Patrick Kane

[Flashsabre]

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

WHY?  Where does this get the team next year?  Not into the playoffs, not with this goaltending.  RW is not the issue right now and will not be the issue in two years.  Any sacrifice of assets must be to improve the team in the back end and/or long-term, not to provide us with a misguided panacea for Sabre fandom this coming October.  

I missed the memo that teams can only make one move per offseason. Better players on the team make it more attractive to potential free agents, goalies included.

[nfreeman]

7 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

I missed the memo that teams can only make one move per offseason. Better players on the team make it more attractive to potential free agents, goalies included.

Exactly.  There is no reason a trade for Kane would preclude bringing in a real goalie.  

[tom webster]

36 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Exactly.  There is no reason a trade for Kane would preclude bringing in a real goalie.  

In fact, Kane coming would open the door to other moves. 

[Eleven]

7 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

I missed the memo that teams can only make one move per offseason. Better players on the team make it more attractive to potential free agents, goalies included.

 

40 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Exactly.  There is no reason a trade for Kane would preclude bringing in a real goalie.  

Well, if you spend assets trading for Kane, you no longer have those assets to trade for a goalie, right? Just wait a year and get him for nothing.

Edited June 21, 2022 by Eleven

[PromoTheRobot]

9 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

If Chicago wants the cap space, and Kane has the NMC and wants to come here, then you don’t have to give up much. And screw waiting another year, secure his services now for cheap. He brings points, and can help show the rookies what it takes to succeed.

Give them VO and/or Johnson, and a 3rd rounder. No use for VO if Kane will be here. 

I know goalie is what we need most, and this helps address it by making Buffalo a more attractive option. 

We have the cap room now and it's not like it rolls over like the NFL. Why wouldn't you take on the last year of a fat deal?

[LabattBlue]

Okay, I have changed my viewpoint on this ever so slightly.  The Blackhawks can have a 2nd round pick, and Portillo or Johnson…and this is assuming the Sabres FO knows that Kane will sign a reasonable extension after the trade. 
 

Anything more than that…tell them to go pound salt, and sign Kane as a UFA next summer

[Brawndo]

One important thing to remember about Ryan Johnson, His Value right now is the equivalent of the 2024 62nd Overall Pick, the Sabres Compensation if He doesn’t sign 

[Eleven]

10 hours ago, SwampD said:

Wait,… so we’re not trying to win next season yet, either!?

JFC!

When are we ever going to try and actually win and not care more about the next season after next season?

My point is that Kane doesn't help the team have an appreciably better record next season, but surely you knew that.

[That Aud Smell]

this is a fun thread.

and i appreciate a reminder on who around here has insider connections.

the one thing that i cannot get over is the wide range of values that people are suggesting for a trade to get the player for a year. my view is with those who see this as a deal that would (should) not cost a great deal - certainly not a top prospect (who suggested that the sabres offer quinn?! gah!!) and most likely not a top-12 1st rounder (but #16? maybe?).

[dudacek]

18 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

this is a fun thread.

and i appreciate a reminder on who around here has insider connections.

the one thing that i cannot get over is the wide range of values that people are suggesting for a trade to get the player for a year. my view is with those who see this as a deal that would (should) not cost a great deal - certainly not a top prospect (who suggested that the sabres offer quinn?! gah!!) and most likely not a top-12 1st rounder (but #16? maybe?).

Best recent comparable would be Claude Giroux, who was also a pending UFA with a big ticket, and a full no-move clause.

He got a (presumably late) 1st and a 23-year-old former 10th overall pick yet to fully make the NHL

#16 is better than either of those assets. #28 and Ryan Johnson seems very much in the ballpark. I stand by my Olofsson and Portillo offer as reasonable under the circumstances.

The key would be Kane wanting to be here and having a full-no trade. He can pretty much dictate his destination, giving Adams tremendous control over the price. The only lever the Hawks have is timing and Adams can afford to wait.

