Non Sabres Deadline Trades/Rumors

[stenbaro]

32 minutes ago, inkman said:

Yeah I'd trade anyone this side of Dahlin, even though I'm not his biggest fan, for Horvat. That includes Jack. Bo may not have the skill Jack does but I like his game profoundly more than our saviour's. 

I agree on the Eichel sentimemt. I have always thought he was too big for his britches. I do not like his effort. He plays hard way too little for my liking. I would hope we would get more than Horvath but ya never know

[Brawndo]

 

[dudacek]

43 minutes ago, Derrico said:

Not sure on that but I could see it being because Sabres thought Caufield would slide to 10 and they could still take him there *ducks*

Or Boldy. Certainly one of them - or Newhook, Krebs or Cozens - will be there.

A 3rd won’t get it done, but a 2nd might...or a player like Virtanen or Tanev?

I’d probably do it.

[Weave]

Yes please on Statsny.  He's what we need on the 2nd line.

2 minutes ago, stenbaro said:

I agree on the Eichel sentimemt. I have always thought he was too big for his britches. I do not like his effort. He plays hard way too little for my liking. I would hope we would get more than Horvath but ya never know

The movement grows....

[Hoss]

39 minutes ago, inkman said:

Yeah I'd trade anyone this side of Dahlin, even though I'm not his biggest fan, for Horvat. That includes Jack. Bo may not have the skill Jack does but I like his game profoundly more than our saviour's. 

Oh. Oh god. This is an all-time bad take.

5 minutes ago, stenbaro said:

I agree on the Eichel sentimemt. I have always thought he was too big for his britches. I do not like his effort. He plays hard way too little for my liking. I would hope we would get more than Horvath but ya never know

Kill me now.

[LGR4GM]

47 minutes ago, inkman said:

Yeah I'd trade anyone this side of Dahlin, even though I'm not his biggest fan, for Horvat. That includes Jack. Bo may not have the skill Jack does but I like his game profoundly more than our saviour's. 

You're not a fan of Dahlin? Why?

 

 

One of these things is better and a full season younger. 

Bo Horvat: 0.26 gpg, 0.59PtPG

Jack Eichel: 0.35gpg, 0.91PtPG

[kas23]

I don’t want another team’s old spare parts again. I’d rather a draft pick or at least pair it up with an obvious piece of junk and send us a decent prospect. If some team’s 27/28/29/30 year-old isn’t good enough for them, then they shouldn’t be good enough for us. And I want quality, not quantity. 

[stenbaro]

18 minutes ago, Hoss said:

Oh. Oh god. This is an all-time bad take.

Kill me now.

No, just buy season ticks like i have for the past umpteen years and watch his effort. Then you can say kill me now like I have walking out of the Arena before the second period ends most nights. For the crap we went through to get him it sure hasnt been worth it.

[IKnowPhysics]

Jack Eichel will be fine.

[Hoss]

6 minutes ago, stenbaro said:

No, just buy season ticks like i have for the past umpteen years and watch his effort. Then you can say kill me now like I have walking out of the Arena before the second period ends most nights. For the crap we went through to get him it sure hasnt been worth it.

Kill me before now. Sometime in the past. Before this point. Before I read these posts.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Tanev, turning 30 in December, on an expiring contract, with his injury history? Why do I want that as a sweetener? Thats like the throw in we take to help them out with numbers or cap not something we want on purpose.

At least Virtanen is only 22 and still could maybe, though probably not, turn into something.

LOL. I remember last year at this time when Canuck fans were of the opinion Tanev would get you Reinhart.

Maybe he is too far past his best-before, but in my opinion, Cozens, Caufield, Newhook, Krebs and Boldy are a virtual pick-em. If I get a useful asset to pick between two of them instead of 5, I’m alright with that.

Edited June 20, 2019 by dudacek

[triumph_communes]

Stastny and Carrier for Sheary 

Sign Vanek 1yr

 

all the 26s

[Thorner]

9 hours ago, dudacek said:

Don’t think much of how Montour upgrades the D?

In the proposed scenario where we keep ROR and Kane, it seems very likely Botterill will have added a similar D-man in lieu of Montour. So I look at it more as ROR and Kane vs Miller and Skinner, in which case the former is still much better. 

More importantly, it could have been ROR and Skinner, with Montour. It's not some sort of zero-sum game where we couldn't have added Skinner anyways after keeping ROR. 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Thorny

[Derrico]

1 hour ago, stenbaro said:

I agree on the Eichel sentimemt. I have always thought he was too big for his britches. I do not like his effort. He plays hard way too little for my liking. I would hope we would get more than Horvath but ya never know

It wouldn’t be Buffalo unless we are trying to run a star out of town.....

