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

Trading Up Part II: The Midnight Barkov

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-12-2013, 01:18 PM
  #126
Devo-2
Registered User
 
Devo-2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
I think you're reading too much into it. I think the comment re: Sweden was about the class as a whole. If anything, I think that bodes poorly for those who are hoping guys like Burakowsky, de la Rose, Hagg, et al. end up in Buffalo. It also sounded like he had Wennberg #4 on that list of Euros.

Even if he has Lindholm below Nichushkin, there's still a good chance that Lindholm would be a great pick at #8, and that they think the same.
His discussion on Barkov and Nichushkin was based on specific questions about both from Jeremy White (i.e., "what do you think about..."). later, Howard asked who the top European's were and Kevin said "the top guy after that is Lindholm, you already mentioned Nichushkin...."

Devo-2 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 01:20 PM
  #127
Dunkster19
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
The "Darth Regier" scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, and Sekera to Carolina for 5.

Carolina is looking to add a roster play.

Regier trades 5, 16, Grigorenko, Vanek or Miller at 50% (maybe more) to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm) at 5, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal, and Vanek gives him a legit scorer.

Second scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, Vanek at 50% to Nashville for 4.

Nashville wants a big four now (Weber, Josi, Rinne, Vanek) and thinks a center will drop to 8.

Regier trades 4, 16, Grigorenko, Miller to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov) at 4, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal.


A Darth Regier off-season.
You may not have to include #16 for phase two of your scenario

Dunkster19 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 01:44 PM
  #128
SabresAreScaryGood
Win jack for Jack!
 
SabresAreScaryGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,801
vCash: 500
The Sabres talk too much. They raise fans expectations and then dont have the guts or smarts to pull it off.

SabresAreScaryGood is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 01:57 PM
  #129
LGB24
Registered User
 
LGB24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
The "Darth Regier" scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, and Sekera to Carolina for 5.

Carolina is looking to add a roster play.

Regier trades 5, 16, Grigorenko, Vanek or Miller at 50% (maybe more) to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm) at 5, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal, and Vanek gives him a legit scorer.

Second scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, Vanek at 50% to Nashville for 4.

Nashville wants a big four now (Weber, Josi, Rinne, Vanek) and thinks a center will drop to 8.

Regier trades 4, 16, Grigorenko, Miller to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov) at 4, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal.


A Darth Regier off-season.
so either we give up 8, 16, 52, grigorenko, sekera, vanek
or
8. 16, 52, grigorenko, vanek and miller + pay for half his contract

In either scenario how is giving up 3 firsts (inc grigs), a second and 2 of our best players to move up 7 spots a "Darth Regier" offseason? To get #1 you need a vast overpayment, much like you've displayed here in both scenarios. Im not sure how overpaying immensely to move up 7 spots deserves a bunch of praise for Darcy. The Mackinnon blinders get more ridiculous every day

LGB24 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:01 PM
  #130
LGB24
Registered User
 
LGB24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunkster19 View Post
I would rather give up some veterans than all those picks and prospects so my answer would be no.
it doesnt matter what you want, its what colorado wants

LGB24 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:02 PM
  #131
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Giving up Vanek, Miller, Grigorenko, 2 firsts and whatever else for one player is stupid. I know everyone has prospect boners on this site but MacKinnon or Druin or whoever could en up being worse than Grigorenko, easily.

Karate Johnson is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:03 PM
  #132
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
The "Darth Regier" scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, and Sekera to Carolina for 5.

Carolina is looking to add a roster play.

Regier trades 5, 16, Grigorenko, Vanek or Miller at 50% (maybe more) to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm) at 5, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal, and Vanek gives him a legit scorer.

Second scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, Vanek at 50% to Nashville for 4.

Nashville wants a big four now (Weber, Josi, Rinne, Vanek) and thinks a center will drop to 8.

Regier trades 4, 16, Grigorenko, Miller to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov) at 4, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal.


A Darth Regier off-season.

Are you insane? He should be fired if he considers any of that garbage.

Karate Johnson is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:06 PM
  #133
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
Giving up Vanek, Miller, Grigorenko, 2 firsts and whatever else for one player is stupid. I know everyone has prospect boners on this site but MacKinnon or Druin or whoever could en up being worse than Grigorenko, easily.
cool guess


Jame is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:09 PM
  #134
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
cool guess

Is it out of the realm of possibility that Grigorenko becomes a better player than anyone taken in this draft? Specifically MacKinnon?

Karate Johnson is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:12 PM
  #135
Rob Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 18,640
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
Is it out of the realm of possibility that Grigorenko becomes a better player than anyone taken in this draft? Specifically MacKinnon?
Nope

Rob Paxon is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:13 PM
  #136
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
Is it out of the realm of possibility that Grigorenko becomes a better player than anyone taken in this draft? Specifically MacKinnon?
how big is the realm?

Jame is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:18 PM
  #137
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
The point is, trading Grigorenko in addition to 2 firsts, Vanek and Miller and some other stuff makes very little sense considering Grigorenkos potential and youth.

Even if MacKinnon is better making that move doesn't make sense.

I'd rather just draft the next consensus #1 guy the old fashioned way. By sucking for a year.

Karate Johnson is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:20 PM
  #138
Gabrielor
14-15 Goal: McDavid
 
Gabrielor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
The "Darth Regier" scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, and Sekera to Carolina for 5.

Carolina is looking to add a roster play.

Regier trades 5, 16, Grigorenko, Vanek or Miller at 50% (maybe more) to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm) at 5, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal, and Vanek gives him a legit scorer.

Second scenario:

Regier trades 8, 52, Vanek at 50% to Nashville for 4.

Nashville wants a big four now (Weber, Josi, Rinne, Vanek) and thinks a center will drop to 8.

