Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 minutes ago, steveoath said:

Lost me at: Buffalo would need to be prepared to part ways with potentially rising talent that includes any or all of Dahlin, Reinhart, and Mittelstad

Dahlin is the deal breaker and I doubt Sam is the forward they want. If they are blowing it up, they want to start younger, like Cozens.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted

Any GM who traded a 20-year-old $3.7 million Rasmus Dahlin for a 32-year-old $10.5 million Patrick Kane would automatically become the worst GM in Sabres history.

Pure mom's basement article.

  • Like (+1) 7
Posted
1 hour ago, steveoath said:

Lost me at: Buffalo would need to be prepared to part ways with potentially rising talent that includes any or all of Dahlin, Reinhart, and Mittelstad

I wouldn’t trade Dahlin for Kane straight up, let alone add anything more.

  • Like (+1) 5
Posted (edited)

Click bate, in a long offseason, at it's finest.

Kane is fantastic, but him coming to Buffalo now is just nonsense.

Edited by New Scotland (NS)
the comma is underrated and I don't write English very goodly
  • Like (+1) 4
Posted
32 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Should we pass a board rule against that website?  It seems like pure crapola.  

Not necessarily, I would mandate any article containing a trade proposal of similar absurdity, be labeled as such by the original poster. 

Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I agree, why should Kane care about Buffalo. He hasn't lived here in what? 12 years?

Not advocating for this ( click-batey) trade, playing devil's advocate, I guess...  I was born in Buffalo, haven't lived there in 21 years, aside from a year (part time) after law school... but I still love Buffalo.  Just because you've left a place for a while, doesn't mean you're rid of it, especially if it's where you were raised.

Edited by Shmuffalo
Posted

Guys, I’m not saying I would do it. I’m saying that this is probably what it would take and think the article covered all aspects.

Problem with this talk is when you say trade Dahlin, people say it’s a junk article and not realistic. When you don’t offer up something of great value, people say it’s a junk article and not realistic. 

Posted
3 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Should we pass a board rule against that website?  It seems like pure crapola.  

I think that’s what we’ve been griping about threads like these in general.  It just turns into mouse potato central making ***** up to see who gets riled.  

Posted (edited)

“Some or all of the content shared in this post is disputed and might be misleading about a trade or other NHL process.”

Seems like we should be used to this sort of thing by now.

Edited by SwampD
Posted
8 hours ago, dudacek said:

Any GM who traded a 20-year-old $3.7 million Rasmus Dahlin for a 32-year-old $10.5 million Patrick Kane would automatically become the worst GM in Sabres history.

Pure mom's basement article.

I wouldn't trade Cozens for Kane straight up even if Chicago took back some of Kane's contract. As you stated this is an internet bravado whose fantasy hockey imagination has run amuck. Because of the age differential I wouldn't even trade Reinhart in a straight up deal.   

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Bold prediction. Rasmus Dahlin scores more points per 60min than Kane this year. 

9 hours ago, steveoath said:

Lost me at: Buffalo would need to be prepared to part ways with potentially rising talent that includes any or all of Dahlin, Reinhart, and Mittelstad

If Chicago called and asked for Dahlin I'd laugh them off the phone. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I wouldn't trade Cozens for Kane straight up even if Chicago took back some of Kane's contract. As you stated this is an internet bravado whose fantasy hockey imagination has run amuck. Because of the age differential I wouldn't even trade Reinhart in a straight up deal.   

Feelings about the article aside, this feels like an over correction. You wouldn’t trade Cozens for Kane straight up with Chicago retaining some salary? That’s honestly way more overboard than the article. 

Edited by I-90 W
Typo
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Feelings about the article aside, this feels like an over correction. You wouldn’t trade Cozens for Kane straight up with Chicago retaining some salary? That’s honestly way more overboard than the article. 

I would absolutely not trade Cozens in a straight up deal for Kane. Kane is on the downside of his prime. He still is an elite player but how long is that going to last? Maybe the next few years or so. Cozens is starting his career. It might take him another year or so to become an established player. But after that he could be a prime time player for the next decade or so. No thank you. I'm not interested in giving away our future for a short term boost. That's not how you build a serious team and have sustained success. 

Edited by JohnC
  • Like (+1) 4
Posted (edited)

^ I guarantee TP and KA would take that deal in a heartbeat, as would any GM in the league. Kane is 31 not 40. He scored 84 points in 70 games last season and your not gonna trade him for a prospect with salary retained?

