HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

Trading Up Part II: The Midnight Barkov

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-17-2013, 10:16 PM
  #651
DJN21
Registered User
 
DJN21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Rochester
Posts: 1,744
vCash: 500
are we picking 8th based on Jame's worst case scenario or what lol? otherwise worst-case scenario is completely open ended...

DJN21 is offline  
Old
06-17-2013, 11:26 PM
  #652
Afinogretzky
Registered User
 
Afinogretzky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Lindholm
he said worst case scenario, not best case scenario...

Afinogretzky is offline  
Old
06-17-2013, 11:48 PM
  #653
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
Like I said, it'd be a worst case scenario - and it's not as far-fetched when you look at Miller being traded and Leggio walking. Is Knapp or Lieuwen really an inspiring future in net? Beyond Hackett and Markov, there's not much left. Granted, it's not their biggest weakness at the moment but I wouldn't put it past Darcy.



Really? How did Boyes and Leino work out? What about Myers' contract extension?

He deserves credit for Hodgson, Ehrhoff and last summer's draft but to exempt him from any criticism during Pegula's regime is as one-sided as what you accuse others of doing.



I thought Devine brought Fucale's name up in the interview as a point to say that this wasn't a draft filled with many goalie choices.
Your lament that Darcy may draft Fucale at #8 is beyond far fetched, its utterly baseless nonsense. They're not even looking at goalie (per Devine). But evil Regier, in order to spite the fans, will draft one at #8 anyway.

joshjull is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 12:23 AM
  #654
CraniumCram
Syracuse '14
 
CraniumCram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse/Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallagt01 View Post
Has Poile discussed moving four?

I've said before that I think Barkov and Ristolainen are the guys they want.

What needs to be added to 8 for 4? What about 16 for 5?

Additionally, if Regier added both, what are the odds both play in the NHL next season?

The prospect of Barkov, Ristolainen, Grigorenko and Armia all playing in the NHL next year is frightening in. both good and bad ways.
Dat European Talent, along with ZG and Johan.

I'm beginning to lean away from going all out for #1 and towards the 3-6 area, while somehow keeping our 8th overall. The one I could see doing it is Carolina. They want help now so Sekera or possibly Ehrhoff would have to be involved.

Lindholm/Ristolainen '13

CraniumCram is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 12:38 AM
  #655
Selanne00008
Registered User
 
Selanne00008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NYC - UES
Posts: 3,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cramdizzl View Post
Dat European Talent, along with ZG and Johan.

I'm beginning to lean away from going all out for #1 and towards the 3-6 area, while somehow keeping our 8th overall. The one I could see doing it is Carolina. They want help now so Sekera or possibly Ehrhoff would have to be involved.

Lindholm/Ristolainen '13
Sekera and 16th?

I could live with that scenario I think. I agree, but I'd really like barkov.

Selanne00008 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 02:15 AM
  #656
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallagt01 View Post
Has Poile discussed moving four?.
His assistant, Paul Fenton, acknowledged that the Preds will listen but admitted that it would have to be a deal "to knock their socks off".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucky Gleason View Post
So assuming you HAVE to pick someone at 8 in the worst case scenario, where do you go with it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Your lament that Darcy may draft Fucale at #8 is beyond far fetched, its utterly baseless nonsense. They're not even looking at goalie (per Devine). But evil Regier, in order to spite the fans, will draft one at #8 anyway.
You're really going off the deep end with that kind of exaggeration, putting words in my mouth - I never suggested anything about Regier doing a move to maliciously sabotage the organization or infuriate the fan base. I suggested the scenario because of Miller's status being uncertain; Enroth's potential as a starter being an unknown; their top AHL goalie being a free agent; and the other 3 prospects all having little to no professional experience to judge how they'll turn out. With that said, if the Sabres don't find a defenseman or forward they like, it is not impossible for Regier to take Fucale in reaction to that. It's not what I think will happen or want to happen but could happen - again, as a "worst case scenario". Defend Regier all you like but you can't deny he's made some off-the-board draft 1st round selections in his GM tenure.

As for all of the dismissals based on the Devine interview, those people should replay the interview:

Starting at 3:02 - White asks Devine about where the organizational strengths and weaknesses are and comments that "goaltending is a question going forward - not quite sure how that picture is going to shake out"; Devine replies that, "unlike in different years, we're really looking at all areas". He goes on to admit that their goaltending "is up in the air at the moment" and that it's been their policy in the past to avoid goalies in the first round because of the "trickiness" in how goalies develop. But he then notes that "we have two picks in the first round" and "Fucale will go in the first round".

http://audio.wgr550.com/a/76140150/6...?pageid=401026

Sabretip is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 07:59 AM
  #657
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,479
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
His assistant, Paul Fenton, acknowledged that the Preds will listen but admitted that it would have to be a deal "to knock their socks off".






