Nazem Kadri - trade target for the Sabres?

[GASabresIUFAN]

He is having a Zucker type season points wise and is very over-priced contract wise.  He is 34 and has 4 years left at 7 per season.  

One thing about Kadri is that he plays the right way and we can always trade or buy him out in a few years.  We need centers and we need forwards who play hard and relentlessly.  He would hold the locker-room to a better standard.  

Admittedly the Sabres need help in almost every department, but Kadri would be a positive change.  

 

Edited December 12 by GASabresIUFAN

[ska-T Palmtown]

can you imagine how pissed a player would be about getting traded to this team?!?!?

[will]

it's Nazem

[TheAud]

Just now, will said:

it's Nazem

Yes, but isn’t ‘Kazem’ quite a bit cooler?

[DarthEbriate]

He has a no move clause; then it becomes a 13-team NTC in 2026-27. He's not waiving his rights to join this fantastic franchise.

[Archie Lee]

I think we have officially reached the point in this season where no player who has a full NMC is waiving for the Sabres. There was talk this summer,  I seem to recall, of Kadri being interested in coming back east. I thought then that he might consider the Sabres. That ship has sailed now though. Adams, or whoever is control behind the curtain, waited too long and the worst case scenario has developed. 
 

[Warriorspikes51]

Since no one else is going to accept a trade here, we may as well seriously pursue McDavid. 

It's likely he would actually agree to come here given he's from nearby 

[inkman]

11 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He is having a Zucker type season points wise and is very over-priced contract wise.  He is 34 and has 4 years left at 7 per season.  

One thing about Kadri is that he plays the right way and we can always trade or buy him out in a few years.  We need centers and we need forwards who play hard and relentlessly.  He would hold the locker-room to a better standard.  

Admittedly the Sabres need help in almost every department, but Kadri would be a positive change.  

 

Based on everything Adams has done and said Kadri is not the kind of contract they want to bring in.  

[JohnC]

12 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He is having a Zucker type season points wise and is very over-priced contract wise.  He is 34 and has 4 years left at 7 per season.  

One thing about Kadri is that he plays the right way and we can always trade or buy him out in a few years.  We need centers and we need forwards who play hard and relentlessly.  He would hold the locker-room to a better standard.  

Admittedly the Sabres need help in almost every department, but Kadri would be a positive change.  

 

Hard no for me. How is acquiring a 34 yr old who has 4 years left on his contract for $7 M per year a good idea? His trade value in a few years means he will be even less productive with a high-cost per annum still remaining. The bigger concern is not what will you get back but who would want to trade for him at that point. You would be stuck with him and his onerous contract/value wise. 

Your logic in your post is illogical. On the one hand you say he is having an overpriced Zucker season and then say we should seek another overpriced veteran like him whose production is poor. If you made the same contradictory argument in the courtroom the judge and jury would look at you in askance.  Being desperate and exasperated doesn't mean that you have to be foolish and self-destructive. Please stop with the nonsense. 

Edited December 12 by JohnC

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 minutes ago, inkman said:

Based on everything Adams has done and said Kadri is not the kind of contract they want to bring in.  

And how has that worked out so far? You are correct yes man Howdy Doody won’t try such a move, but that doesn’t mean it’s not the right course of action for changing the soft culture of this team.  

Continue to do what has already failed won’t fix this team.  

[bob_sauve28]

Can he take Payton Krebs spot on the PP?

[Archie Lee]

2 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Hard no for me. How is 34 yrs old and has 4 years left on his contract for $7 M per year. His trade value in a few years means he will be even less productive with a high-cost per annum still remaining. The bigger concern is not what will you get back but who would want to trade for him at that point. You would be stuck with him and his onerous contract/value wise. 

Your logic in your post is illogical. On the one hand you say he is having an overpriced Zucker season and then say we should seek another overpriced veteran like him whose production is poor. If you made the same contradictory argument in the courtroom the judge and jury would look at you in askance.  Being desperate and exasperated doesn't mean that you have to be foolish and self-destruction. Please stop with the nonsense. 

A couple of things on this.

1.).  I agree on Kadri. He is not the answer to fix this. One of the fall-out consequences of failing to make a move at the appropriate moment is that you risk things becoming so dire that it is too late for any move to have the intended positive impact. Had we traded for a player like Kadri in July, or a month ago, their presence may have helped prevent this recent swoon from becoming catastrophic. As is, there is no player who is going to pull us back into the playoff race. That doesn’t mean moves should not be made, but we are now in a position where making the playoffs would require a legendary in-season turnaround. There is no realistic trade that could reasonably result in that sort of change in expectation for this season. It is over. Trading for an aging over priced veteran now would be bizarre. 

2.). I’m interested in your opinion on what a reasonable trade might be. I realize you are not the GM and it is not your job to build a winning team. But you are hard on Adams (rightfully), while also being a “hard no” on many trade options suggested (you were a hard no in the off-season on the idea of trading Quinn, Benson or Peterka for a veteran top 6 player; I think you were a hard no on trading for Brady Tkachuk, not that it was ever a realistic option). I respect your opinion, which is why I ask: what would be a meaningful and acceptable trade to you?
 

