Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

So Samson would basically have a veto over the trade, right? That complicates things. Limits our options for sure 

Oh ha

That’s kind of assuming a lot of things. Sam could just say no and wait until he is a free agent. Sure, perhaps it all lines up, and he wants to go to a certain place, and they want him now. Could happen. 

 

What ?  He has zero control over the trade 

Posted
2 hours ago, Curt said:

He is great obviously, but I worry a little that he might not stick at C.  Nit picking because even at W he could be a dynamic guy who controls plays.  Just would prefer a more true 2-way guy ideally.

 

I cant see him ever being a winger he is an elite playmaker but cant score . I see him  Dishing out about 50a+ and 15g a year 

Posted
24 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

 

What ?  He has zero control over the trade 

In the sense that the team receiving him is only guaranteed one year if they get him. 
 

Does that make sense? 
 

Like with the Skinner trade. We gave up very little for a good player. Same situation, if I understand the situation correctly. 

Posted
35 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

 

I cant see him ever being a winger he is an elite playmaker but cant score . I see him  Dishing out about 50a+ and 15g a year 

Why do you say that he can’t score?

12 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

In the sense that the team receiving him is only guaranteed one year if they get him. 
 

Does that make sense? 
 

Like with the Skinner trade. We gave up very little for a good player. Same situation, if I understand the situation correctly. 

Skinner had a NMC.  That’s why he was able to choose exactly where he would go, just like Hall with his NMC.  Reinhart doesn’t have a NMC.

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Curt said:

Why do you say that he can’t score?

Skinner had a NMC.  That’s why he was able to choose exactly where he would go, just like Hall with his NMC.  Reinhart doesn’t have a NMC.

He has a good Shot but hes like thornton ,sedin, backstrom,getzlaf  pass first  And that's not a bad thing hes one hell of a playmaker but needs finishers 

23 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

In the sense that the team receiving him is only guaranteed one year if they get him. 
 

Does that make sense? 
 

Like with the Skinner trade. We gave up very little for a good player. Same situation, if I understand the situation correctly. 

Hes a RFA totally different  and doesn't  have a NMC

Edited by Buffalonill
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

ROR was a better player when we traded him and proceeded to immediately win a cup and be the best player on his team. 

The question was who got a better return for O’Reilly?

And, for the record, O’Reilly was coming off 61 and 55 point seasons when we traded him, 55 and 64 when Colorado did. He was the same player.

Edited by dudacek
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
7 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Remember in Buffalo he is your default #2 center in this scenario because Eichel and Reinhart have been traded. If you keep 1 or both, there's no reason to get Danault. With his role in Montreal changing, he could take a shorter deal somewhere else to try and prove he is worth bigger money (maybe h does 2 years 5.5 to prove he's got it)

Anyways just spit ballin. 

Kahun turned down more money from Buffalo and got screwed. He thought he was worth more as well. Sometimes players get to UFA and realize they aren't worth more. That's why smart teams set their limits on players and stick to it. 

I’m sure Kahun is extremely sad having to playing on the top line with McJesus in the playoffs. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

Im happy he went to see how overrated he was 

It’s always fun to watch players not good enough for the last place team in the league be useful players for teams who don’t finish dead last 4 of the last 8 years. 

Posted

Eichel will be a Sabre to start the season.  Wouldn't be surprised if he is moved around Christmas depending on how season starts.  Sabres need to maximize return by showing he is healthy!!

Posted
2 hours ago, sweetlou said:

Eichel will be a Sabre to start the season.  Wouldn't be surprised if he is moved around Christmas depending on how season starts.  Sabres need to maximize return by showing he is healthy!!

The Sabres will minimize the return by doing that. Very few teams can add a $10 million contract in season. The time to make a move like this is in the summer when lots of teams still have uncommitted space.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
10 hours ago, dudacek said:

The Sabres will minimize the return by doing that. Very few teams can add a $10 million contract in season. The time to make a move like this is in the summer when lots of teams still have uncommitted space.

I understand your point, but what team is going to pay out the yin-yang for a currently-injured Eichel.  The question becomes does a mid-season trade hurt his value more than his current injury?  I think it's possible that Jack doesn't get moved at all simply because the Sabres won't take a discounted deal for Eichel driven by either one of those.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, dudacek said:

Ryan O'Reilly was in the exact same position as Samson when he was traded to Buffalo for 2 recent first rounders and 2 high 2nds.

Signed a 7-year extension a week later.

I'm not worried about Samson's contract status affecting his return at all.

Semi-related, is what we got for ROR that much worse than what the Avs did?

That we got him for such a good price makes it that much worse.

Compher has been pretty good though 

Edited by Thorny
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

It isn't. He is an RFA. Any team trading for him has no problem with the fact they can sign him long term. 

Sam Reinhart has no power over where he gets traded to. Where are ppl getting these outlandish ideas that he is untradeable and can veto trades. 

He's an  RFA with arbitration rights. 

