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

Ennis, Ryan, Gagner

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-23-2012, 02:33 AM
  #1
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Ennis, Ryan, Gagner

There's a lot of rumors going about regarding Sabres wanting to add Sam Gagner and, of course, Bobby Ryan. While I cannot determine the value of the sources, I still find the thought interesting. And besides - it's a slow off season. We need something to talk about, right?

So, rumor has it that Sabres and Oilers are talking about a trade that would bring Sam Gagner to the Sabres in return for Jordan Leopold and Luke Adam. Instead of Leopold it could be Andrej Sekera, although I believe Leopold is a better fit for both sides. Picks could also be involved to tweak the deal. Anyway, I think it's a deal that makes sense. Oilers need to add a defender. Sabres want a center. Oilers may not have a lot of centers so they get one back in Adam. Trading Leopold makes sense for the Sabres since he could give a good return and he is on the final year of his contract, and the team has a logjam at D. I like Leo, but I'd rather keep Sekera and those two are the most likely to be traded if we want a nice return.

With Sam Gagner on the team things get interesting, because now the Sabres have three young centers, of which one is not signed yet. At first one might object and say that Gagner isn't what the Sabres need to backup Ennis and Hodgson. Atleast, that was my reaction. But the theory here is that Sabres and Ducks are talking trades where a package with Ennis as the centerpiece is sent out west for Bobby Ryan. I don't know what to think of that.

While I would love to see Ryan wearing blue and gold, I'd hate giving up Ennis. He's one of my favorite players with huge potential. And besides that, I don't want to lose that chemistry that Ennis had with Stafford and Foligno. On the other hand, Sam Gagner could be considered an upgrade since Ennis has only played half a season at center in the NHL. Gagner is a much more proven center.

We'd be giving up a lot for a slight upgrade at center and adding Ryan. I don't know if I'd do it. If it were up to me, I think I'd do the Leo-Gagner deal but pass on Ryan. Sure, with Grigorenko and Girgensons coming in, it could mean a logjam at center. That's a luxury problem I'd love to have.

Thought?

Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 02:39 AM
  #2
enrothorne
A DJ saved my life
 
enrothorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Downtown Buffalo
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,511
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to enrothorne
Other than posters here spouting their wishes and cockamamie trade desires, where are you hearing "a lot of rumors going about regarding Sabres wanting to add Sam Gagner and, of course, Bobby Ryan."

enrothorne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 03:21 AM
  #3
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by enrothorne View Post
Other than posters here spouting their wishes and cockamamie trade desires, where are you hearing "a lot of rumors going about regarding Sabres wanting to add Sam Gagner and, of course, Bobby Ryan."
Maybe I shouldn't have said "rumors". Maybe I should have just said "speculation". Besides posters on this board, speculation is going on twitter and blogs. It doesn't really matter. I posted this perticular speculation for, well, speculation. Because true or not, it has some logic to it (unlike alot of other crazy ideas out there). So speculate!

Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 03:34 AM
  #4
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
Get gagner for leopold and adam. Keep ennis. Leave bobby ryan alone for now

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 05:49 AM
  #5
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by enrothorne View Post
Other than posters here spouting their wishes and cockamamie trade desires, where are you hearing "a lot of rumors going about regarding Sabres wanting to add Sam Gagner and, of course, Bobby Ryan."
I know that Gagner comes from Eklund. As for Bobby Ryan, the sabres have been mentioned by about 70% of the writers adressing it since the ducks' GM and scouts were at a game or two of ours last season. =/

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 10:21 AM
  #6
bullseyed
Registered User
 
bullseyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Amherst, NY
Posts: 257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent42 View Post
There's a lot of rumors going about regarding Sabres wanting to add Sam Gagner.
By a lot of rumors, you mean Eklund posted it and people ran with it.

bullseyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 10:31 AM
  #7
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Why would we downgrade at center, a position of weakness, to upgrade at wing, a position of strength? Boredom, I guess.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:21 AM
  #8
Deevo
Registered User
 
Deevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
Why would we downgrade at center, a position of weakness, to upgrade at wing, a position of strength? Boredom, I guess.
I honestly don't see Poms, Vanek, Stafford, Leino, Ott, Foligno, Gerbe equaling a "position of strength". I think we have some good depth at wing, but we could absolutely benefit from any type of top-6 upgrade, being a winger or a center. Foligno is unproven, Leino is a bust, and Stafford is, well, we know about Stafford.

Deevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:27 AM
  #9
ZZamboni
Puttin' on the Foil
 
ZZamboni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennett View Post
I honestly don't see Poms, Vanek, Stafford, Leino, Ott, Foligno, Gerbe equaling a "position of strength". I think we have some good depth at wing, but we could absolutely benefit from any type of top-6 upgrade, being a winger or a center. Foligno is unproven,
Leino is a bust so far, and Stafford is, well, we know about Stafford.


There ya go.

I know it's hard to be truthful sometimes.

ZZamboni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:28 AM
  #10
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennett View Post
I honestly don't see Poms, Vanek, Stafford, Leino, Ott, Foligno, Gerbe equaling a "position of strength". I think we have some good depth at wing, but we could absolutely benefit from any type of top-6 upgrade, being a winger or a center. Foligno is unproven, Leino is a bust, and Stafford is, well, we know about Stafford.
Sure we could use an upgrade, but you don't do it at the expense of your weakest position.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:35 AM
  #11
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
By a lot of rumors, you mean Eklund posted it and people ran with it.
Except I didn't see it from Eklund, but yes, that could very well be the case. Honestly, I'm not trying to claim that this is happening, and I don't care if it's just made up. I thought it'd be interesting to discuss. It's not like we have anything else to talk about right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
Why would we downgrade at center, a position of weakness, to upgrade at wing, a position of strength? Boredom, I guess.
But is Gagner really a downgrade from Ennis? I'd say slight upgrade right now because Gagner has more experience at that position. But, there's a lot of potential in Ennis and he could turn out to be better that Gagner soon enough. Plus, Ennis has a thing going with Stafford and Foligno. You can't be sure Gagner fits. So I'd pass. If it's up to me, Ennis goes nowhere.

Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:48 AM
  #12
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent42 View Post
Except I didn't see it from Eklund, but yes, that could very well be the case. Honestly, I'm not trying to claim that this is happening, and I don't care if it's just made up. I thought it'd be interesting to discuss. It's not like we have anything else to talk about right now.



But is Gagner really a downgrade from Ennis? I'd say slight upgrade right now because Gagner has more experience at that position. But, there's a lot of potential in Ennis and he could turn out to be better that Gagner soon enough. Plus, Ennis has a thing going with Stafford and Foligno. You can't be sure Gagner fits. So I'd pass. If it's up to me, Ennis goes nowhere.
Yes, he is a MAJOR downgrade. There are a few players that make this team go. Ennis is one of them. Do you remember what this team looked like when he was out? Slow and uninspired. A horrible team to watch.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:52 AM
  #13
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
Yes, he is a MAJOR downgrade. There are a few players that make this team go. Ennis is one of them. Do you remember what this team looked like when he was out? Slow and uninspired. A horrible team to watch.
Yes I remember and I see your point. I especially remember how Stafford looked when Ennis was out.

Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:55 AM
  #14
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZamboni View Post
There ya go.

I know it's hard to be truthful sometimes.
Minimum standard for a guy making his money. For me would be 18 goals and 45 points per year. He'll have to average 20 goals and 50 points over the next 5 years to hit that mark, and considering what he's done so far, that's a pretty tall task. I'll pencil him in as a bust.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:01 PM
  #15
ZZamboni
Puttin' on the Foil
 
ZZamboni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
Minimum standard for a guy making his money. For me would be 18 goals and 45 points per year. He'll have to average 20 goals and 50 points over the next 5 years to hit that mark, and considering what he's done so far, that's a pretty tall task. I'll pencil him in as a bust.
So far....

ZZamboni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:15 PM
  #16
Deevo
Registered User
 
Deevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZamboni View Post
There ya go.

I know it's hard to be truthful sometimes.
38 goals, 60 assists in 220 NHL games, including 8 goals, 17 assists in his most recent 71 game season for a 28 year old making 4.5 mil a year...

I don't think saying "Ville Leino is a bust" is too far from being truthful, seeing as these are the numbers he has put up in the heart of the typical "Prime years" for an NHL player. Yes, I know he started his NHL career late.

Deevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:24 PM
  #17
Myllz
Pavelski Lite
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 13,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
Yes, he is a MAJOR downgrade. There are a few players that make this team go. Ennis is one of them. Do you remember what this team looked like when he was out? Slow and uninspired. A horrible team to watch.
Do you remember when he was completely invisible for the first 35 games of the season? I like Ennis, but let's not pretend he's something he isn't yet. Gagner and Ennis are fairly close right now.

