tom webster Posted January 9, 2021 Report Posted January 9, 2021 Corey Crawford retirement bad news for Sabres.
Shootica Posted January 9, 2021 Report Posted January 9, 2021 4 minutes ago, tom webster said: Corey Crawford retirement bad news for Sabres. How so?
Taro T Posted January 9, 2021 Report Posted January 9, 2021 18 minutes ago, Shootica said: How so? Probably because that is even 1 less adequate/good goalie in the league, thus presumably making it a bit more difficult to obtain a good one.
Shootica Posted January 9, 2021 Report Posted January 9, 2021 13 minutes ago, Taro T said: Probably because that is even 1 less adequate/good goalie in the league, thus presumably making it a bit more difficult to obtain a good one. Eh, I don't think it hurts us. Takes a good goalie out of our division, and the Devils aren't in a win now situation to really be active in the goalie market. They'd sign a cheap vet before paying out for a goalie. And I'm pretty confident we don't make a move for a goalie anyway. 1
Thorner Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Shootica said: Eh, I don't think it hurts us. Takes a good goalie out of our division, and the Devils aren't in a win now situation to really be active in the goalie market. They'd sign a cheap vet before paying out for a goalie. And I'm pretty confident we don't make a move for a goalie anyway. Ya. The season is starting, we aren't adding anyone. Edited January 10, 2021 by Thorny
Derrico Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 I can’t believe we didn’t upgrade our goaltending. In a condensed season backups will be playing a ton. This decision could easily cost us into missing the playoffs. We tried it. It didn’t work. Move on. 2
Thorner Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 11 minutes ago, Derrico said: I can’t believe we didn’t upgrade our goaltending. In a condensed season backups will be playing a ton. This decision could easily cost us into missing the playoffs. We tried it. It didn’t work. Move on. The better the forwards look the greater the missed opportunity appears to me. 1
triumph_communes Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 I don’t know how to upgrade our goaltending without losing a needed asset. Nobody wants our bad contracts and otherwise our players are too good to lose or not good enough to bother. And trading away a 2nd round pick for a rental goalie is hard to swallow when the rest of the team is still untested. but not upgrading our backup does appear to be the downfall we are going to have
SABRES 0311 Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 2 hours ago, triumph_communes said: I don’t know how to upgrade our goaltending without losing a needed asset. Nobody wants our bad contracts and otherwise our players are too good to lose or not good enough to bother. And trading away a 2nd round pick for a rental goalie is hard to swallow when the rest of the team is still untested. but not upgrading our backup does appear to be the downfall we are going to have Might have to wait until next offseason. Maybe some younger guys develop in a way some veterans become expendable.
Thorner Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 13 hours ago, triumph_communes said: I don’t know how to upgrade our goaltending 2C without losing a needed asset. Nobody wants our bad contracts and otherwise our players are too good to lose or not good enough to bother. And trading away a 2nd round pick for a rental goalie C is hard to swallow when the rest of the team is still untested. but not upgrading our backup 2C does appear to be the downfall we are going to have 10 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said: Might have to wait until next offseason. Maybe some younger guys develop in a way some veterans become expendable. Could take these posts right out of the Botterill days with a slight adjustment. If they think they need a goalie, they are on the hook for not getting a goalie. 3
Taro T Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 35 minutes ago, Thorny said: Could take these posts right out of the Botterill days with a slight adjustment. If they think they need a goalie, they are on the hook for not getting a goalie. Totally agree on the bolded. 1
tom webster Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 20 minutes ago, Taro T said: Totally agree on the bolded. While I agree to an extent, the question becomes do you want a JBOT type deal where you get a goalie at any cost or do you want a deal where you decide how much you want to pay and refuse to overpay? The other team has to agree to the deal.
Thorner Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, tom webster said: While I agree to an extent, the question becomes do you want a JBOT type deal where you get a goalie at any cost or do you want a deal where you decide how much you want to pay and refuse to overpay? The other team has to agree to the deal. What Botterill trades did he approach in this way? The good thing with these questions is the proof will always be in the pudding - if the goaltending fails us, their evaluation was off. I'm sure they wouldn't say they were happy with their decision to avoid making a deal if the season fails w/the GT being a culprit. They won't be sitting there saying, well, the GT cost us a spot, but I'm still glad we didn't give up that extra prospect/pick. The balk at making the move will be revealed to be a good decision, or a poor one. Edited January 10, 2021 by Thorny
tom webster Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 4 minutes ago, Thorny said: What Botterill trades did he approach in this way? The good thing with these questions is the proof will always be in the pudding - if the goaltending fails us, their evaluation was off. I'm sure they wouldn't say they were happy with their decision to avoid making a deal if the season fails. The ROR trade was a deal he backed down and the Skinner contract is another example. He had a price and he let Skinner’s agent convince him he was wrong. 1
Thorner Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 1 minute ago, tom webster said: The ROR trade was a deal he backed down and the Skinner contract is another example. He had a price and he let Skinner’s agent convince him he was wrong. Skinner contract counts if we are counting signings but to me that's a bit of apples to oranges. The ROR trade seems to be a totally different situation. It wasn't a case of Botterill paying whatever it took to bring in someone he wanted, it was Botterill making absolutely sure he moved at player at the request of the owner (that's what we were going with here, right?)