[inkman]

39 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

And how has that worked out so far? You are correct yes man Howdy Doody won’t try such a move, but that doesn’t mean it’s not the right course of action for changing the soft culture of this team.  

Continue to do what has already failed won’t fix this team.  

I’d love to have that dirt bag on the team but between Adams ineptitude and Kadri’s no trade clause, it’s not happening.  Not sure why it’s a topic for discussion.  I guess we don’t have much else to yammer about. 
 

[GASabresIUFAN]

41 minutes ago, inkman said:

I’d love to have that dirt bag on the team but between Adams ineptitude and Kadri’s no trade clause, it’s not happening.  Not sure why it’s a topic for discussion.  I guess we don’t have much else to yammer about. 
 

Kadri is looking to get out of Calgary and is from London Ont.  I agree I doubt he'd waive his NMC, but stranger things have happened (Ullmark to Ott for example).  I agree KA is unlikely to inquire, but something must be done to shake up this roster and culture and he seems like a reasonable place to start.  

@JohnC As to the contract amount etc....  No one is acquiring Kadri at the current $ amount.  Calgary will be eating a major piece of the contract.  The question is how much and for how long.  Calgary's return on the deal will be a sliding scale depending on how much of Kadri's deal is retained.  You should have realized this before posting.

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Kadri is looking to get out of Calgary and is from London Ont.  I agree I doubt he'd waive his NMC, but stranger things have happened (Ullmark to Ott for example).  I agree KA is unlikely to inquire, but something must be done to shake up this roster and culture and he seems like a reasonable place to start.  

@JohnC As to the contract amount etc....  No one is acquiring Kadri at the current $ amount.  Calgary will be eating a major piece of the contract.  The question is how much and for how long.  Calgary's return on the deal will be a sliding scale depending on how much of Kadri's deal is retained.  You should have realized this before posting.

You pointed out that Kadri is having a Zucker like year. And you also pointed out that he had 4 years left on his contract. You may not be aware of it but those are persuasive arguments not to pursue this fading player. Even if Calgary took back much of his salary, the four years remaining on his contract makes this deal very unappealing. 

There is nothing wrong spit balling for solutions. But in this case, you are spitting in a gale force wind pushing against your face. I recommend that you get your hankey ready because it will need to be wiped dry. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Sorry John the goal here is to add veteran leadership who can still play, adds centers and improve the team now.  Who cares whether he’ll be good 3 years from now.   We need guys like Zucker and Kadri who bring it every night.  Who play with accountability.  Is current Kadri better than what we are getting from Cozens, Kulich, McLeod and Krebs? Of course.  Why not take the chance? 

Also why are you worried about the cap 3 years from now when we can’t win a game now?  Also how do you know that Kadri’s scoring won’t bounce back here like Zucker’s has given the top 6 opportunities here?  PS his 9 goals would be second on the team.

There is no downside to acquiring someone like Kadri if he is willing to come to Buffalo.  This team is already at rock bottom and Kadri can reinvigorate the team.  

This idea isn’t spitting into the wind.  The player is available and he has a skill set on and off the ice that this team needs.  I’m sorry you don’t understand that. 

Whether or not we acquire Kadri or someone else, the status quo must change.  The KA plan is dead and the franchise is literally dying in front of us.  Things can’t continue as is.

Edited December 12 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Sorry John the goal here is to add veteran leadership who can still play, adds centers and improve the team now.  Who cares whether he’ll be good 3 years from now.   We need guys like Zucker and Kadri who bring it every night.  Who play with accountability.  Is current Kadri better than what we are getting from Cozens, Kulich, McLeod and Krebs? Of course.  Why not take the chance? 

Also why are you worried about the cap 3 years from now when we can’t win a game now?  Also how do you know that Kadri’s scoring won’t bounce back here like Zucker’s has given the top 6 opportunities here?  PS his 9 goals would be second on the team.

There is no downside to acquiring someone like Kadri if he is willing to come to Buffalo.  This team is already at rock bottom and Kadri can reinvigorate the team.  

This idea isn’t spitting into the wind.  The player is available and he has a skill set on and off the ice that this team needs.  I’m sorry you don’t understand that. 

Whether or not we acquire Kadri or someone else, the status quo must change.  The KA plan is dead and the franchise is literally dying in front of us.  Things can’t continue as is.

If you believe that I'm arguing for the status quo, then you haven't been reading my posts correctly. Specifically related to a Kadri deal, I firmly say no.  It makes no sense for the reasons that you have already stated. I'm open to any reasonable deal. That is not to say that out of desperation I'm willing to make a damaging deal. This organization has been steeped in too many crippling deals that have repeatedly set this franchise back. I'm not subscribing to a Kadri like deal that doesn't help us. Again, absolutely not to your proposal. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

36 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If you believe that I'm arguing for the status quo, then you haven't been reading my posts correctly. Specifically related to a Kadri deal, I firmly say no.  It makes no sense for the reasons that you have already stated. I'm open to any reasonable deal. That is not to say that out of desperation I'm willing to make a damaging deal. This organization has been steeped in too many crippling deals that have repeatedly set this franchise back. I'm not subscribing to a Kadri like deal that doesn't help us. Again, absolutely not to your proposal. 

