defensive depth is bad, we barely have it.

[dudacek]

I've always smirked at posters who say "we don't need ----" when blank is a good player.

But tell me again - given our current strengths and weaknesses and the consraints of the cap - why we need Duchene?

Are people pitching him as Kane's replacement?

[LGR4GM]

We literally don't need Duchene. Reinhart out scored him last year. We can't find a center spot for Sam who's 5 years younger and cost controlled.

[jeffismagic]

We literally don't need Duchene. Reinhart out scored him last year. We can't find a center spot for Sam who's 5 years younger and cost controlled.

 

This. 

[Huckleberry]

I've always smirked at posters who say "we don't need ----" when blank is a good player.

But tell me again - given our current strengths and weaknesses and the consraints of the cap - why we need Duchene?

Are people pitching him as Kane's replacement?

 

This only makes sense to me if Kane is going the other way, and then I still don't think we need to add much for the extra year of Duchene.

[sweetlou]

I am really looking at this as a replacement for Kane. I think he will head out west to either LasVegas, Vancouver, Anaheim or LA as an UFA after this year.  It only make sense for Buffalo to trade him now while his value is good.

 

If he has an awesome year 30-40 goals he is going to want 7-8 million a year in which Buffalo will not be able to afford.  If he has a bad year and only scores 20 goals he would still want 6 million.  If he is not scoring his trade value goes down from where it is now.  

[LGR4GM]

And how much will Duchenne cost in 2 years?

[WildCard]

I am really looking at this as a replacement for Kane. I think he will head out west to either LasVegas, Vancouver, Anaheim or LA as an UFA after this year.  It only make sense for Buffalo to trade him now while his value is good.

 

If he has an awesome year 30-40 goals he is going to want 7-8 million a year in which Buffalo will not be able to afford.  If he has a bad year and only scores 20 goals he would still want 6 million.  If he is not scoring his trade value goes down from where it is now.  

But why would we trade for Kane's replacement, as a guy for 2 years, when

 

A) Kane is already here for half that time

 

B) In 2 years Nylander or Middelstadt will be here 

[erickompositör72]

The only logic I see is Kane-hating. A fast, goal-scoring power-forward left wing is not easy to come by. So we get rid of him for a center, when we don't have any problems with depth at that position?