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, 11:53 AM
  #151
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post

if failure is your goal, management and players being on different pages is definitely a good way to go
Every year, half the league is buyers and half the league is sellers. Does that mean that every year, half the league's players somehow don't care to perform, knowing that the expectation isn't there to win a cup? Of course not. Players love to upset expectations, even their own managements'. Players compete against management, too, you know - they have to outperform what management thinks they're worth if they're going to get that next raise. I really don't think Darcy's team-building strategy will have any long term impact on the psyche of the locker room. Guys care too much about their own careers to just not compete because management doesn't think "win now" should be the goal.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:04 PM
  #152
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 11,645
vCash: 500
So, we should offer sheet Joakim Andersson.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:06 PM
  #153
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
I agree with everything except Enroth.

It hurts Enroth. Enroth needs to be given the reigns to take his next step (succeed or fail). He needs a season where he can get AT LEAST 40 games... and that won't happen with Miller here.
I don't think it will hurt Enroth. I have a lot of faith in Rolston being able to a maintain the confidence he rebuilt in Enroth. jhonas talked about how much of a positive influence Rolston was. I think that played a big role in Enroth's play at the WC.

Enroth was able to get back to back starts with Rolston. Basically getting rewarded for good play, something that rarely if ever occurred with Ruff. I envision a much more involved role for Enroth next season. Maybe not quite a tandem goaltending situation but he will get over 30 starts. No more of Lindy riding Miller.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:13 PM
  #154
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I don't think it will hurt Enroth. I have a lot of faith in Rolston being able to a maintain the confidence he rebuilt in Enroth. jhonas talked about how much of a positive influence Rolston was. I think that played a big role in Enroth's play at the WC.
We disagree. Enroth needs the opportunity to start 5 in a row. To feel the weight. To work on his game start to start.

There is zero benefit to Enroth if Miller stays, it simply slows or at worsrt postpones the next stage of his development.

It's really a stretch to see Miller's presence as a benefit to Enroth.

Quote:
If you recall Enroth was able to get back to back starts with Rolston after he played well. I envision a much more involved role for Enroth next season. Maybe not quite a tandem goaltending situation but he will get over 30 starts. No more of Lindy riding Miller.
maybe if Miller is traded at the deadline (has the date been announced?), and Enroth rides a large portion of the remaining 15 or so games

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:16 PM
  #155
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
So, we should offer sheet Joakim Andersson.
We should tell st louis they either accept this trade:
Miller (50%)
Vanek (50%)

for

Halak
Oshie
1st

or we will give Petriangelo a 7 yr / 10 million per year offersheet


Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:17 PM
  #156
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I don't think it will hurt Enroth. I have a lot of faith in Rolston being able to a maintain the confidence he rebuilt in Enroth. jhonas talked about how much of a positive influence Rolston was. I think that played a big role in Enroth's play at the WC.

Enroth was able to get back to back starts with Rolston. Basically getting rewarded for good play, something that rarely if ever occurred with Ruff. I envision a much more involved role for Enroth next season. Maybe not quite a tandem goaltending situation but he will get over 30 starts. No more of Lindy riding Miller.
I disagree only because Miller is likely going to need showcased in order for Darcy to move him (which probably won't happen, but whatever). Darcy is likely to put a nugget in Ron's ear to that affect.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:30 PM
  #157
HarryNealesGarden
Big Daddy Ted
 
HarryNealesGarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: BOS
Country: United States
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Look, the fact is, this whole "give away Miller/Vanek for whatever we can get so we lose more" argument is null. That is distinctly an internet argument and an internet argument only, because, once again, deliberately trying to make your team worse is not something which happens in professional sports. While it may, in theory, be the optimal strategy from an economic/theoretical sense, franchises care about selling tickets and putting a good product on the ice for the fans. They care about putting young players in a position to develop and succeed. What the F* type of message do you think it sends to the room when you trade your best players for scraps?

