HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2013 Draft Thread (Part 3) #8, 16, 38, 52, 69, 129, 130, 140, 159, 189

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-05-2013, 09:34 PM
  #26
1972
"Craigs on it"
 
1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,138
vCash: 50
.....

1972 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 07:47 AM
  #27
Chainshot
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 66,287
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob582 View Post
I agree.

Even moving up at last year's draft to snag Z. Girgensons was a surprise. It was a departure form the old Darcy pre-Pegula.
Eh, Darcy's identified and been willing to move pieces to get up in the draft. He did it with Paille and with Myers prior to the Girgensons deal. He's moved up, and traditionally in the area where teams move up -- outside the top 10.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 08:19 AM
  #28
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,555
vCash: 500
If Regier moves up, I hope he uses 2nd rd picks or later and/or a roster player like Stafford to do it. I really don't see the use of trading both #8 and #16 when there will be quality players at least up to #20 or so. OTOH, Regier might want to figure out a way to get the best player possible (probably at #5) as a way to prove to Vanek that the re-build will be a short one, so he (and maybe Miller) re-signs. I just hope using both 1sts isn't the way to make that happen.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 08:35 AM
  #29
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,555
vCash: 500
Carolina needs a d-man and Buffalo might want to move up (for Monahan?). What seems to be a more plausible trade scenario with Carolina?

1. Myers and #38 for #5?
2. Myers and #16 for #5 (and something else?)
3. #8 and #38 for #5?
4. #8 and #16 for #5?

Do you switch out Myers for another d-man or does Carolina say no to the whole d-corps?

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 09:02 AM
  #30
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,960
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Carolina needs a d-man and Buffalo might want to move up (for Monahan?). What seems to be a more plausible trade scenario with Carolina?

1. Myers and #38 for #5?
2. Myers and #16 for #5 (and something else?)
3. #8 and #38 for #5?
4. #8 and #16 for #5?

Do you switch out Myers for another d-man or does Carolina say no to the whole d-corps?


I'm all for moving up, but those first two and the last are insane. If you are moving Myers+, you had better get into the top 3.

stokes84 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 09:51 AM
  #31
Jacob582
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Carolina needs a d-man and Buffalo might want to move up (for Monahan?). What seems to be a more plausible trade scenario with Carolina?

1. Myers and #38 for #5?
2. Myers and #16 for #5 (and something else?)
3. #8 and #38 for #5?
4. #8 and #16 for #5?

Do you switch out Myers for another d-man or does Carolina say no to the whole d-corps?
I think some have posted that Rutherford has stated that he is not trading his pick.

Regardless, it seems like there is pressure to win now (or at least that is their direction - trade for Staal, signing Semin). So your following points makes sense for them:

1. trading for an established Dman
2. our 8th pick (they can still pick up a good defenseman here and another asset)

Jacob582 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 09:55 AM
  #32
wunderpanda
no more murray!
 
wunderpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: outside the hive
Posts: 4,809
vCash: 500
Nichushkin signed a new 2 year contract with Dynamo Moscow, he could fall pretty far in the draft now. So who are the NHL ready scoring wingers that will be around at 8? Needed a winger when we had Pomer, will need three if we trade Vanek :|

wunderpanda is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:00 AM
  #33
Mit Yarrum
HoF Turd Shiner
 
Mit Yarrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,679
vCash: 1663
Quote:
Originally Posted by wunderpanda View Post
Nichushkin signed a new 2 year contract with Dynamo Moscow, he could fall pretty far in the draft now. So who are the NHL ready scoring wingers that will be around at 8? Needed a winger when we had Pomer, will need three if we trade Vanek :|
Wasn't he already signed for the next 2 years? Are you saying he's extended it out to 4 years?

Mit Yarrum is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:11 AM
  #34
wunderpanda
no more murray!
 
wunderpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: outside the hive
Posts: 4,809
vCash: 500
Dynamo bought his contract for $10 million, which voided his deal. KHL rules are different, so he had to sign a new contract with Dynamo under the same terms. The KHL signing thread has the story linked.

wunderpanda is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:14 AM
  #35
New Sabres Captain
ForFriendshipDikembe
 
New Sabres Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 43,298
vCash: 500
He wouldn't have to be signed for two years anyways, although the obvious questions of whether he would sign another contract in the KHL.

New Sabres Captain is online now  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:15 AM
  #36
tsujimoto74
Moderator
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 15,662
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob582 View Post
I think some have posted that Rutherford has stated that he is not trading his pick.

Regardless, it seems like there is pressure to win now (or at least that is their direction - trade for Staal, signing Semin). So your following points makes sense for them:

1. trading for an established Dman
2. our 8th pick (they can still pick up a good defenseman here and another asset)
What "good" defnesemen do we have whose value you'd peg only as 3 spots in the draft?

tsujimoto74 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:20 AM
  #37
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,555
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob582 View Post
I think some have posted that Rutherford has stated that he is not trading his pick.

Regardless, it seems like there is pressure to win now (or at least that is their direction - trade for Staal, signing Semin). So your following points makes sense for them:

1. trading for an established Dman
2. our 8th pick (they can still pick up a good defenseman here and another asset)
I thought I read that Poile won't move #4, Feaster won't move #6 unless he's moving up, and that maybe Rutherford would move down because a top d-man prospect would still be available around #8-#12. I think what I read about Carolina has just been speculation though, except the part abut wanting to improve the defense (by draft or trade/UFA).

