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 Offseason roster build thread part Additional Nauseum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-23-2013, 03:27 PM
  #226
dotcommunism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
I agree. But money is a different kind of asset. For us, money is essentially limitless. With the salary cap and team revenue coming in, Terry's never going to be able to run out of money, or even substantially impair his fortune. So he might have to run the team at a $10M loss. He's got what, $4B? He can afford to run this team at a $160M loss every year in perpetuity just based on a 4% interest rate in the safest mutual fund you can imagine.
Again, there's no actual reason for him to do any of this other than "because he can". That's not an actual reason from any sort of non-fan perspective.

Quote:
For something to have value, it has to have scarcity. Terry's money, for our purposes, is limitless. So if that money makes a trade happen that wouldn't otherwise, whatever value you get is essentially something for nothing.
Pegula doesn't suddenly lose his money if he doesn't spend it right now, or spend it to essentially do other teams favors for no actual asset gain

dotcommunism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 03:28 PM
  #227
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcommunism View Post
Again, there's no actual reason for him to do any of this other than "because he can". That's not an actual reason from any sort of non-fan perspective.


Pegula doesn't suddenly lose his money if he doesn't spend it right now, or spend it to essentially do other teams favors for no actual asset gain
but we will draft #1 overall by doing this.... duh

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 03:30 PM
  #228
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reacher Gilt View Post
So you don't believe in stocking up on second rounders, but you would pay Miller 3 million dollars to pay on another team to get one?
I didn't say they were valueless. You could move them in a deal to move up, e.g..

Quote:
And those top picks don't work out more often than not, look at the oilers or Tampa who picked before us again.
You can't judge most of the Oiler's kids, seeing as they've been in the league for like, one year. But if you look at the top forwards picked over 2000-2009, you're going to notice mostly all-stars, and high end ones at that.

Do the analysis over a fair sample that's been in the league a few years, and those top picks emphatically work out more often that not.

I'm not vouching, btw, for the top defensemen picked. It's a position that takes most folks a lot longer to learn, and what we know about kids at age 18 is much less reliable.

Edit: here's a little breakdown. Top 2 forwards picked in the draft, 2000-2009

Made It (like top line forward on a contender): Heatley, Gaborik, Kovalchuk, Spezza, Nash, Eric Staal, Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby, Bobby Ryan, Toews, Patrick Kane, Stamkos, Tavares

Didn't really make it (anything less): Upshall (funny year for forwards, was the second F picked at 6th), Nathan Horton, Jordan Staal, Van Riemsdyk, Filatov (another weird year for forwards, 2nd forward picked at #6), Duchene.

All those guys on the "didn't make it" list are still damn good players. But using that list as your baseline, the odds are 70% that you're gonna get an elite forward in the NHL with one of the top two forwards picked in the draft.

I like those odds, and think the Sabres would be wise to pursue them.


Last edited by haseoke39: 07-23-2013 at 03:50 PM.
haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 03:48 PM
  #229
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
So we couldn't say, trade some of the excess youth we have accumulated for upgrades at the NHL level, like what Ottawa just did with Ryan?
We could. It's just a lot less likely route to getting a star forward than drafting one yourself, and costs more in assets.

Quote:
And what franchise players were on the 05-07 teams?
Arguably none, and arguably if they had any they might have won a cup.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 03:56 PM
  #230
Samsonite23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: wny
Country: United States
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Am I the only one who questions this assumption?
I don't think that we should just let Miller walk for nothing, I would just get the most we can for him.

Personally, I think with it being a contract year as well as an Olympic year Miller has all the motivation in the world to play at the top of his game.

Samsonite23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 04:04 PM
  #231
Reacher Gilt
Registered User
 
Reacher Gilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
I didn't say they were valueless. You could move them in a deal to move up, e.g..



You can't judge most of the Oiler's kids, seeing as they've been in the league for like, one year. But if you look at the top forwards picked over 2000-2009, you're going to notice mostly all-stars, and high end ones at that.

Do the analysis over a fair sample that's been in the league a few years, and those top picks emphatically work out more often that not.

I'm not vouching, btw, for the top defensemen picked. It's a position that takes most folks a lot longer to learn, and what we know about kids at age 18 is much less reliable.

Edit: here's a little breakdown. Top 2 forwards picked in the draft, 2000-2009

Made It (like top line forward on a contender): Heatley, Gaborik, Kovalchuk, Spezza, Nash, Eric Staal, Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby, Bobby Ryan, Toews, Patrick Kane, Stamkos, Tavares

Didn't really make it (anything less): Upshall (funny year for forwards, was the second F picked at 6th), Nathan Horton, Jordan Staal, Van Riemsdyk, Filatov (another weird year for forwards, 2nd forward picked at #6), Duchene.