I'll tell you what it says. It says "we don't care about winning right now." It says "we don't think you're good enough." It says "this organization will trade you for a bag of worthless pucks no matter how good you are."

Do you REALLY think that's the message management should be sending to the team? Do you think Hodgson and Ennis and Myers and Grigorenko and Armia and Risto want to play for team that says "screw it, we're not going to win anyway, might as well self-destruct and lose as many games as possible."

This is abject shenanigans. If you are going to trade a star player from a rebuilding team, you do it for fair value and you do it because it's the last choice you have. Dumping Miller for a 2nd round pick or something is not fair value. Despite whatever you might think as an e-GM, sending the right message to your players, fans, and entire organization is something that has value. Far, far more value than the difference between a 2nd and 1st round pick.

I, for one, applaud Darcy for waiting to get fair value for Miller and Vanek. Telling your players and fans "hey, we want to lose as many games as possible" is a horribly destructive message, and one that rightly should drive fans and players away from the team in droves. It should never be supported. By anyone.

HarryNealesGarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:43 PM
  #158
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryNealesGarden View Post
Look, the fact is, this whole "give away Miller/Vanek for whatever we can get so we lose more" argument is null. That is distinctly an internet argument and an internet argument only, because, once again, deliberately trying to make your team worse is not something which happens in professional sports. While it may, in theory, be the optimal strategy from an economic/theoretical sense, franchises care about selling tickets and putting a good product on the ice for the fans. They care about putting young players in a position to develop and succeed. What the F* type of message do you think it sends to the room when you trade your best players for scraps?

I'll tell you what it says. It says "we don't care about winning right now." It says "we don't think you're good enough." It says "this organization will trade you for a bag of worthless pucks no matter how good you are."

Do you REALLY think that's the message management should be sending to the team? Do you think Hodgson and Ennis and Myers and Grigorenko and Armia and Risto want to play for team that says "screw it, we're not going to win anyway, might as well self-destruct and lose as many games as possible."

This is abject shenanigans. If you are going to trade a star player from a rebuilding team, you do it for fair value and you do it because it's the last choice you have. Dumping Miller for a 2nd round pick or something is not fair value. Despite whatever you might think as an e-GM, sending the right message to your players, fans, and entire organization is something that has value. Far, far more value than the difference between a 2nd and 1st round pick.

I, for one, applaud Darcy for waiting to get fair value for Miller and Vanek. Telling your players and fans "hey, we want to lose as many games as possible" is a horribly destructive message, and one that rightly should drive fans and players away from the team in droves. It should never be supported. By anyone.
I think letting your players walk for nothing sends a worse message. And that's what is going to happen if they don't get moved. To me, as a fan, as one of those people you say the franchise is worried about sending messages to, treading water in 12th place sends a worse message. That sends the message to me that they don't care to improve if it takes short term pain.

Besides, none of the fans will care about the message that was sent in 2013-14 if we grab Reinhart in the draft and are a cup contender in a few years. That's the only message that ultimately counts.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:45 PM
  #159
WhoIsJimBob
I Believe
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryNealesGarden View Post
Look, the fact is, this whole "give away Miller/Vanek for whatever we can get so we lose more" argument is null. That is distinctly an internet argument and an internet argument only, because, once again, deliberately trying to make your team worse is not something which happens in professional sports. While it may, in theory, be the optimal strategy from an economic/theoretical sense, franchises care about selling tickets and putting a good product on the ice for the fans. They care about putting young players in a position to develop and succeed. What the F* type of message do you think it sends to the room when you trade your best players for scraps?

I'll tell you what it says. It says "we don't care about winning right now." It says "we don't think you're good enough." It says "this organization will trade you for a bag of worthless pucks no matter how good you are."

Do you REALLY think that's the message management should be sending to the team? Do you think Hodgson and Ennis and Myers and Grigorenko and Armia and Risto want to play for team that says "screw it, we're not going to win anyway, might as well self-destruct and lose as many games as possible."