Yes. 

I agree the return would probably be okay for the fact he's soon to be an RFA because there'll be enough teams that fit for him, but to the OP's point - the bolded is key: any team trading for him. I'm sure there are at least a couple bidders that won't be there, should there have been a few more years left on his deal, hypothetically. Of course, we wouldn't be trading him in that case. 

I'd argue Sam has a little bit of power here, too, cause if he tells a team he's not going to sign with them, why would they pony up a package?

Edited by Thorny
Posted
18 hours ago, Curt said:

He is great obviously, but I worry a little that he might not stick at C.  Nit picking because even at W he could be a dynamic guy who controls plays.  Just would prefer a more true 2-way guy ideally.

We already have a projected 2-way guy that everyone wants to put at wing 😉

17 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Eh wot?  You think they won't find a centre better than Eakin in an Eichel trade, a Reinhart trade, a Ristolainen trade, in free agency, or anything else?

Fixed that for you

Posted

Looking at raw numbers from the ROR trades

A.  Colorado received Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher and the 31st pick (which they traded for the 39th in 2015, 40th in 2016 and a 6th in 2017).  AJ Greer is the top player from those three picks.  So far they have received the following

746 NHL games, 141 g 136 a and 224 pts.  Only Compher is still with the Avs, but Zadorov gave them the most games at 289 games so far.

B.  Buffalo received ROR, McGinn and then McGinn was traded for a pick which was traded for the failed rights to Vesey.

We received 224 games from ROR.  Totals for ROR and McGinn  267 games, 79g, 124a 203 pts

C. We traded ROR to STL for Berglund, Sobatka, Thompson, a 1st (Johnson) and a 2nd in 2021 (traded for Colin Miller).

Totals so far with Miller 311 games 28g 41a 69 pts but Thompson finally earned a full time gig with the Sabres and Johnson will be in the NHL soon. 

Honestly the Sabres arguably won the first trade as we got the best player and none of Grigorenko, Compher and Zadorov didn't become stars but at least Compher and Thompson were and are good depth pieces.

The Sabres lost the second trade as all we got so far is the cap savings on ROR and when Berglund left.  This could drastically improve if Thompson grows into a middle 6 power forward and Johnson becomes at 2nd line pairing NHL D.

So did we get as much for ROR as Colorado got from us?  Grigorenko, Compher, Zadorov and Greer vs Junk (Sobotka and Berglund to make the cap work), Miller, Johnson and Thompson.  Based on where they prospects/young players were drafted ( 2 mid 1sts and 2 high 2nds vs 2 lower 1sts and a 2nd), Colorado did better but not significantly.   So the question comes down to since Greer and Grigorenko are busts is Compher vs Thompson and Zadorov vs Johnson.  This is pretty even if Johnson becomes a legit NHL D.   That said had Greer and Grigorenko not busted, Colorado would win by a large margin. 

Posted
11 hours ago, dudacek said:

The Sabres will minimize the return by doing that. Very few teams can add a $10 million contract in season. The time to make a move like this is in the summer when lots of teams still have uncommitted space.

And when teams can be over the cap. You don't have to be cap compliant until a certain date and can make an eichel move and then move other things around if needed. For example say LA trades for Eichel and they are still 1mil over the cap, they have a few months to make trades or free up space to be compliant. 

Posted

No matter what happens we’ll “lose” an Eichel trade because the team that trades away the better player always loses the deal but that doesn’t mean we can’t get better by making the trade.  Carolina traded us Skinner for Pu and got better.  Colorado traded ROR to us and got better.  It depends on what else we do and how the kids develop.  
 

We were better last year without Eichel. Trade Eichel for Matt Tkachuk, get goaltending, keep Reinhart and we will be better.

Posted
1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

No matter what happens we’ll “lose” an Eichel trade because the team that trades away the better player always loses the deal but that doesn’t mean we can’t get better by making the trade.  Carolina traded us Skinner for Pu and got better.  Colorado traded ROR to us and got better.  It depends on what else we do and how the kids develop.  
 

We were better last year without Eichel. Trade Eichel for Matt Tkachuk, get goaltending, keep Reinhart and we will be better.

Matt Tkachuk has had sinking numbers the last couple years. 

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Matt Tkachuk has had sinking numbers the last couple years. 

Goals yes (.43 to .24), assists no (approx .5 all 3 years).  Still he was .75 points per game this past season.  Only Reinhart put up .75 pts per game for the Sabres this season.  In fact both players had 40 pts in 54 games this past season. Maybe the trade is to keep Jack and trade Reinhart and pieces for Tkachuk and pieces.

Edited by GASabresIUFAN
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

1) Samson Rienhart 

if he is traded

Sean Monahan will be the Sabres 1C next season, keeping the seat warm for Beniers or Cozens in a year or two

Hard pass on Monahan. 

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

Hes not good 

Too much.  He isn’t the good 1C they hoped he would become, but he is still a player that would help most any team.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...