Aside from Carolina (who still hasn't ever completed a trade with Buffalo as the Whalers or Canes) I don't see how Buffalo could move up without a losing deal.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:23 AM
  #38
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,555
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post


I'm all for moving up, but those first two and the last are insane. If you are moving Myers+, you had better get into the top 3.
Those first two options were for #5 and keeping #8, with the second option being if Carolina added from their end. I agree about the 4th option. I don't want to do that but I wondered what others thought.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 10:59 AM
  #39
SundherDome
Get to the Draft!
 
SundherDome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minneapolis,MN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy Regier View Post
I would much rather we make the 4 picks then give up a 2nd to move 16 up..their are plenty of solid options at 16 who will be available. I would hate if we gave up a 2nd to move 16 to 12ish.
What if you looked at it from another angle, would you trade 16 and leopolds rights for 12?

SundherDome is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:01 AM
  #40
Jacob582
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsujimoto74 View Post
What "good" defnesemen do we have whose value you'd peg only as 3 spots in the draft?
Sorry, how I wrote it doesn't make it clear.

I meant it makes sense for the Canes (not necessarily for the Sabres).

Jacob582 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:23 AM
  #41
Workensons
doginthebathtub
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
If they're not going to use #16 to move up, then they should acquire some proven talent with it.

Workensons is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:40 AM
  #42
Chainshot
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 66,287
vCash: 500
Awards:
"Transform Bad to Ekblad". Time for a t-shirt I think.

So thoughts on Taylor Cammarata in middle rounds? I'm sure someone's brought him up, probably why his name is stuck in my mind. At this point, size-bias is against him, but for a team needing all sorts of options and likely about a year away (or less) from kicking one of it's last midgets to the curb *cough*Gerbe *cough*, do they look at him if he's around at 55? 69? 94 (hockey gods willing)?

Chainshot is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:48 AM
  #43
tsujimoto74
Moderator
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 15,662
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wearegodawful View Post
If they're not going to use #16 to move up, then they should acquire some proven talent with it.
What' wrong with just making the pick? It's a deep draft, and there are a lot of prospects I'd be excited about getting there. There are some projects with huge upside, there are some big, high character guys. If we want to move picks for players, we have a extra 2nds this and next year that we could package up (maybe along with a player or prospect) to get it done.

tsujimoto74 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:53 AM
  #44
Chainshot
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 66,287
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsujimoto74 View Post
What' wrong with just making the pick? It's a deep draft, and there are a lot of prospects I'd be excited about getting there. There are some projects with huge upside, there are some big, high character guys. If we want to move picks for players, we have a extra 2nds this and next year that we could package up (maybe along with a player or prospect) to get it done.
Agreed. Take the picks. It's a deep draft, there are some talking about the quality extending even into the second round. Take the picks. Make the picks.

Chainshot is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 01:47 PM
  #45
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wunderpanda View Post
Nichushkin signed a new 2 year contract with Dynamo Moscow, he could fall pretty far in the draft now. So who are the NHL ready scoring wingers that will be around at 8? Needed a winger when we had Pomer, will need three if we trade Vanek :|
If you really thought anything else would happen, I have a bridge to sell you.

Also, you don't draft to fill your current roster, this isn't the NFL.

jfb392 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 03:10 PM
  #46
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,960
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
If you really thought anything else would happen, I have a bridge to sell you.

Also, you don't draft to fill your current roster, this isn't the NFL.
We lack scoring wingers in our prospect pool outside of Armia, so NHL ready or not, the point remains that we need more talented wingers.

Personally, I hate the idea of Shinkaruk at 8. To think that the reward for putting up with this season will be Hunter Shinkaruk makes me a little depressed. Not that he's a bad player, but I doubt he's a game changer.

stokes84 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 03:13 PM
  #47
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,444
vCash: 500
If the forwards arent there I wouldnt mind trading down.

Djp is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 03:13 PM
  #48
Chainshot
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 66,287
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
We lack scoring wingers in our prospect pool outside of Armia, so NHL ready or not, the point remains that we need more talented wingers.
They need more talent, period. The also don't have much applied size, are weak in finishers, and have a relative lack of speed throughout their prospect pool.

But the point remains, this team should not be concerning itself with drafting for immediate need, especially that early in a quality draft class.

Chainshot is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 03:37 PM
  #49
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
We lack scoring wingers in our prospect pool outside of Armia, so NHL ready or not, the point remains that we need more talented wingers.

Personally, I hate the idea of Shinkaruk at 8. To think that the reward for putting up with this season will be Hunter Shinkaruk makes me a little depressed. Not that he's a bad player, but I doubt he's a game changer.
We lack talent period, so they have no reason to target an "NHL ready scoring winger" at 8 to fill holes we've created through trades like the poster suggested.
Domi or Shinkaruk may be able to play in the NHL next year, but they're not going to produce at the level of any of the players we've traded just yet, so there's no quick fix like the poster wants.
Just take the player you feel has the most upside, regardless of position.

jfb392 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 03:50 PM
  #50
Ness
New Age Retro Hippie
 
Ness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
"Transform Bad to Ekblad"

Break Bad for Ekblad.

Ness is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.