You're really going off the deep end with that kind of exaggeration, putting words in my mouth - I never suggested anything about Regier doing a move to maliciously sabotage the organization or infuriate the fan base. I suggested the scenario because of Miller's status being uncertain; Enroth's potential as a starter being an unknown; their top AHL goalie being a free agent; and the other 3 prospects all having little to no professional experience to judge how they'll turn out. With that said, if the Sabres don't find a defenseman or forward they like, it is not impossible for Regier to take Fucale in reaction to that. It's not what I think will happen or want to happen but could happen - again, as a "worst case scenario". Defend Regier all you like but you can't deny he's made some off-the-board draft 1st round selections in his GM tenure.

As for all of the dismissals based on the Devine interview, those people should replay the interview:

Starting at 3:02 - White asks Devine about where the organizational strengths and weaknesses are and comments that "goaltending is a question going forward - not quite sure how that picture is going to shake out"; Devine replies that, "unlike in different years, we're really looking at all areas". He goes on to admit that their goaltending "is up in the air at the moment" and that it's been their policy in the past to avoid goalies in the first round because of the "trickiness" in how goalies develop. But he then notes that "we have two picks in the first round" and "Fucale will go in the first round".

http://audio.wgr550.com/a/76140150/6...?pageid=401026
Talk about selective hearing. "With the exception of goaltender... We have a lot of holes to fill on both sides (offense and defense)."

stokes84 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 08:12 AM
  #658
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 16,949
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
His assistant, Paul Fenton, acknowledged that the Preds will listen but admitted that it would have to be a deal "to knock their socks off".


You're really going off the deep end with that kind of exaggeration, putting words in my mouth - I never suggested anything about Regier doing a move to maliciously sabotage the organization or infuriate the fan base. I suggested the scenario because of Miller's status being uncertain; Enroth's potential as a starter being an unknown; their top AHL goalie being a free agent; and the other 3 prospects all having little to no professional experience to judge how they'll turn out. With that said, if the Sabres don't find a defenseman or forward they like, it is not impossible for Regier to take Fucale in reaction to that. It's not what I think will happen or want to happen but could happen - again, as a "worst case scenario". Defend Regier all you like but you can't deny he's made some off-the-board draft 1st round selections in his GM tenure.

As for all of the dismissals based on the Devine interview, those people should replay the interview:

Starting at 3:02 - White asks Devine about where the organizational strengths and weaknesses are and comments that "goaltending is a question going forward - not quite sure how that picture is going to shake out"; Devine replies that, "unlike in different years, we're really looking at all areas". He goes on to admit that their goaltending "is up in the air at the moment" and that it's been their policy in the past to avoid goalies in the first round because of the "trickiness" in how goalies develop. But he then notes that "we have two picks in the first round" and "Fucale will go in the first round".

http://audio.wgr550.com/a/76140150/6...?pageid=401026
Tip, Devine has said on multiple occasions that they're going defense or forward with their 1st rounders. That led to people joking about the statement, because it didn't shed much light on the subject beyond the fact that they aren't taking a goaltender in the 1st.

They're most definitely not taking Fucale at 8, regardless of Miller's situation. I could lend more credence to the concern that Buffalo may take a netminder in Round 1 if they hadn't just acquired Hackett. But with the acquisition of Hackett, as well as the way Makarov and Ullmark came along this season, I just don't see it as a possibility.

Zip15 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 08:20 AM
  #659
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cramdizzl View Post
Dat European Talent, along with ZG and Johan.

I'm beginning to lean away from going all out for #1 and towards the 3-6 area, while somehow keeping our 8th overall. The one I could see doing it is Carolina. They want help now so Sekera or possibly Ehrhoff would have to be involved.