This is abject shenanigans. If you are going to trade a star player from a rebuilding team, you do it for fair value and you do it because it's the last choice you have. Dumping Miller for a 2nd round pick or something is not fair value. Despite whatever you might think as an e-GM, sending the right message to your players, fans, and entire organization is something that has value. Far, far more value than the difference between a 2nd and 1st round pick.

I, for one, applaud Darcy for waiting to get fair value for Miller and Vanek. Telling your players and fans "hey, we want to lose as many games as possible" is a horribly destructive message, and one that rightly should drive fans and players away from the team in droves. It should never be supported. By anyone.
Have you seen what the Boston Celtics and Philadelphia 76ers have done this offseason?

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9466869/lakers

Quote:
In the NBA, you want to be either really good or really bad. You never want to land between those two "reallys" for long. You don't want to be squeezed into the no. 8 seed or keep finishing 12th or 13th in every lottery. Basically, you don't want to be the Milwaukee Bucks. (Cut to every Bucks fan nodding vigorously.) If you can't compete for the title, why not bottom out in the most flagrantly offensive way possible?
I would argue that that approach is true in the NHL, as well.

We've seen what picking in the 10 to 13 range year after year has gotten the Sabres.

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:46 PM
  #160
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
I think letting your players walk for nothing sends a worse message. And that's what is going to happen if they don't get moved. To me, as a fan, as one of those people you say the franchise is worried about sending messages to, treading water in 12th place sends a worse message. That sends the message to me that they don't care to improve if it takes short term pain.

Besides, none of the fans will care about the message that was sent in 2013-14 if we grab Reinhart in the draft and are a cup contender in a few years. That's the only message that ultimately counts.

teams are sending a lot of bad messages every offseason...

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:47 PM
  #161
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
Have you seen what the Boston Celtics and Philadelphia 76ers have done this offseason?

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9466869/lakers



I would argue that that approach is true in the NHL, as well.

We've seen what picking in the 10 to 13 range year after year has gotten the Sabres.
cap space is a different animal in the NBA and so is their draft... not mention the short contracts that lead to franchise caliber players moving in free agency every year.

I think it's a terrible comparable

Think about the number of NBA "star" players who have changed teams in their prime... and compare that to the NHL. The economics, CBA, Draft, and team structures are so vastly different from the NHL that the comparable is without meaning.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:52 PM
  #162
dotcommunism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,866
vCash: 500
The fact is that a major obstacle to a Miller trade is salary cap space. This is another thing that is a bigger deal to actual real life teams than it is to fans. There are ways for the Sabres to facilitate a deal by doing things like eating a lot of Miller's contract or taking a bad contract back, but the Sabres are going to either want extra assets back, or are going to look for alternatives that don't require them to eat cap space first.
Meanwhile, any team looking to trade for Miller is going to prioritize ways to open up cap space that don't require giving up additional assets that they'd rather not move.

dotcommunism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:52 PM
  #163
WhoIsJimBob
I Believe
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
cap space is a different animal in the NBA
True, but both those teams have made moves to take huge steps back on the court in 2013-14 with plans to remake the roster over the next few years via the draft.

The Sixers brought in a new GM to remake the team and he promptly traded their only All Star for a draftee that is still rehabbing an ACL and a 2014 1st round pick.

The Sixers weren't good last year and could be worse this year. The only real concern I and plenty of other Sixers fans have is will Noel's knee be OK after the Bynum debacle last year.

The bottom line is that there are pro teams that do gut their roster to try and get high picks to remake the team.

Look at what the Houston Astros are doing, too.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/93...-espn-magazine

Quote:
Houston has come by losing honestly, and second-year general manager Jeff Luhnow has been purposefully transparent at every turn. Smart baseball fans in Houston see Luhnow as their team's savior, the mad scientist brave enough to lose big now to win even bigger later. Outsiders see him as nuts for willingly fielding a team of glorified minor leaguers.
They have spent almost nothing at the MLB level the past few years and have invested in the draft and international signings instead.