LOL, How would adding Kadri "damage" this organization?  How?  How do you damage a car that's dead on the side of the road already?  How does adding a good hard nosed veteran player hurt a directionless, soft, ineffective, poorly constructed, and mismanaged a team as the Sabres?  

Which current center on the Sabres, other than Thompson, is a better player right now than Kadri?  Which current forward, other than Thompson, has more goals YTD than Kadri?  Which current forward on the Sabres' forward plays better 2 way hockey than the current Kadri?  

You say you aren't arguing for the status quo.  You say you want some phantom reasonable deal.  Ok show us a player who is acknowledged as available, who can help us now and what this so called reasonable deal would look like.  This reasonable deal strawman is exactly the BS Adams has been saying for 5 years.  The truth is you are arguing for the status quo because you will argue against all deals the take any form of risk to improve the club.

Edited December 12 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

LOL, How would adding Kadri "damage" this organization?  How?  How do you damage a car that's dead on the side of the road already?  How does adding a good hard nosed veteran player hurt a directionless, soft, ineffective, poorly constructed, and mismanaged a team as the Sabres?  

Which current center on the Sabres, other than Thompson, is a better player right now than Kadri?  Which current forward, other than Thompson, has more goals YTD than Kadri?  Which current forward on the Sabres' forward plays better 2 way hockey than the current Kadri?  

You say you aren't arguing for the status quo.  You say you want some phantom reasonable deal.  Ok show us a player who is acknowledged as available, who can help us now and what this so called reasonable deal would look like.  This reasonable deal strawman is exactly the BS Adams has been saying for 5 years.  The truth is you are arguing for the status quo because you will argue against all deals the take any form of risk to improve the club.

You want to add a declining player whose production is significantly down and take on his additional four-year contract. That is stupendously foolish. 

We had a 2C player in Mitts. And he was traded for Byram. I like Byram a lot. From a talent standpoint both trading partners got comparable talent back in the deal. (My opinion.) What happens if Byram next year decides not to sign a contract next year because he doesn't want to be stuck in this putrid situation? It will be a reprise of the Reinhart situation.

Going back to the Mitts/Byram trade, I believe from a roster building standpoint Mitts had more value and greater versatility. This organization had Eichel, Reinhart and Mitts in the fold. That's a terrific center spine. They all been dispatched for a less than equal value return. An accumulation of bad decisions that has kept this pathetic franchise stuck at the comedy store. 

It's evident that you and I are riding different horses and going in the opposite direction with respect to the Kadri trade proposal. That's okay. You may be desperate to shake things up but I'm not willing to do it based on emotion rather reasonable calculation. Again, a hard no to your Kadri proposal. 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You want to add a declining player whose production is significantly down and take on his additional four-year contract. That is stupendously foolish. 

We had a 2C player in Mitts. And he was traded for Byram. I like Byram a lot. From a talent standpoint both trading partners got comparable talent back in the deal. (My opinion.) What happens if Byram next year decides not to sign a contract next year because he doesn't want to be stuck in this putrid situation? It will be a reprise of the Reinhart situation.

Going back to the Mitts/Byram trade, I believe from a roster building standpoint Mitts had more value and greater versatility. This organization had Eichel, Reinhart and Mitts in the fold. That's a terrific center spine. They all been dispatched for a less than equal value return. An accumulation of bad decisions that has kept this pathetic franchise stuck at the comedy store. 

It's evident that you and I are riding different horses and going in the opposite direction with respect to the Kadri trade proposal. That's okay. You may be desperate to shake things up but I'm not willing to do it based on emotion rather reasonable calculation. Again, a hard no to your Kadri proposal. 

 

Everything you mentioned is spilt milk. Staying with this roster without significant change is the status quo and it’s earning the Sabres another useless top 5 draft pick.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

G-d forbid we have a player that makes this kind of effort.

 

[PerreaultForever]

Now why would you think Calgary would want to give him up? Unlike us, maybe they value some veteran leadership for their rebuild. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Now why would you think Calgary would want to give him up? Unlike us, maybe they value some veteran leadership for their rebuild. 

The “media” has listed him as a player who is available.  Here is one example.  

https://nhltradetalk.com/another-insider-links-kadri-maple-leafs-future-trade/

[JP51]

On 12/12/2024 at 8:11 AM, Warriorspikes51 said:

Since no one else is going to accept a trade here, we may as well seriously pursue McDavid. 

It's likely he would actually agree to come here given he's from nearby 

Ok... this is really not likely... however, just interested from a speculation standpoint... what/who would you trade to get McDavid that Edmonton would accept.  Like literally, Dahlin, Thompson, and 3 1sts? Like what do you think it would take.

[ska-T Palmtown]

I am in love with the fact that TB #90 hurt himself ... skating? lol - hope for me, yet!