Myllz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:24 PM
  #18
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
Why would we downgrade at center, a position of weakness, to upgrade at wing, a position of strength? Boredom, I guess.
there is a difference between strength and depth

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:52 PM
  #19
Wisent42
Registered User
 
Wisent42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Södertälje
Country: Sweden
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Something funny about a slow off season is that when there is nothing solid to discuss, people tend to clutch at straws and build these huge scenarios of them. The silence just makes the speculation even worse. (Like I did here)

Take Bobby Ryan. Good player, yes, but he isn't Wayne Gretzky of 1985, right? Still some fans seem willing to throw just about anything and everything at the Ducks to get him. Because of boredom I guess. People build these ridiculous expectations of Bobby Ryan.


Last edited by Wisent42: 08-23-2012 at 12:55 PM. Reason: Wasn't finnished yet
Wisent42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:10 PM
  #20
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myllz View Post
Do you remember when he was completely invisible for the first 35 games of the season? I like Ennis, but let's not pretend he's something he isn't yet. Gagner and Ennis are fairly close right now.
He only played in 48 games and scored 29 in 33 games after returning from his second injury so it appears your math is off. Yeah, he had a slow start, but the team was still much better with him in the lineup because he added a dimension which nobody else on this team has. If you thought he was invisible, I'd say you have a hard time seeing. There is a direct correlation between his absence and that teams downfall. If you actually think he and Ganger are close in terms of the quality of player they are, you are entitled to that opinion but it is a terrible one.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:18 PM
  #21
Myllz
Pavelski Lite
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 13,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
He only played in 48 games and scored 29 in 33 games after returning from his second injury so it appears your math is off. Yeah, he had a slow start, but the team was still much better with him in the lineup because he added a dimension which nobody else on this team has. If you thought he was invisible, I'd say you have a hard time seeing. There is a direct correlation between his absence and that teams downfall. If you actually think he and Ganger are close in terms of the quality of player they are, you are entitled to that opinion but it is a terrible one.
He was absolutely invisible for the beginning of the year. He had 7 points through 22 games. His absence also did little for the team's downfall considering he had done nothing prior to being injured, unless you consider those 5 points in 15 games critical.

You're making him out to be something he's not yet.

Myllz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:18 PM
  #22
bullseyed
Registered User
 
bullseyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Amherst, NY
Posts: 257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
He only played in 48 games and scored 29 in 33 games after returning from his second injury so it appears your math is off. Yeah, he had a slow start, but the team was still much better with him in the lineup because he added a dimension which nobody else on this team has. If you thought he was invisible, I'd say you have a hard time seeing. There is a direct correlation between his absence and that teams downfall. If you actually think he and Ganger are close in terms of the quality of player they are, you are entitled to that opinion but it is a terrible one.
I figured the joke was that he was invisible in 35 games because he wasn't playing in those games.

I guess he gets points because he got you to bite.

bullseyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:20 PM
  #23
Myllz
Pavelski Lite
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 13,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
I figured the joke was that he was invisible in 35 games because he wasn't playing in those games.

I guess he gets points because he got you to bite.
The 35 I was thinking of was Roy's start before being injured in 2010/11.

Myllz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:30 PM
  #24
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 6,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myllz View Post
He was absolutely invisible for the beginning of the year. He had 7 points through 22 games. His absence also did little for the team's downfall considering he had done nothing prior to being injured, unless you consider those 5 points in 15 games critical.

You're making him out to be something he's not yet.
He was creating a lot of chances and was snakebit. You are looking back and using stats as your guide. I remember as soon as he went out, you could tell the loss of his speed was going to kill this team, and it did. We became one of the slowest teams in the NHL overnight. You don't always have to get on the scoreboard to make the team better. I'm not making him out to be somthing he's not. He's one of the 2 or 3 most important forwards on this team, period.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:32 PM
  #25
New Sabres Captain
ForFriendshipDikembe
 
New Sabres Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 38,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myllz View Post
He was absolutely invisible for the beginning of the year. He had 7 points through 22 games. His absence also did little for the team's downfall considering he had done nothing prior to being injured, unless you consider those 5 points in 15 games critical.

You're making him out to be something he's not yet.
Until Ennis got hurt...he was downright bad. Getting hurt was the best thing to happen with him--it probably helped avoid a huge sophomore slump.

New Sabres Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 11:50 PM.

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.