Yeah, okay. 

Edited by I-90 W
  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Bold prediction. Rasmus Dahlin scores more points per 60min than Kane this year. 

If Chicago called and asked for Dahlin I'd laugh them off the phone. 

If your bold prediction comes true, Buffalo is a solid playoff team. If your bold prediction comes true and they get any kind of goaltending, Buffalo is a contender 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Since Chicago views Kane, like Buffalo views Eichel or Dahlin ... Kane  leaving Chicago won’t happen unless it’s an overpayment and if he even wants to waive his NMC.

Every 8-10 months for the past 10+ years this whole Kane to Buffalo topic in different forms rears it’s ugly and unlikely head. Then phases out after 2-3 weeks. Then like clockwork ... another thread pops up eventually. Yawn.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
39 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Since Chicago views Kane, like Buffalo views Eichel or Dahlin ... Kane  leaving Chicago won’t happen unless it’s an overpayment and if he even wants to waive his NMC.

Every 8-10 months for the past 10+ years this whole Kane to Buffalo topic in different forms rears it’s ugly and unlikely head. Then phases out after 2-3 weeks. Then like clockwork ... another thread pops up eventually. Yawn.

You're not wrong, but I think all of this is a compelling argument (aside from giving up Dahlin which is no starter imo)

https://thehockeywriters.com/kane-sabres-trade-makes-sense/

 

Posted
11 hours ago, tom webster said:

If your bold prediction comes true, Buffalo is a solid playoff team. If your bold prediction comes true and they get any kind of goaltending, Buffalo is a contender 

Even if LGR's prediction about Dahlin's scoring projection doesn't come to fruition the hope is that Hall and Skinner can both return to scoring form that will significantly add to the scoring numbers that will give this team more of a margin to work with. And as you wisely point out the most important factor that will make this team a contender is a reasonable level of goaltending. Solid to good goaltending and better PK play (both related to each other) are going to make the difference between having a successful season or another disappointing season.  

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
15 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Since Chicago views Kane, like Buffalo views Eichel or Dahlin ... Kane  leaving Chicago won’t happen unless it’s an overpayment and if he even wants to waive his NMC.

Every 8-10 months for the past 10+ years this whole Kane to Buffalo topic in different forms rears it’s ugly and unlikely head. Then phases out after 2-3 weeks. Then like clockwork ... another thread pops up eventually. Yawn.

If they view him that way, they likely won’t get anything for him in return. Chicago is a couple steps away from a full rebuild. I can’t see how Kane will be part of that and would probably start dropping hints of a trade. Plus, Kane will be a shell of his former self by the time they are rebuilt. Geez, we think we’re wasting away Jack in his prime, look at Chicago. Teams know he doesn’t fit into he Hawk’s long-term plans, so they’ll wait them out.  

Posted
18 hours ago, I-90 W said:

^ I guarantee TP and KA would take that deal in a heartbeat, as would any GM in the league. Kane is 31 not 40. He scored 84 points in 70 games last season and your not gonna trade him for a prospect with salary retained?

Yeah, okay. 

Cozens is 18 or 19 yrs old who is expected to be our 2C in a year or two. It would make no sense to deal this player with expected high end potential for a 31 yr. old player who is likely to have a few more years of top tier production. The Chicago Blackhawks have won two or three Stanley Cups with their core players built with high draft picks such as Kane and Toews. So what you are suggesting is not to follow the standard model for long term success and instead go for the expedient short term gain. That's not a path that I want to follow. As far as I am concerned Cozens is an untouchable. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Cozens is 18 or 19 yrs old who is expected to be our 2C in a year or two. It would make no sense to deal this player with expected high end potential for a 31 yr. old player who is likely to have a few more years of top tier production. The Chicago Blackhawks have won two or three Stanley Cups with their core players built with high draft picks such as Kane and Toews. So what you are suggesting is not to follow the standard model for long term success and instead go for the expedient short term gain. That's not a path that I want to follow. As far as I am concerned Cozens is an untouchable. 

You speak as if our early first round prospect is a slam dunk future top six center. History doesn’t support that calculation, odds wise. Obviously I hope he will be though. 
 

I’m sorry but your assertion that you wouldn’t trade a top prospect (who could still be a bust in theory) for a 31 Patrick Kane WITH partial salary retained is by far more over the top than anything in the article. No offense but you’re over correcting IMO.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...