[TrueBlueGED]

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

What are you moving from 7 to 10 for? 

I have no problem moving back, but Vancouver is such an unappealing trade partner. Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, or Hughes? Sign me up. But that's obviously not happening and they've got nothing else even remotely interesting. 

[dudacek]

15 minutes ago, Thorny said:

In the proposed scenario where we keep ROR and Kane, it seems very likely Botterill will have added a similar D-man in lieu of Montour. So I look at it more as ROR and Kane vs Miller and Skinner, in which case the former is still much better. 

More importantly, it could have been ROR and Skinner, with Montour. It's not some sort of zero-sum game where we couldn't have added Skinner anyways after keeping ROR. 

I disagree with your first paragraph. Botterill flipped the asset he got for Kane to get Montour. It was a direct correlation.

I do agree that Botterill could have had both O’Reilly and Skinner. He chose one of them and liquid assets instead. We haven’t seen yet how he uses those assets.

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, inkman said:

Yeah I'd trade anyone this side of Dahlin, even though I'm not his biggest fan, for Horvat. That includes Jack. Bo may not have the skill Jack does but I like his game profoundly more than our saviour's. 

Dahlin is the true savior, not Eichel. Though the prophecy originally referred to Jack, his son Dahlin redeems him from the clutches of the Tank Stench and Eichel delivers the final blow for us during some future overtime in the playoffs. 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Thorny

[Curt]

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

What are you moving from 7 to 10 for? 

Hmm, Vancouver.  7 for 10 and Jett Woo?  7 for 10, 40, and 2020 4th?

[Thorner]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I disagree with your first paragraph. Botterill flipped the asset he got for Kane to get Montour. It was a direct correlation.

I do agree that Botterill could have had both O’Reilly and Skinner. He chose one of them and liquid assets instead. We haven’t seen yet how he uses those assets.

He could have had O'Reilly, Skinner, and Montour, actually.  I don't think he chose Skinner over ROR, he just felt he had to move ROR. It's been discussed ad nauseam how inferior those liquid assets acquired are to ROR, no need to do it again here. 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Thorny

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

You're not a fan of Dahlin? Why?

 

 

One of these things is better and a full season younger. 

Bo Horvat: 0.26 gpg, 0.59PtPG

Jack Eichel: 0.35gpg, 0.91PtPG

I was confused by this, too, Maybe he meant Horvat?

[inkman]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

Oh. Oh god. This is an all-time bad take.

I'm full of them. 

[inkman]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

You're not a fan of Dahlin? Why?

 

 

One of these things is better and a full season younger. 

Bo Horvat: 0.26 gpg, 0.59PtPG

Jack Eichel: 0.35gpg, 0.91PtPG

Dahlin appears to be a risk reward type player. He gonna take a whole lotta risks and you might get rewarded, depending on the day. His metrics will be off the charts and he will appear great but he'll do things that bother blue collar Buffalo and they will turn on him. 

See Phil Housley, Richard Smehlik, Henrik Tallinder, Alexei Zhitnik and Rasmus Ristolainen. 

[rakish]

6 hours ago, pi2000 said:

What?

None of Giordano, Burns or Hedman played sheltered minutes.  And to mention Risto in the same sentence is laughable.

Hedman played second line minutes this year, while in previous years he has played first line minutes. Burns played second line minutes. Laughable? thank you, I'm here all week.

6 hours ago, pi2000 said:

That has nothing to do with being sheltered.  SJ is a much better team, they have many many more offensive zone starts vs defensive zone starts.  

Burns and Risto are both top 10 in the league in avg TOI.    SJ is not pulling Burns off the ice when he's up against top lines.

 

Yes they are

[TrueBlueGED]

2 minutes ago, rakish said:

Hedman played second line minutes this year, while in previous years he has played first line minutes. Burns played second line minutes. Laughable? thank you, I'm here all week.

There's a pretty significant difference between not playing the most minutes and playing sheltered minutes. Neither Hedman nor Burns played sheltered minutes. And the years they led their teams in ice time and strength of competition? They were still fantastic. 

[rakish]

1 minute ago, TrueBlueGED said:

There's a pretty significant difference between not playing the most minutes and playing sheltered minutes. Neither Hedman nor Burns played sheltered minutes. And the years they led their teams in ice time and strength of competition? They were still fantastic. 

Who's talking about Time on Ice? you're measuring your first pair by how much time on ice? The only reasonable stat is the power play time of your opponents, using that metric, Hedman played second pair, Burns played second pair. As Wildcard pointed out above, zone starts are an OK metric, Burns got good zone starts.