Lindholm/Ristolainen '13
Carolina wants a top four D-man and also wants to stay in the top ten draft order...probably top seven targeting Edm. Buffalo may be able to swing something though. IMO Myers is too much value and also has a contract that makes filling out the rest of their roster difficult, so Sekera may be a better option for them. I posted earlier Sekera and #8 for #5 and #35, with the idea of hopefully using #35 and #16 to move up around the #10 spot.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 08:25 AM
  #660
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 16,949
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Carolina wants a top four D-man and also wants to stay in the top ten draft order...probably top seven targeting Edm. Buffalo may be able to swing something though. IMO Myers is too much value and also has a contract that makes filling out the rest of their roster difficult, so Sekera may be a better option for them. I posted earlier Sekera and #8 for #5 and #35, with the idea of hopefully using #35 and #16 to move up around the #10 spot.
The Edmonton/Carolina trade chatter is interesting. On the one hand, both teams want the same exact thing: defensive help now. For that reason, I don't see any trade between the two solving the other's problem. At the same time, I have little doubt Edmonton would like to jump over rival Calgary and assure themselves of getting the guy they want (likely Monahan) rather than playing against said player four or five times per season.

Zip15 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 10:10 AM
  #661
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Darcy, I fear, is too scared to lose a trade to put all the players on the table it would take to make a meaningful one.

He could probably get that first pick if he were willing to lose some good players to do it. But if he's even considering re-signing Vanek and Miller, he doesnt have the right mindset.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 11:09 AM
  #662
1972
Registered User
 
1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
But if he's even considering re-signing Vanek and Miller, he doesnt have the right mindset.
Not at all, we have enough futures that keeping those guys is something worth considering.

1972 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 11:11 AM
  #663
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy Regier View Post
Not at all, we have enough futures that keeping those guys is something worth considering.
Okay. So you just sold your captain off for ***** and giggles, then?

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 11:34 AM
  #664
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
They're most definitely not taking Fucale at 8, regardless of Miller's situation. I could lend more credence to the concern that Buffalo may take a netminder in Round 1 if they hadn't just acquired Hackett. But with the acquisition of Hackett, as well as the way Makarov and Ullmark came along this season, I just don't see it as a possibility.
If Pegula has his way, Miller won't be traded unless he demands a move so the drafting of a goalie would be even more improbable.

Sabretip is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 11:57 AM
  #665
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Okay. So you just sold your captain off for ***** and giggles, then?
Pominville was traded because Minny offered up a great return. Vanek and Miller will get traded if a similar return is offered up. Whether the team wants to re-sign them or not, speaking publicly that they want to keep them is the right/smart thing to do...both for trade value and for PR reasons.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 12:10 PM
  #666
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Pominville was traded because Minny offered up a great return. Vanek and Miller will get traded if a similar return is offered up. Whether the team wants to re-sign them or not, speaking publicly that they want to keep them is the right/smart thing to do...both for trade value and for PR reasons.
I agree about keeping up trade value with good PR, so I hope that's all this is.

But as for actually resigning?

(1) If you trade away the best pieces of your core for draft picks, you're broadcasting that you think the core of your cup winning team hasn't been drafted yet. There's no other way to interpret that. You don't move your captain for draft picks because you think you'll be winning the cup in 2-3 years. Your return on the captain won't be ready by then.

(2) If you think your cup winning core hasn't been drafted yet, you're setting the bar at being at least ~5 years away, and so you have very little use for a 30 and 32 year old on that cup winning team (Miller and Vanek).

(3) If you have very little use for a presently 30 and 32 year old on that cup winning team but need good draft picks if, indeed, that core is going to be a cup winning one, you need to move them while their value is high.

I can't really imagine any other way this plan makes sense. If you think Vanek and Miller are going to be key parts of your cup winner, then you don't ****ing move Pominville, because by the time Pominville's return is of age to contribute, Vanek and Miller won't be the core anymore. If you don't think Vanek and Miller are going to be key pieces of your cup winner, get them out now and increase the odds that your draft picks will be good ones.

Darcy jumped off the ledge with that Pominville deal. He intentionally made the team worse for at least 3-4 years. You don't do that if you think those 3-4 years are your window. And if they're not your window, get ****ing rid of any assets that will only be good for 3-4 more years. You cannot half ass a rebuild hoping someone gives you the best of all possible present and future trade returns. You have to commit to sucking in the short term to set up a window 5 years in the future.

But I'm damned scared Darcy doesn't share that commitment to decisive action.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 01:57 PM
  #667
1972
Registered User
 
1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Okay. So you just sold your captain off for ***** and giggles, then?

