Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Brawndo changed the title to Sabres Trade for Johnny Boychuk’s Contract
Posted (edited)

That really shores up the right side of the defense, veteran leadership, grit...  oh...  oh right. Still, cap compliance is important. (Edit: Execute Order Seventy!)

What does everyone think the eventual future consideration becomes?

Edited by DarthEbriate
Posted

 

9 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

That really shores up the right side of the defense, veteran leadership, grit...  oh...  oh right. Still, cap compliance is important.

What does everyone think the eventual future consideration becomes?

Nothing or a 7th round pick in 2025

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

I still cannot understand how anyone can say that we are not tanking.

I mean, why spend money on actual players when you can pay someone who has already retired.

Edited by SwampD
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, sabrefanday1 said:

would have much preferred to get a veteran center with that money

sarcasm?

9 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I still cannot understand how anyone can say that we are not tanking.

I mean, why spend money on actual players when you can pay someone wha already retired.

I keep explaining what tanking is and how it doesn't fit the definition of what the Sabres are doing but you keep ignoring that. 

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
9 minutes ago, sabrefanday1 said:

no...we could really use a vet center right now unless we are tanking 

I guess then I am confused why you said "with that money". What money are you talking about and how does it preclude us from getting a center?

Posted
2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Nothing or a 7th round pick in 2025

I'm leaning nothing as well. But I hope Lou is all... "You know, I like Sheevyn. I'm gonna give them that low 6th that JBott traded their high 6th for. I believe in karmic balance."

A 6th in 2023 is my pipe dream.

Posted
Just now, LGR4GM said:

sarcasm?

I keep explaining what tanking is and how it doesn't fit the definition of what the Sabres are doing but you keep ignoring that. 

Just because you believe it doesn't mean it's true.

And it's exactly what they did the last tank.

The only difference is that they never use the word "Tank."

Hmm, maybe that's all it takes for it not to be a tank?

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

I still cannot understand how anyone can say that we are not tanking.

I mean, why spend money on actual players when you can pay someone wha already retired.

Future considerations. Lou Lamiorello now owes Donny "the Don" Meatballs a favor. And Meatballs always collects.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, sabrefanday1 said:

Now we have a retired d-man we are paying til the end of year and he makes good money...they clearly do not want to spend much right now so instead iof spending on Boychuk to get to the cap floor at least spend it on a center

Now flip Boychuk to Arizona. They'll give up a 2nd to show us the true meaning of the Concept of Tank. 🍺😇

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, DarthEbriate said:

Now flip Boychuk to Arizona. They'll give up a 2nd to show us the true meaning of the Concept of Tank. 🍺😇

if we ever needed any proof that Arizona is without doubt tanking so they can draft that stud 1st then add Mathews in a few years we got the proof when they signed Carter Hutton!

Posted
3 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

Now flip Boychuk to Arizona. They'll give up a 2nd to show us the true meaning of the Concept of Tank🍺😇

Love it.

Posted
13 minutes ago, sabrefanday1 said:

Now we have a retired d-man we are paying til the end of year and he makes good money...they clearly do not want to spend much right now so instead iof spending on Boychuk to get to the cap floor at least spend it on a center

I am so confused the Sabres can spend money on center at any time they want. They have tons of room for it and boychuk and his 1.25mil in actual money is not relevant to that. 

15 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Just because you believe it doesn't mean it's true.

And it's exactly what they did the last tank.

The only difference is that they never use the word "Tank."

Hmm, maybe that's all it takes for it not to be a tank?

So if this tank works then I get to say that tanks work. Sweet. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Just because you believe it doesn't mean it's true.

And it's exactly what they did the last tank.

The only difference is that they never use the word "Tank."

Hmm, maybe that's all it takes for it not to be a tank?

Laugh all you want but you want to play semantics I am game. 

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...