After fiascos like Hasek and Hall, it would be nice to be on the other side of one of those situations.

This situation and whether it proceeds is entirely in Patrick Kane's hands.

Edited June 21, 2022 by dudacek

[MattPie]

14 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Best recent comparable would be Claude Giroux, who was also a pending UFA with a big ticket, and a full no-move clause.

He got a (presumably late) 1st and a 23-year-old former 10th overall pick yet to fully make the NHL

#16 is better than either of those assets. #28 and Ryan Johnson seems very much in the ballpark. I stand by my Olofsson and Portillo offer as reasonable under the circumstances.

SNIP

#28 and Ryan Johnson is getting close to something I'd consider, but I'm still TeamUFA. I'd keep Olofsson before a 50/50 #28 to ever make the NHL. Is there some rumblings that we want to be rid of Olofsson or vice versa? He seems to come up in trades a lot, but seemed like he was playing reasonably well.

[WhenWillItEnd66]

14 hours ago, SwampD said:

ISeeing the term “mortgage” makes me want to kick a puppy. PK will be a better player for the next three years than any piece we would be sending in their direction to make it happen.

And Tom is right-

 

Mortgage meaning giving up 3/4 major pieces for a star on his way down the mountain, not climbing up. And, prove it that he is going to be better then the pieces we give up for the next 3 years..... we saw what happened with Hall. (LOL J/K))😁

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, MattPie said:

#28 and Ryan Johnson is getting close to something I'd consider, but I'm still TeamUFA. I'd keep Olofsson before a 50/50 #28 to ever make the NHL. Is there some rumblings that we want to be rid of Olofsson or vice versa? He seems to come up in trades a lot, but seemed like he was playing reasonably well.

It's contract related. He's an RFA and a lot of analysts say the Sabres are reluctant to make a top 6 commitment to him with Skinner already on the books and Quinn, Peterka, Rosen and others coming behind him.

I'm not entirely in that camp, but I do see how he has value as a trade chip and how his contract demands and the pipeline could influence the Sabres thinking.

[dudacek]

When you think about from the Hawks perspective, moving pending UFAs Kane and or Toews right now does make some sense.

The team is a disaster on and off the ice and is clearly planning to tank next year.

I'm not sure those two are going to embrace the ends of their careers as being the guys who keep the ship steady as the team goes through that. And on the ice their presence still has the power to get in the way of that.

Why not clear the decks now, as opposed to waiting until the deadline?

[nfreeman]

2 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

Okay, I have changed my viewpoint on this ever so slightly.  The Blackhawks can have a 2nd round pick, and Portillo or Johnson…and this is assuming the Sabres FO knows that Kane will sign a reasonable extension after the trade. 
 

Anything more than that…tell them to go pound salt, and sign Kane as a UFA next summer

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

this is a fun thread.

and i appreciate a reminder on who around here has insider connections.

the one thing that i cannot get over is the wide range of values that people are suggesting for a trade to get the player for a year. my view is with those who see this as a deal that would (should) not cost a great deal - certainly not a top prospect (who suggested that the sabres offer quinn?! gah!!) and most likely not a top-12 1st rounder (but #16? maybe?).

I'm willing to pay some combination of #28, #41, Johnson and Portillo, but only if a reasonable extension is part of the deal.

 

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Best recent comparable would be Claude Giroux, who was also a pending UFA with a big ticket, and a full no-move clause.

He got a (presumably late) 1st and a 23-year-old former 10th overall pick yet to fully make the NHL

#16 is better than either of those assets. #28 and Ryan Johnson seems very much in the ballpark. I stand by my Olofsson and Portillo offer as reasonable under the circumstances.

The key would be Kane wanting to be here and having a full-no trade. He can pretty much dictate his destination, giving Adams tremendous control over the price. The only lever the Hawks have is timing and Adams can afford to wait.

