So the Sabres are surging, for the most part, and Stafford is finally looking like the guy he was projected to be when he was drafted. BUT, the returns for players have been silly as of late [1+3 for Versteeg?] and there's still a question mark as to whether or not Drew has really turned the corner.
An RFA at the end of the season, some are talking about him getting $4M a season in his next deal.
So, with that in mind, do you shop him around and see what comes up? Or do you flat out refuse to move him barring anything asinine [think Malkin]?
~100% move him for the best offer
~50% shop him around but just as likely to keep him
~0% he's off the table
~???% see if he'll re-sign for reasonable rate, shop him otherwise
Its worth keeping in mind that players like Fisher and Versteeg are signed beyond this year. Thus making them know quantitiies to their new teams beyond this year.
Stafford's pay going forward is an unknown. Nor is it known what he will want and if that could lead to contract battles.
In his first and second years in Buffalo, I remember posters on this board saying it takes a few years for players of his style to come into his own. Now it looks like he may of become that player and people want to trade him. If he is traded for picks, than it will be 2-3 yrs before that pick turns pro and another couple of years to get to where Drew is today(if that pick does not bust). So you are throwing away the next 5 years if you trade him for picks. If he is given an offer sheet, than we can match or take the 4 first round picks(Is this still the top compensation. I believe we would match anything otherwise)
As many times as I've accused him of being Chris Gratton, I think he's shown enough this (contract) year that he can up his game to the next level, consistently. My lone fear at this point is that he is just playing for a contract, and that he would move back down to scrub status next season if getting a pay day. But I guess that's the risk of the CBA.
Established top-6 center (think Ribeiro) or elite, near-NHL ready center prospect (think Schenn). Those are the only things I'm willing to trade him for. I'd kick the tires on those guys, but I'd be more than happy to get him re-signed for three or fours at a cap hit around $3.7-$4.
I'd only consider trading him for a top-six center. Otherwise, re-sign him. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets an offer sheet, though, which will complicate things.
Trading players who develop to their full potential in your system is dumb. This isn't the stock market, you can't just "sell high" and consider it a success. There's other ways to find top six (or potential top six) centers for this team. We don't HAVE to give up Stafford for one.
At this point, I think I'd rather move Pominville and keep Stafford.
Me too, but Pominville is signed for only $2M less than Scott Gomez for the same number of seasons. Pominville is better than Gomez right now, but he'll be difficult to move.
I say 50%, trade him if you can get a #1 center or maybe even something like Brayden Schenn and a 1st.
Shop and keep unless there's an extreme overpayment. No draft pick only deals.
I second this.
Sure this appears to be the long awaited breaking out of Drew Stafford. However, he's shown flashes in the past only to turn into a ghost for weeks at a time. So while yes he's looking great now there's always the possibility for him to regress back to the disappointment he's been for the majority of the last 3 seasons.
I believe Stafford is finally becoming the player we all hoped he would become when he first came out strong in 06-07. He's far from the "take whatever we can get" player that he was after the playoffs, but he's hardly untouchable.
If a strong offer for a top line C is on the table, bye bye Drew.
At this point, I think I'd rather move Pominville and keep Stafford.
If it's a keep one trade the other option.
I would rather keep Pominville and trade Stafford at his peak value for something that really makes this team stronger (top 6 C) rather than keep Stafford, sell Pominville low for a mediocre pick and/or roster player/prospect in what would turn out to be a sideways move at best.
You let Briere and Drury go for nothing. Trade Campbell for arguably nothing. Now we have a young player playing the best hockey of his career and you want to move him. The best teams in any sport find a way to keep their best players. I sincerely hope we don't continue this trend of turning into the Cleveland Indians of the NHL.
Why not sign Stafford to a one year deal at 3.5 million? He'll still be RFA and if he can repeat his play next year, a longer term deal at a higher rate could be negotiated at that point.
You let Briere and Drury go for nothing. Trade Campbell for arguably nothing. Now we have a young player playing the best hockey of his career and you want to move him. The best teams in any sport find a way to keep their best players. I sincerely hope we don't continue this trend of turning into the Cleveland Indians of the NHL.
Why not sign Stafford to a one year deal at 3.5 million? He'll still be RFA and if he can repeat his play next year, a longer term deal at a higher rate could be negotiated at that point.
Because he won't sign it. He'll say "**** you, see you at arbitration where some moron arbitrator will give me $4+ mil next season, and your price will be even higher next summer."
Oh, and all his detractors will still poo-poo his season because it's still a contract season.
If we make the playoffs, and Stafford does well there, I would sign him to a 4 year 18 million dollar contract without hesitation before the free agent market.
If we make the playoffs, and he gets 2 points in 6 games, I think I would sign him to a 3 year 11.5 million dollar deal.
He is to hot to trade now though, and if our team wants to make the playoffs then we need to keep him.
You let Briere and Drury go for nothing. Trade Campbell for arguably nothing. Now we have a young player playing the best hockey of his career and you want to move him. The best teams in any sport find a way to keep their best players. I sincerely hope we don't continue this trend of turning into the Cleveland Indians of the NHL.
Stafford is #3 in the NHL in goals per game. Behind Crosby and Stamkos. Yes, those two. In a year he admittedly, and with his coach's validation, committed to being in better shape. As this poster says, I have no idea why you would not want to try hard to retain such a talent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 71Zamboni
If we MUST resign Stafford, then I would agree to a 1 yr. 3.5 mil deal, then if he repeats this season, then 4-5 yr deal at 4+/per.
If he repeats this season next year, in a full 82-game schedule, he'll have >50 goals. I don't follow deals like some on these boards, but I'd wager 2 years at that pace is worth >$4M/yr., whether the other side of the table is an agent or an arbitrator.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNBOY
Trade him if you could get a 1st round pick (atleast Top 20) and a top 6 forward with decent potential/upside....
Sorry, IMO that's selling way too low.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15
Because he won't sign it. He'll say "**** you, see you at arbitration where some moron arbitrator will give me $4+ mil next season, and your price will be even higher next summer."
Oh, and all his detractors will still poo-poo his season because it's still a contract season.
Zip gets it. Staff has leverage - regardless of whether he repeats next year or never again.
So would we trade Drew for B Schenn straight up? I'm sure we could get a 2nd too, but not a 1st...so do we do an ELC center, who has tremendous potential for him? I doubt we have the leverage to get an established center for him.
It could be a deal that works for both teams...we want future center help, and LA wants a top 6 splash now.