All those guys on the "didn't make it" list are still damn good players. But using that list as your baseline, the odds are 70% that you're gonna get an elite forward in the NHL with one of the top two forwards picked in the draft.

I like those odds, and think the Sabres would be wise to pursue them.
Those are all good players but you need a team of 20-25 guys and if you have 2 or 3 stars and don't make the playoffs it's not worth sucking 5 years.

Teams like Boston or Detroit are fighting for the cup every year without those top picks.

Reacher Gilt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 04:27 PM
  #232
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reacher Gilt View Post
Those are all good players but you need a team of 20-25 guys and if you have 2 or 3 stars and don't make the playoffs it's not worth sucking 5 years.

Teams like Boston or Detroit are fighting for the cup every year without those top picks.
Absolutely. That's not really an argument to not get those elite guys, though. I think our pipeline currently has a pretty good stock of supporting characters, and we seem to be going in the direction big bodied character guys with speed, a la Boston.

To address your examples, I think Boston is good example of another way to build a team - that is, around an elite defenseman. Elite defensemen can be just as valuable as elite forwards, but it's much more of a crap shoot trying to get one, because they usually develop later. It's not often that the best defensemen of your generation goes to UFA, and it only happened in Chara's case because Ottawa still couldn't figure how good he was, even at age 29. Boston is still built around an elite talent, but I like our odds of getting one such as him much better through the top of the draft than as a 29 year old UFA.

Detroit is often brought up, and I can't wait until Datsyuk and Zetterberg retire so they can stop being parroted out to prove that elite talent is there in the 6th round. At the time, Detroit was the only team really putting resources into scouting half of the planet. Unless there's a third half of the planet waiting to be discovered, I don't expect it to happen again.

Either way, both have elite players, they just didn't get them at the top of the draft. I know it's possible, but I like the odds of failing for McDavid much better than those of our 6th rounder becoming Datsyuk, or landing elite D in the UFA market.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 05:05 PM
  #233
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcommunism View Post
Again, there's no actual reason for him to do any of this other than "because he can". That's not an actual reason from any sort of non-fan perspective.


Pegula doesn't suddenly lose his money if he doesn't spend it right now, or spend it to essentially do other teams favors for no actual asset gain
He gets the return on that trade, doesn't he?

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 07:05 PM
  #234
Paradigm
Registered User
 
Paradigm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,502
vCash: 500
Post in the Vanek thread on the Trade Forums caught my eye from a Shark's fan... tried to flesh it out a bit more in my post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm View Post
I'm very interested in a deal surrounding Vanek and Pavelski.

Both are 29 and UFA after this year; Buffalo can offer to retain salary in the deal... not sure if that's enough to get it done.

I feel like the trade would fit needs for both teams, especially Buffalo who needs a center capable of playing good defense until Girgs is ready for full-time duty.

Vanek (50% Salary) for Pavelski?

I'd obviously love to see both on the Sabres, but it would depend on the assets required to acquire Pavelski if Vanek isn't in the picture. Plus, re-signing them both could be a tough task during the next off-season.

Sample Line-ups?

Vanek-Thornton-Burns
Marleau-Couture-Havlat
Torres-Hertl-Kennedy
Sheppard-Desjardins-Wingels

Ennis-Pavelski-Stafford
Foligno-Hodgson-Flynn
Ott-Grigorenko-Leino
Tropp-Girgensons-Kaleta
Is 1-for-1 good enough value? What could we realistically add to get it done? Is there motivation for either side to do it?

Paradigm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 08:23 PM
  #235
Matt Martin
Generational Poster
 
Matt Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 12,787
vCash: 50
Top-30 faceoff man in the league, 60 points or so, absolutely. The question would be as to whether the Sabres could keep him.

Matt Martin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 08:27 PM
  #236
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm View Post
Post in the Vanek thread on the Trade Forums caught my eye from a Shark's fan... tried to flesh it out a bit more in my post.



Is 1-for-1 good enough value? What could we realistically add to get it done? Is there motivation for either side to do it?
So let me get this straight... We are trading the better player AND retaining 50% salary, and you think we would add?