They won't see the fruits of those invests for a few years. But, their system went from horrible to one of the best in baseball. And stinking at the MLB level was a big piece to their game plan, as well.

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:57 PM
  #164
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
True, but both those teams have made moves to take huge steps back on the court in 2013-14 with plans to remake the roster over the next few years via the draft.

The Sixers brought in a new GM to remake the team and he promptly traded their only All Star for a draftee that is still rehabbing an ACL and a 2014 1st round pick.

The Sixers weren't good last year and could be worse this year. The only real concern I and plenty of other Sixers fans have is will Noel's knee be OK after the Bynum debacle last year.

The bottom line is that there are pro teams that do gut their roster to try and get high picks to remake the team.

Look at what the Houston Astros are doing, too.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/93...-espn-magazine



They have spent almost nothing at the MLB level the past few years and have invested in the draft and international signings instead.

They won't see the fruits of those invests for a few years. But, their system went from horrible to one of the best in baseball. And stinking at the MLB level was a big piece to their game plan, as well.
Thanks for those examples.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 12:58 PM
  #165
Eichel15
A DJ saved my life
 
Eichel15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Downtown Buffalo
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,702
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Eichel15
If you think Miller being here will make a difference in the team winning a cup or not, you're smoking good stuff. Terry said, goal is to win cups. THIS team can't do that.

Eichel15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:02 PM
  #166
dotcommunism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
The bottom line is that there are pro teams that do gut their roster to try and get high picks to remake the team.
But do those teams just dump their players for nothing? Because that's what's being argued about. There's a big difference between gutting your roster and getting a return and gutting your roster for nothing. And oftentimes even when teams do the former they get criticized for doing the latter (see: the Marlins)

Quote:
Look at what the Houston Astros are doing, too.

They have spent almost nothing at the MLB level the past few years and have invested in the draft and international signings instead.
Major League Baseball doesn't have things like a salary cap or salary floor and amateur spending works completely differently there than it does in the NHL. Furthermore the major league assets that the Astros moved weren't dumped for nothing, they were moved for future assets

dotcommunism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:03 PM
  #167
dotcommunism
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by enrothorne View Post
If you think Miller being here will make a difference in the team winning a cup or not, you're smoking good stuff. Terry said, goal is to win cups. THIS team can't do that.
Who said anything even remotely resembling this?

dotcommunism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:10 PM
  #168
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
True, but both those teams have made moves to take huge steps back on the court in 2013-14 with plans to remake the roster over the next few years via the draft.
The Celtics moves 33 million in cap space in 13-14(57% of the cap), AND 18 million in 14-15.

The NBA is a completely different animal. Monster free agents are hitting the market in 2014. Teams clear cap space to contend in the future.

That's not remotely similar to the Sabres situation... they have no cap issues. the Celtics GOT something of incredible value in trading those guys. CAP SPACE. that's not the same as "giving Miller away for nothing"

Quote:
The Sixers brought in a new GM to remake the team and he promptly traded their only All Star for a draftee that is still rehabbing an ACL and a 2014 1st round pick.
Im not sure what the comparable is.... trading Jason Pominville for futures?

Is this supposed to be an example of trading a good player that you realize you can't build around?

Quote:
The bottom line is that there are pro teams that do gut their roster to try and get high picks to remake the team.
the bottom line is that the comparison of different leagues with different economics, markets, drafts, CBAs, and roster structures is a pointless endeavour

Quote:
Look at what the Houston Astros are doing, too.
maybe you'll point to some NHL teams...

Quote:
They have spent almost nothing at the MLB level the past few years and have invested in the draft and international signings instead.