After fiascos like Hasek and Hall, it would be nice to be on the other side of one of those situations.

This situation and whether it proceeds is entirely in Patrick Kane's hands.

I'm not trading VO in this deal.  He's a good player, he's just entering his prime, the Sabres still control his rights and the NHL is becoming more of a scoring league.  And, most importantly, if Kane really is going to wield his leverage and force his way to Buffalo (!), we don't need to give up VO in the deal. 

 

[dudacek]

21 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I'm willing to pay some combination of #28, #41, Johnson and Portillo, but only if a reasonable extension is part of the deal.

 

I'm not trading VO in this deal.  He's a good player, he's just entering his prime, the Sabres still control his rights and the NHL is becoming more of a scoring league.  And, most importantly, if Kane really is going to wield his leverage and force his way to Buffalo (!), we don't need to give up VO in the deal. 

 

Trading VO is more about cap and roster space moving forward than it is about the player: Skinner and Tuch are in the top 6 for a while. Peterka and Quinn are challenging. One of our young centres is going to switch to the wing. Rosen and more might be coming.

Kane and Olofsson is cap expense that is probably better allocated elsewhere. I see Kane more as an Olofsson upgrade that better fits our cap. You can wait, but one of them will have to get moved.

Edited June 21, 2022 by dudacek

[SwampD]

2 hours ago, Eleven said:

My point is that Kane doesn't help the team have an appreciably better record next season, but surely you knew that.

I disagree.

[SwampD]

2 hours ago, NJhopelessSabresfan66 said:

Mortgage meaning giving up 3/4 major pieces for a star on his way down the mountain, not climbing up. And, prove it that he is going to be better then the pieces we give up for the next 3 years..... we saw what happened with Hall. (LOL J/K))😁

What “major pieces” do the Sabres even have?! What would we be giving up that would be better than Patrick Kane in the next three years.

Always trade potential talent for actual talent. 

[Huckleberry]

Would not waste assets on kane, we are not in the position to spend assets on a 1 year rental.   And Chicago would be asking a lot for him.

If he wants to be in Buffalo, he will come next summer for free.

[Doohicksie]

17 hours ago, SwampD said:

That would never happen, though. Chicago would never let him leave without getting something.

After this coming season, they really don't have a say in the matter.

[MattPie]

45 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Trading VO is more about cap and roster space moving forward than it is about the player: Skinner and Tuch are in the top 6 for a while. Peterka and Quinn are challenging. One of our young centres is going to switch to the wing. Rosen and more might be coming.

Kane and Olofsson is cap expense that is probably better allocated elsewhere. I see Kane more as an Olofsson upgrade that better fits our cap. You can wait, but one of them will have to get moved.

Chicago may not be particularly interested in VO. If they're going to be terrible for a couple years, they're using up his RFA years and would probably be just getting good when it's time for his next contract. I'd think they'd want someone under control for longer.

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

I'm willing to pay some combination of #28, #41, Johnson and Portillo, but only if a reasonable extension is part of the deal.

[Marvin]

36 minutes ago, SwampD said:

What “major pieces” do the Sabres even have?! What would we be giving up that would be better than Patrick Kane in the next three years.

Always trade potential talent for actual talent. 

IMHO, we would be doing the Black Hawks a salary cap favour AND they won't lose him for nothing.  I am not sending them any of Tuch, Cozens, Quinn, Dahlin, etc. for Kane.  #28, Portillo, and Johnson?  That I can see.

[PromoTheRobot]

4 hours ago, Brawndo said:

One important thing to remember about Ryan Johnson, His Value right now is the equivalent of the 2024 62nd Overall Pick, the Sabres Compensation if He doesn’t sign 

Both Portillo and Johnson a next to worthless as trade assets, unless Tim Murray is a GM somewhere.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

14 hours ago, shrader said:

Is that Dale Hawerchuk?

Yes.  And Doug Bodger.  And the other Turgeon.  We go the better brother.