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 08:34 PM
  #237
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
So let me get this straight... We are trading the better player AND retaining 50% salary, and you think we would add?
never fails

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 09:11 PM
  #238
kirby11
Registered User
 
kirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
So let me get this straight... We are trading the better player AND retaining 50% salary, and you think we would add?
Let's see...
2 way, defensively strong center who can consistently score 20+ goals (and broke 30 in 2011), is good at the dot, and can play on both special teams units at $4 mil

in exchange for...

One dimensional goal scorer (albeit a very good one) who is, at best, average defensively at $7 mil

Even if we ate some of vanek's salary, I'd say we still have to add. Maybe something like a 2nd+adam?

Not to mention...we have a TON of young centers (hodgson, grigs, larsson, even ennis, because pavelski can play wing, too) who could use mentoring from a guy who is solid on faceoffs and the defensive side of the game. Armia is the only guy who has the tools to learn from vanek, and who knows if he plays here next year

kirby11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 09:19 PM
  #239
kirby11
Registered User
 
kirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucky Gleason View Post
Top-30 faceoff man in the league, 60 points or so, absolutely. The question would be as to whether the Sabres could keep him.
I'd like that...hmm...lineup w/ Pavelski:
Ennis-Hodgson-Stafford (hope the ennis/stafford connection gets rejuvenated)
Leino-Grigs-Ott (try to respark that line from last year's preseason and pairs grigs with someone who's solid in their own end)
Foligno-Pavs-Flynn (tough minutes line)
Kaleta-Porter-Scott

If Larsson shows he's ready to step in as the 3rd line center, do this with the bottom 6:
Pavs-Larsson-Flynn
Kaleta-Porter-Foligno

The more I look at this lineup, the more I like it...provided ennis isn't a complete liability on the wing, and Hodgson's defensive game improves...

kirby11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 09:40 PM
  #240
Moskau
Registered User
 
Moskau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Western New York
Posts: 13,354
vCash: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
So let me get this straight... We are trading the better player AND retaining 50% salary, and you think we would add?
Ahahahahahaha good god man. You would think that with all of these amazing players Buffalo would be contenders every year. Instead they can't even make the playoffs.

Moskau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:09 PM
  #241
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moskau View Post
Ahahahahahaha good god man. You would think that with all of these amazing players Buffalo would be contenders every year. Instead they can't even make the playoffs.
How many really good players do we have? I count Vanek and Miller.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:13 PM
  #242
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
How many really good players do we have? I count Vanek and Miller.
dont forget ennis the superstar

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:14 PM
  #243
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirby11 View Post
Let's see...
2 way, defensively strong center who can consistently score 20+ goals (and broke 30 in 2011), is good at the dot, and can play on both special teams units at $4 mil

in exchange for...

One dimensional goal scorer (albeit a very good one) who is, at best, average defensively at $7 mil

Even if we ate some of vanek's salary, I'd say we still have to add. Maybe something like a 2nd+adam?

Not to mention...we have a TON of young centers (hodgson, grigs, larsson, even ennis, because pavelski can play wing, too) who could use mentoring from a guy who is solid on faceoffs and the defensive side of the game. Armia is the only guy who has the tools to learn from vanek, and who knows if he plays here next year
Why are you talking about his salary when we are retaining half of it? Vanek had 10 more points in 10 less games. They are not remotely on the same level. SJs 6th best forward for our best, and we add... These boards are amazing some days.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:15 PM
  #244
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
dont forget ennis the superstar
He's not a great player, he's just better than the garbage you always want.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:22 PM
  #245
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
He's not a great player, he's just better than the garbage you always want.
you know you make it easy for everyone to never take you seriously around here, when you refer to players like Oreilly and Couturier as garbage

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:26 PM
  #246
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
you know you make it easy for everyone to never take you seriously around here, when you refer to players like Oreilly and Couturier as garbage
They certainly aren't great.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:28 PM
  #247
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
They certainly aren't great.
that's 2

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:29 PM
  #248
JPurp26
Registered User
 
JPurp26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokes84 View Post
They certainly aren't great.
Sarcasm?

JPurp26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:41 PM
  #249
stokes84
Registered User
 
stokes84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,368
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to stokes84
We've been down this path a thousand times. The last time was probably just a few pages back. Lets end it before it begins.

SJ would have to add a B+ level prospect to Pavelski to get Vanek. B+ prospect and a high pick to get him at 50% salary.

stokes84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 10:44 PM
  #250
Matt Martin
Generational Poster
 
Matt Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 12,787
vCash: 50
Flynn played center in college, right?

Matt Martin 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 12:08 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.