As neat as it would be to have both Staal's on the same team, not having any draft at all in 2012 is bad.
Yea but you've fixed the center situation for the next decade and all the other positions have great prospect depth, with the exception maybe of goaltender.
Alright I'll take your word for it, I did say I didn't think it couldn't be true.
I'm not sure if Roy could get them exactly what Richards and Carter got Philly, but I'd have to think he could get them something close. I don't think a center prospect with high end potential and a solid roster player are out of the question. Although I don't know if they could get a young player with upside like Voracek or Simmonds on top of that center prospect.
I agree that it would be tough to get as much back for him as Carter and Richards got but I would think its still close... If it was to get higher in the draft we could always add picks with Roy to get the "Couturier" of this years draft. I dunno who that would be or if it would even be possible, Columbus looking like they got owned in that trade might scare off a team from making the same mistake.
I agree that it would be tough to get as much back for him as Carter and Richards got but I would think its still close... If it was to get higher in the draft we could always add picks with Roy to get the "Couturier" of this years draft. I dunno who that would be or if it would even be possible, Columbus looking like they got owned in that trade might scare off a team from making the same mistake.
1st thing that needs to happen: The Sabres need to want to move Roy
2nd thing that needs to happen: They need to find a team that values (or is that overvalues) Roy
I think the odds of the 2nd thing happening are much greater than the 1st.
Trade Roy/Stafford or both for picks. Then use picks and a prospect to trade for a Center from a team looking to rebuild. Anything like that I would love. I would put MAG and Sekera in there too.
Would be great to get Ruutu included in a deal. We need what he brings on this team.
Actually, we would take on $250,000 in that trade. My mistake.
I'd still do it.
This team could use a player that has been there and done that before (being on a Cup winning team) and is still young and could help change the mentality of this team.
I want no part of Staal's deal. He's not worth it.
Why isn't he?
Just my opinion, but he has played 6 full seasons, scored over 70 points in every one of those seasons (how's THAT for consistency?) and has a 100 point season when the Hurricanes won the Cup.
Yeah, I'd like to see him centering our first line. Sure would beat the heck out of Chewy, wouldn't it?
Actually, we would take on $250,000 in that trade. My mistake.
I'd still do it.
This team could use a player that has been there and done that before (being on a Cup winning team) and is still young and could help change the mentality of this team.
Just my opinion, but he has played 6 full seasons, scored over 70 points in every one of those seasons (how's THAT for consistency?) and has a 100 point season when the Hurricanes won the Cup.
Yeah, I'd like to see him centering our first line. Sure would beat the heck out of Chewy, wouldn't it?
How does 43 points in 43 playoff games grab you?
I'm well aware of his stats. But his cap hit is 8.25mil and he makes 8.5mil, 9.25mil, 9.25mil and then 9.5mil the next 4 years. He would have to be the final piece of the puzzle to take on that contract. Is that what you think he is?
Btw we can't hold a lead to save our life and he will do zero to improve that.
Just my opinion, but he has played 6 full seasons, scored over 70 points in every one of those seasons (how's THAT for consistency?) and has a 100 point season when the Hurricanes won the Cup.
Yeah, I'd like to see him centering our first line. Sure would beat the heck out of Chewy, wouldn't it?
How does 43 points in 43 playoff games grab you?
At the start of the year I would not want the trade for Staal, but now I would be in. This core needs a shake up and Stafford and Roy have had problems with consistency since before this year.
I'm well aware of his stats. But his cap hit is 8.25mil and he makes 8.5mil, 9.25mil, 9.25mil and then 9.5mil the next 4 years. He would have to be the final piece of the puzzle to take on that contract. Is that what you think he is?
Btw we can't hold a lead to save our life and he will do zero to improve that.
The final piece of the puzzle? I don't know, would he be? Possibly.
All I know is that he has been a great offensive player over the years, has a Stanley Cup Championship to his name and has also been an absolute monster in the playoffs.
So, yeah, I think he would fit in nicely on a team looking to win right now and in the future.
Im seriously to the point where i just want a change. Give me something un expected. No im not talking about putting Vanek on waivers, but something that shows me that these guys arent okay with this crap. Something that shows me that they arent tossing in the towel for a while because we have some hurt players.
For the love of god, just show that you know that this team isnt what you (Darcy, Lindy, Terry and Ted) had hoped they were.
If we traded Stafford and Roy we would be under the cap.
You'd need Vanek to go if you want Staal and his deal here. Vanek and Staal would tie up almost $16 million in cap space by themselves. That'd be the second highest two-player cap amount in the league. The only team with anything that high relegated to two players is Pittsburgh with Crosby and Malkin.
You'd need Vanek to go if you want Staal and his deal here. Vanek and Staal would tie up almost $16 million in cap space by themselves. That'd be the second highest two-player cap amount in the league. The only team with anything that high relegated to two players is Pittsburgh with Crosby and Malkin.
No we wouldn't, it's manageable. Not ideal but you could definitely do it. You just need enough guys on ELC's to balance it out which we can do. Roy and Stafford is 8 million, if the extra guy to replace the 2 for 1 is someone on an ELC or a Matt Ellis type for 550k you're not even adding 1 million in salary. Bottom line is we can fit Staal in under the cap without trading Vanek.
No we wouldn't, it's manageable. Not ideal but you could definitely do it. You just need enough guys on ELC's to balance it out which we can do. Roy and Stafford is 8 million, if the extra guy to replace the 2 for 1 is someone on an ELC or a Matt Ellis type for 550k you're not even adding 1 million in salary. Bottom line is we can fit Staal in under the cap without trading Vanek.
Fitting Staal in wouldn't be the problem. Its being able to put a winning team together with that much tied up in two guys like Vanek/Staal. They are hardly Crosby/Malkin.
Staal is also one dimensional offensive player and does nothing to fix our inability to lock things down and hold a lead.
At the same time, there are players that are expendable to free up cap space for the future.
I know Myers deal kicks in next season so we need to make a little space there. I'd look to move Sekera and Leopold. I have no problem with either of those player but I also have no problem with players like McNabb and Brennan being on the roster next season instead of them.
Boyes and Hecht are coming off the books. I wouldn't mind one of the two back at a reduced rate. I'd probably take Boyes if he was will to be a 2.5 to 3 million per year player.
Those 4 players I mentioned (Sekera, Leopold, Boyes and Hecht) are 13 million plus off the books. Add in Myers new deal and we are still 9 million up with really only two spots to fill (Boyes and Hecht)
I don't think it would matter having the money tied up in Vanek and Staal. Those guys have a long history of producing big numbers.
We just have to stay away from givng the unproven Ville Leino's of the world long term deals at a salary that is not worth that players production.
Fitting Staal in wouldn't be the problem. Its being able to put a winning team together with that much tied up in two guys like Vanek/Staal. They are hardly Crosby/Malkin.
Staal is also one dimensional offensive player and does nothing to fix our inability to lock things down and hold a lead.
Oh I'm not saying we should do it, I'm just pointing out that it's possible.