They won't see the fruits of those invests for a few years. But, their system went from horrible to one of the best in baseball. And stinking at the MLB level was a big piece to their game plan, as well.
stinking at the MLB level has to do with money... not improving the team. The MLB draft is also COMPLETELY different.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:11 PM
  #169
WhoIsJimBob
I Believe
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcommunism View Post
But do those teams just dump their players for nothing? Because that's what's being argued about. There's a big difference between gutting your roster and getting a return and gutting your roster for nothing. And oftentimes even when teams do the former they get criticized for doing the latter (see: the Marlins)
Who is saying trade Miller for a 7th round pick?

All I've said is that moving Miller now for slightly less than what you MIGHT get at the deadline would be offset by the team getting a better draft pick.

It's all theoretical, but if they move Miller now and finish with the 5th pick versus keeping him until the deadline and doing well enough to get only the 10th pick, the trade value difference between the 10th and 5th picks is the opportunity cost of keeping Miller.

Plus, you are running the risk that there is no market for Miller at the deadline and he walks for nothing (or just a pick you get trading his negotiating rights before UFA opens).

Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcommunism View Post
Major League Baseball doesn't have things like a salary cap or salary floor and amateur spending works completely differently there than it does in the NHL. Furthermore the major league assets that the Astros moved weren't dumped for nothing, they were moved for future assets
The assertion I was countering was that no pro team intentionally fields a team that is bad to improve their chances in the draft.

I feel that the Astros are a pretty good example of a team doing just that.

If you look at the Oilers in 2010-11 and 2011-12, did they do everything they could to ice the best team possible?

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:11 PM
  #170
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcommunism View Post
But do those teams just dump their players for nothing? Because that's what's being argued about.
To be fair, the only reason we're arguing about dumping players for nothing is that a number of folks are arguing that there are zero trading partners out there willing to give up anything and saying I have to somehow prove it if I want to assume anything different. In reality, I doubt we'd have to give up players for nothing. But folks keep pushing us towards that logical extremity by demanding proof that anyone is willing to give up anything.

At that point, at the point of losing them for nothing, would you do it? I still suppose so, because otherwise you just lose them for nothing next summer, and have a lower pick for your trouble. I see zero value in them helping us to a 12th place finish, personally. I similarly see zero value to the extra wins that Vanek helped us earn last year. It got us further from the cup than if we had just bottomed out and had MacKinnon now.

But in reality, I kind of resent that this argument has turned into me having to defend the most absurd, extreme position of giving them away for nothing, because everyone knows we should get something back for them. Just the mere fact that I can't introduce phone records or offers reported in the media doesn't mean we face this choice between keeping them and just giving them away.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:14 PM
  #171
brian_griffin
"Elite Poster" ???
 
brian_griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: hiding Robert Durst
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,200
vCash: 500
Salient post by HarryNealesGarden, and I also agree with joshjull's view - but with Jame's exception re: Enroth (although I am in-between Jame's and joshjull's opinion in terms of how Enroth could be impacted).

I reject Haseoke's contention Vanek and Miller should be moved (now) and at whatever return value (regardless of how minimal) can be garnered.

Some additional points:

1) Vanek's value, IMO, will be maximized at deadline. But, I could see Darcy acting before then if the value is fair return (top-line winger injury to another team). The risk, as others have noted, is a Vanek injury mid-Sabre-season, but I think that is a risk worth taking. I explicitly reject the notion a potential decline in Vanek's performance will make him less attractive at the deadline. There will be limited number of top-line forwards available at the trade deadline. A slower offensive pace will not detract from his body of work. Had either Iginla or Jagr tailed off last year in the shortened season before the deadline, I believe it would have had no impact on the ability of CGY and DAL to move either of them at the deadline. Top-line talent is top-line talent, and Vanek has a large enough body of work to stand for itself. I know I make an un-supported assumption, but I am too lazy to dig up scenarios in past half-dozen years where a potential deadline offensive rental had a "sub-par" offensive season which kept him from being moved.

2) Miller (and Vanek) have another value, and that is putting paying customers in seats at the FNC.