Derrico Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 28 minutes ago, tom webster said: While I agree to an extent, the question becomes do you want a JBOT type deal where you get a goalie at any cost or do you want a deal where you decide how much you want to pay and refuse to overpay? The other team has to agree to the deal. The alternative is wasting the one year you have with Hall, Dahlin still on his ELC and yet another prime Eichel year. 2
Taro T Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 35 minutes ago, tom webster said: While I agree to an extent, the question becomes do you want a JBOT type deal where you get a goalie at any cost or do you want a deal where you decide how much you want to pay and refuse to overpay? The other team has to agree to the deal. True, the other team has to agree to the deal. But, if not being able to make the deal costs them a playoff spot, Adams still owns it; just like if they make the playoffs, he owns it even though his best piece Eichel predates him. It won't be a fireable offense, but it will make the next off-season more difficult. And am still hopeful he finds a way to make a move because this team has the look to be good (handwringing over the quality of the 4th line not withstanding. 😉 isn't it nice to have the Q's be the 4th line & backup goalie rather than every line BUT the 4th & the starter. (And w/ that said, the backup goalie could cost them a playoff spot; but at least that's a solvable problem.)) Edited January 10, 2021 by Taro T
Thorner Posted January 10, 2021 Report Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Taro T said: True, the other team has to agree to the deal. But, if not being able to make the deal costs them a playoff spot, Adams still owns it; just like if they make the playoffs, he owns it even though his best piece Eichel predates him. It won't be a fireable offense, but it will make the next off-season more difficult. And am still hopeful he finds a way to make a move because this team has the look to be good (handwringing over the quality of the 4th line not withstanding. 😉 isn't it nice to have the Q's be the 4th line & backup goalie rather than every line BUT the 4th & the starter. (And w/ that said, the backup goalie could cost them a playoff spot; but at least that's a solvable problem.)) I still see 2 sure-fire lines and 2 question marks. There is undoubtable on-paper upgrade, but that is found in trading a certainly-strong bottom 6 line for a certainly strong TOP 6 line. The forwards are improved. But it's always been about the curve - *how much* we need to improve, and that's a principle in place right on down to the goalies. --- For the record I'm not just saying we need to improve simply because we've gone 9 years w/o playoffs and are facing a solid deficit in catching those playoff teams. Though arguably that would be enough. Its all shifting and grey but, I think it's more likely than not that Jack asks out after 2 more seasons (and his NTC kicks in) if we haven't turned this around. There's been some smoke and I think 2 more down years makes fire. If we don't win this year *with* Hall, winning next year *without* him seems quite a task. And if we don't, then we are in trade territory with Jack IMO. How do we keep Hall here? Have to win this year. For some time I've been coming to the realization that, imo, Eichel and Hall likely represent a package deal at this time: it's gonna be both or none. Edited January 10, 2021 by Thorny
Brawndo Posted January 15, 2021 Author Report Posted January 15, 2021 Adams doing His Due Diligence 1
Shootica Posted January 15, 2021 Report Posted January 15, 2021 1 minute ago, Brawndo said: Adams doing His Due Diligence Like he should. I'd imagine that a trade for either one of these guys would involve Reinhart and something extra. Only way I think the cap space works out.
aristocrat Posted January 15, 2021 Report Posted January 15, 2021 5 minutes ago, Brawndo said: Adams doing His Due Diligence barkov would be cozens, and a first to start the convo i'd imagine. then we'd have to give up more 1
dudacek Posted January 15, 2021 Report Posted January 15, 2021 Maybe the convo should start with Eichel for Barkov and Spencer Knight? Or Dubois/Elvis/plus?
Scottysabres Posted January 15, 2021 Report Posted January 15, 2021 11 minutes ago, Shootica said: Like he should. I'd imagine that a trade for either one of these guys would involve Reinhart and something extra. Only way I think the cap space works out. Cozens and more. For either I'd seriously consider doing it. And soon.
nfreeman Posted January 15, 2021 Report Posted January 15, 2021 I would love Barkov or PLD, but 'm not trading Cozens or Eichel for either of those guys. Cozens is going to be the fiery Jim Kelly who finally, by force of will, lifts this franchise out of its post-idiotic-tank loserdom. As I've said before, I would trade Reino plus sweeteners for PLD in a heartbeat. 4
thewookie1 Posted January 15, 2021 Report Posted January 15, 2021 21 minutes ago, dudacek said: Maybe the convo should start with Eichel for Barkov and Spencer Knight? Or Dubois/Elvis/plus? I wouldn't do that by any stretch. I could certainly see something around Reinhart for PLD however. They have put up similar numbers and Reinhart is only slightly older. Barkov, on the other hand, I am sure they would want Cozens primarily with multiple other pieces involved. Columbus is being pressured by the player, while Florida is more likely pressured from salary. That being said, Florida is trying to dump Yandle as well so who knows. 1
Recommended Posts