1972 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 02:07 PM
  #668
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy Regier View Post
Deal with it. You just sold Pominville for draft picks. If Miller and Vanek were going to be a part of the core of the cup team, you'd have kept Pominville to play with them. Trading your captain and best all around two-way player for guys who won't be impact players for at least 5 years broadcasts loud and clear that you're not looking to contend for a while. Unless the goal is to tread water, it makes no sense to hang on to your other valuable players just to tread a little higher. It hurts you in the draft, deprives you of future returns, and they'll be forgettable players by the time you're back in the conversation. As soon as the Pominville deal happened, we were either all in on the rebuild or we just made a huge mistake. And now you can't take back the Pominville trade, so you'd better get all in on the rebuild.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 02:32 PM
  #669
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,599
vCash: 500
I see your point, but Hackett and Larsson are not five years away from being impact players (although Hackett may only end up being a back-up). The 16th pick may only be one year away from making an impact.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 03:14 PM
  #670
SabresFanNorthPortFL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Port, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,750
vCash: 500
Hasek, your opinion of Pominville differs from mine. If you wanted to talk about Pominville of 2012, his best season as a pro, I'd some what agree but if we are talking about 2013, he sucked. He hit his prime in 2012, responded to being named captain but in 2013 he really regressed when he was looked at to lead. Sorry, truth.

Agreed, I was all for trading him a few years ago because I don't like "soft" players, and he's one. Pominville was traded at the deadline because the team needed a jolt, he was the jolt. It was a good hockey trade.

I still don't see why the Sabres need a full-on rebuild, there is too much in the pipeline that's on the cusp of contributing that Vanek and Miller can still be contributors. Hey, if Miller said he wants out; ok, trade him. Darcy better be working the phones with Philly to swing the Courtier deal, again no matter what it takes to make the principles of Miller/Couts work, get it done.

MY FIRST CHOICE WOULD BE TO TRADE MILLER TO PHILLY: MILLER, SEKERA & 16TH FOR COURTIER & READ....this to me speeds up the retool, and gives us exactly what we need in a solid two way center.

BUT, IMO, sign Vanek & Miller on July 1st (whatever the day you can is) for career ending contracts, decent cap hits. This shows the rest of the league its a retool, not a rebuild. Drop/trade the dead weight in Gerbe, Stafford, McCormick, Pardy, Sulzer, etc., focus on bringing in 1 solid dman (top 4) to round out Hoff, Sekera and Myers....Weber, McNabb, Pysyk and Ruhn should be able to take a step forward and cover 5-6 depth. Bring in another solid bottom sixer and see how the season goes, as we will be bringing in a couple quality draft picks.

Guys who has proven, or have shown something at least that are returning in this scenario:

Vanek
Hodgson
Ott
Kaleta
Ennis

question marks but have shown something:
Foligno
Leino

Flynn could be counted in the above too.

That's 8 out of 12 forwards that should/could contribute. Stafford could bring in another player, heck, overpay to the Peg and bring in Burmistov, he's big and bangs.

I just see a couple moves here and there, some progression amongst players, a solid coaching staff, and the team is not 5 years away. I watch these playoffs and hope that if all else fails over the summer, we come out October 1st and at least forecheck. Please send the guys after the puck, be aggressive, not sit back.

SabresFanNorthPortFL is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 04:07 PM
  #671
Selanne00008
Registered User
 
Selanne00008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NYC - UES
Posts: 3,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
I agree about keeping up trade value with good PR, so I hope that's all this is.

But as for actually resigning?

(1) If you trade away the best pieces of your core for draft picks, you're broadcasting that you think the core of your cup winning team hasn't been drafted yet. There's no other way to interpret that. You don't move your captain for draft picks because you think you'll be winning the cup in 2-3 years. Your return on the captain won't be ready by then.

(2) If you think your cup winning core hasn't been drafted yet, you're setting the bar at being at least ~5 years away, and so you have very little use for a 30 and 32 year old on that cup winning team (Miller and Vanek).

(3) If you have very little use for a presently 30 and 32 year old on that cup winning team but need good draft picks if, indeed, that core is going to be a cup winning one, you need to move them while their value is high.

I can't really imagine any other way this plan makes sense. If you think Vanek and Miller are going to be key parts of your cup winner, then you don't ****ing move Pominville, because by the time Pominville's return is of age to contribute, Vanek and Miller won't be the core anymore. If you don't think Vanek and Miller are going to be key pieces of your cup winner, get them out now and increase the odds that your draft picks will be good ones.

Darcy jumped off the ledge with that Pominville deal. He intentionally made the team worse for at least 3-4 years. You don't do that if you think those 3-4 years are your window. And if they're not your window, get ****ing rid of any assets that will only be good for 3-4 more years. You cannot half ass a rebuild hoping someone gives you the best of all possible present and future trade returns. You have to commit to sucking in the short term to set up a window 5 years in the future.

But I'm damned scared Darcy doesn't share that commitment to decisive action.