3) As someone else noted, these situations are both games of chicken. Other GMs know Darcy will want to sell high, but has poor leverage knowing there is small likelihood either will resign in BUF. Now that we are post-draft, the longer Darcy and other GMs wait, the lower #39/#26 trade value gets, but also, the smaller the gap between "bid" and "ask" prices gets. Then sometime around the Olympics, the value at which a trade deal will be struck will begin to rise.

Maybe the fact no deals have been made is because it actually makes sense that no deals have been made, because the gap between bid and ask value hasn't gotten close enough, because enough time hasn't passed for that value to equilibrate?

Sometimes the world does make sense.

brian_griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:15 PM
  #172
WhoIsJimBob
I Believe
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
the bottom line is that the comparison of different leagues with different economics, markets, drafts, CBAs, and roster structures is a pointless endeavour
The post I replied to said no pro team would do what teams like the Astros and others have done.

The post wasn't specific to the NHL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
maybe you'll point to some NHL teams...
How about the Oil Changing Oilers recently?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
stinking at the MLB level has to do with money... not improving the team. The MLB draft is also COMPLETELY different.
Agreed.

But again, it was an example of a pro team intentionally fielding a team that was less than the best that they could have in an attempt to be bad to eventually improve the team.

It's their version of "suffering".

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:17 PM
  #173
HarryNealesGarden
Big Daddy Ted
 
HarryNealesGarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: BOS
Country: United States
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcommunism View Post
But do those teams just dump their players for nothing? Because that's what's being argued about. There's a big difference between gutting your roster and getting a return and gutting your roster for nothing. And oftentimes even when teams do the former they get criticized for doing the latter (see: the Marlins)


Major League Baseball doesn't have things like a salary cap or salary floor and amateur spending works completely differently there than it does in the NHL. Furthermore the major league assets that the Astros moved weren't dumped for nothing, they were moved for future assets
Exactly. The Celtics gutted their roster, but in the process of moving Terry, Pierce, Garnett and Doc they have also accumulated FOUR 1st round picks, plus an optional swap that could net another lottery pick, plus additional assets. The Sixers also got the equivalent of two 1st rounders.

Npbody is arguing that it would be a bad idea to trade Miller and Vanek. Far from it. But to act like we should just take whatever junk assets someone is willing to give (like a 2nd rounder) is ludicrous. The ONLY benefit of that approach is losing more games, and that is just a terrible idea. Losing more games while simultaneously acquiring valuable assets? Now we're talking.

HarryNealesGarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:20 PM
  #174
HarryNealesGarden
Big Daddy Ted
 
HarryNealesGarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: BOS
Country: United States
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
But again, it was an example of a pro team intentionally fielding a team that was less than the best that they could have in an attempt to be bad to eventually improve the team.

It's their version of "suffering".
I would happily drive Miller to the airport tomorrow if we netted fair value in return. So would just about any of us.

But it seems haseoke is arguing that we should dump him between now and October 3rd for whatever the best offer is, even if the best offer is terrible. And that just doesn't make any sense when you take a holistic view of the entire organization and its future.

HarryNealesGarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2013, 01:21 PM
  #175
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
Who is saying trade Miller for a 7th round pick?

All I've said is that moving Miller now for slightly less than what you MIGHT get at the deadline would be offset by the team getting a better draft pick.
Haseoke suggested trading Miller for whatever we could get

I think the presumption that the Sabres would be worse with Enroth over Miller is debatable

Quote:
The assertion I was countering was that no pro team intentionally fields a team that is bad to improve their chances in the draft.

I feel that the Astros are a pretty good example of a team doing just that.
Waiting for relevant NHL examples

Quote:
If you look at the Oilers in 2010-11 and 2011-12, did they do everything they could to ice the best team possible?
they didn't give Khabibulin away... so as an example in this Miller debate, I thin you lost

Jame 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 02:33 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.