Regier trades 4, 16, Grigorenko, Miller to Colorado for 1.

Roy gets one of (Jones, Drouin, Barkov) at 4, his pupil from Quebec, and another first rounder. Miller to Colorado is shades of his deal.


A Darth Regier off-season.

I have to concur, that isn't very Darth-Regier. More moderate-to-worse case of what we'd have to give up.

Darth Regier is:

1-8,Sekera for 1-5
1-5,Miller,McCabe,2nd-2014 for 1-1


A top-pick trade represents to the fans that they will rebuild, and rebuild with top talent.

Gabrielor is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:22 PM
  #139
Gabrielor
14-15 Goal: McDavid
 
Gabrielor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
The point is, trading Grigorenko in addition to 2 firsts, Vanek and Miller and some other stuff makes very little sense considering Grigorenkos potential and youth.

Even if MacKinnon is better making that move doesn't make sense.

I'd rather just draft the next consensus #1 guy the old fashioned way. By sucking for a year.
In order to suck to 1st-overall, we'd need to reduce our talent. Kind of like how we'd be doing the same to trade for MacKinnon. So why not get MacKinnon?

Gabrielor is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:23 PM
  #140
couture23
Sabres & Red Sox
 
couture23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: GTA/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,706
vCash: 500
How about we talk about the possibility of moving up from 16? Because frankly, I'm getting sick of these fantasy type proposals that gut out our organization to get one draft pick.

Swap picks with Phoenix, Winnipeg, or Columbus?

couture23 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:23 PM
  #141
kirby11
Registered User
 
kirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
The point is, trading Grigorenko in addition to 2 firsts, Vanek and Miller and some other stuff makes very little sense considering Grigorenkos potential and youth.

Even if MacKinnon is better making that move doesn't make sense.

I'd rather just draft the next consensus #1 guy the old fashioned way. By sucking for a year.
We'd have to suck A LOT for that...as in, trade miller, vanek, and sekera for futures and sign a scrub backup to be our starting goalie...
I don't wanna be edmonton and be stuck in a perpetual rebuild (also, before anyone brings up the positives of the young guys playing together, all those RFA contracts coming up around the same time will make it difficult to retain all of them)

kirby11 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:27 PM
  #142
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,957
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by couture23 View Post
How about we talk about the possibility of moving up from 16? Because frankly, I'm getting sick of these fantasy type proposals that gut out our organization to get one draft pick.

Swap picks with Phoenix, Winnipeg, or Columbus?
You need a scenario to move up from 16, that's why it's not interesting. Too many variables.

stokes84 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:27 PM
  #143
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,816
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by couture23 View Post
How about we talk about the possibility of moving up from 16? Because frankly, I'm getting sick of these fantasy type proposals that gut out our organization to get one draft pick.

Swap picks with Phoenix, Winnipeg, or Columbus?
It's going to depend on opportunity cost -- who is the player available at that pick and do the teams targetted have another player higher? If it happens, it's probably going to be fairly organic as the draft unfolds.

I also wouldn't mind if they could get themselves another pick between 16 and 38. There are some juicy candidates in there who may not slip all the way down to the 38th pick. That's where the discussed veteran trade options could land them something additional.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:27 PM
  #144
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
The point is, trading Grigorenko in addition to 2 firsts, Vanek and Miller and some other stuff makes very little sense considering Grigorenkos potential and youth.

Even if MacKinnon is better making that move doesn't make sense.

I'd rather just draft the next consensus #1 guy the old fashioned way. By sucking for a year.
Word. You can make a much smarter use of your resources than a lot of these trade proposals.

With the depth of talent that's supposed to be there at 5-25 this year, I'd rather we just put more bullets in the gun.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:30 PM
  #145
couture23
Sabres & Red Sox
 
couture23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: GTA/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
It's going to depend on opportunity cost -- who is the player available at that pick and do the teams targetted have another player higher? If it happens, it's probably going to be fairly organic as the draft unfolds.

I also wouldn't mind if they could get themselves another pick between 16 and 38. There are some juicy candidates in there who may not slip all the way down to the 38th pick. That's where the discussed veteran trade options could land them something additional.
Like Bowey, or Morrissey?

couture23 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:54 PM
  #146
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
I have no problem trading Miller and Vanek. I have no problem trading 2 firsts, or Grigorenko.

I have a problem trading them all for one 17 year old.

Karate Johnson is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 02:58 PM
  #147
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,927
vCash: 500
I understood Devine's comments this morning as an acknowledgement that the teams in the 3-7 slots want primarily Buffalo's young players and that the Sabres are mulling over whether there are any players in this year's draft (i.e. someone they think is a franchise player) that they REALLY want and would be willing to part with some of their young players in return.

In other words, if the Sabres were able to get into position to draft Jones, MacKinnon or whomever they deem a future superstar, they'd be willing to give up any of their current prospects and/or youngsters (including Myers, Hodgson and Ennis).

Sabretip is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 03:00 PM
  #148
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,816
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by couture23 View Post
Like Bowey, or Morrissey?
Zykov and Carrier, maybe Hartman are guys I'd like in the 20-38 range with another pick.

Chainshot is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 03:02 PM
  #149
unte93
Registered User
 
unte93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
would Nashville take Hodgson + Vanek + 16 for 4?

unte93 is offline  
Old
06-12-2013, 03:17 PM
  #150
SabresFanNorthPortFL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Port, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unte93 View Post
would Nashville take Hodgson + Vanek + 16 for 4?
Now that would be interesting, as the two have exhibited chemistry together, would form 2/3 of #1 or #2 line. Interesting. Maybe a signed Vanek would be more inticing.

SabresFanNorthPortFL 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 02:17 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.