This is just a hunch but I think you will be singing a different tune come post draft. I would bet my life savings even before we traded poms that the idea is to combine multiple assets to move up in the draft and gain top end talent that will be NHL ready sooner rather than later. Not just draft at 8, 16, and our two seconds and just let them progress by 2015. This is going to be a fast track rebuild.

I would not be shocked if we used Grigs, the 16th, the 8th, next years 2nd rounders we acquired, and other prospects to move up from 16 and from 8 to ice a playoff looking roster as soon as possible. The idea is a quick rebuild with short term suffering if any at all. I'm glad we traded poms as long as it helps us move forward with a grittier and more skilled team and I think there is still room to accomplish that come '13 draft. There's no way Darcy and pegula are prepared for a 5 year rebuild and that was not the idea by trading away the quiet soft captain.

P.S. how many NHL teams is pominville appropriate to be a captain on? 5? Just because we traded away the C doesn't mean it makes us that much of a worse team. How was our record with and without him? We ended the season 8-4.

Selanne00008 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 04:08 PM
  #672
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Everything I'm saying is in the context of assembling our cup roster. Larsson may make the team in only a couple of years. The 16th pick (unlikely) could even make the team next year. Correct. That doesn't mean they'll be impact players on a cup winning roster anytime soon. Larsson gets drafted in 2010 and still hasn't seen the NHL. These guys are long term projects.
your making a poor connection between pommer and larsson...

the connection you should be making is something like:
i need to stress that the exact players used in the comparison are irrelevant....

Ennis replaces Poms (ennis entering prime)
Grigorenko replaces Ennis (young breaking in secondary scorer)
Armia replaces Grigorenko (top prospect)

Larsson, #16, etc simply make the rebuild deeper...

Jame is online now  
Old
06-18-2013, 04:12 PM
  #673
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selanne00008 View Post
This is just a hunch but I think you will be singing a different tune come post draft. I would bet my life savings even before we traded poms that the idea is to combine multiple assets to move up in the draft and gain top end talent that will be NHL ready sooner rather than later. Not just draft at 8, 16, and our two seconds.

I would not be shocked if we used Grigs, the 16th, the 8th, and other prospects to move up from 16 and from 8 to ice a playoff looking roster as soon as possible. The idea is a quick rebuild with short term suffering if any at all. I'm glad we traded poms as long as it helps us move forward with a grittier and more skilled team and I think there is still room to accomplish that come '13 draft. There's no way Darcy and pegula are prepared for a 5 year rebuild and that was not the idea by trading away the quiet soft captain.

P.S. how many NHL teams is pominville appropriate to be a captain on? 5?
If you're competing for the cup in the next 2 years, e.g., nobody on the roster currently is one of that team's best players. If you think (a) we're going to get MacKinnon without giving up present roster talent, and (b) if so, MacKinnon is going to put us over the top at age 18, I think that's silly. I agree with the tactic of trading up in the draft and getting great players, but for the purpose of competing five years down the road. I think it's downright fanciful to imagine the high impact players we want either come for free or just in exchange for the picks and prospects we already have, or that they singlehandedly take us from 22nd to 1st inside a year or two.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 04:20 PM
  #674
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
your making a poor connection between pommer and larsson...

the connection you should be making is something like:
i need to stress that the exact players used in the comparison are irrelevant....

Ennis replaces Poms (ennis entering prime)
Grigorenko replaces Ennis (young breaking in secondary scorer)
Armia replaces Grigorenko (top prospect)

Larsson, #16, etc simply make the rebuild deeper...
Somehow you're assuming there's no drop off. And if all those players (or, indeed, any player) were guaranteed to perform at the level of the guys who preceded them, then we could trade away our top line guys all day for prospects and never run dry of NHL ready talent. But they're all prospects. You've said yourself that you think the odds are less than 50% than Grigs ends up being a second line scoring talent. Armia isn't eve on the damn continent yet. Ennis is not the two way player Poms is. There's a dropoff.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-18-2013, 04:40 PM
  #675
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Somehow you're assuming there's no drop off. And if all those players (or, indeed, any player) were guaranteed to perform at the level of the guys who preceded them, then we could trade away our top line guys all day for prospects and never run dry of NHL ready talent. But they're all prospects. You've said yourself that you think the odds are less than 50% than Grigs ends up being a second line scoring talent. Armia isn't eve on the damn continent yet. Ennis is not the two way player Poms is. There's a dropoff.
um yes

so i guess i dont understand what your argument was

Jame is online now  
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 06:41 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.