I would agree with that price for a 50p guy *if he didn't have a terrible contract*. Unless Cozens becomes a 60 point players consistently, that contract has negative value. I would be very hesitant to trade a 1st for him without retention.
Speculation: Armchair GM Thread
- Thread starter Scoresberg
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
herzausstein
Registered User
Kakko would be interesting. NyR has a fair bit of wing depth (Laf, panarin, smith, kreider, etc) so perhaps he is muscled out a bit. Not sure what the ask is but i feel like thats an organization that would enjoy themselves some Lauzon or L'Heureux type players
Alas, if he becomes a 60-point guy, he won't be traded...there is the dilemma. You have to be able to make the predictions based on the information we already have and what he becomes.
Predsanddead24
Registered User
- Mar 7, 2019
- 6,105
- 7,094
I get the point but given our center situation I'd have no problem overpaying in terms of both assets and contract for a guy I knew was a guarantee 50 point center player for the duration of the contract. The concern to me is that he's not been a 50 point player this season and I have a hard time seeing Bruno as the guy to get him back on track.
I personally think Cozens has a higher ceiling than just about anyone in our prospect pool at forward. I would've said Kemell last year but he seems not to be taking a step forward. Whether that's worth losing ZLH or Svech kinda depends on Buffalo's willingness to retain. At a lower cap hit he could be a great gamble
Unless we unload a big contract back (ROR, Stamkos, March, Forsberg, etc), acquiring Cozens locks us in to having very little flexibility for the next 3-4 years. If someone that we think might be a 70-80 point player comes along, missing out on them for cap reasons would be tragic. Even lower stakes stuff like Broberg's offer sheet or the "Monahan and a 1st for nothing" style deals go away if we trade Novak+futures for Cozens unretained. I am not convinced he is the guy to give up flexibility for, especially if it also involves assets.
All of that changes if we are moving on from a big contract and/or we get significant retention. I like the idea of adding Cozens, I just hope we are trading older pieces vs futures and cap flexibility. ROR straight up or Novak+Carrier+?? would be my dream.
Last edited:
If I’m playing armchair GM, I’d go full blown Billy Bean on Brunette’s ass and trade away all the vets except Forsberg, Stamkos, Marchessault and O’Reilly (the first three due to contracts and O’Reilly because the team needs him). Then I’m telling Brunette he either gives the young guys plenty of ice time and puts them in critical roles and positions or I’ll find someone that will.
Yeah but Ownership looks like they have given BT the keys and checkbook for now. So that ain't happening.
Predsanddead24
Registered User
- Mar 7, 2019
- 6,105
- 7,094
It would definitely make us less flexible through next year but after that our cap situation isn't really that dire. I also think holding out for the mythical 70+ point center is just wishing for something that is never going to be available. We don't have the assets to get someone like that in a trade and no one like that is coming here in free agency. To me it's sort of a don't let perfect be the enemy of good situation.
glenngineer
Registered User
I would not trade for a center with a low IQ and doesn’t play PK for a wing who can play all three situations with an edge to their game, especially if said forward has a long term contract that isn’t necessarily friendly.
I get serious Turris vibes from this.
Exactly what I was saying. His hand will have to be forced.
Roman Yoshi
#164303
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,532
- 13,399
I like Kakko just as much as a player as Cozens tbh. But he has the added advantage in terms of contract flexibility.
I'd be all over trading them any Lauzon/Carrier/Sissons types and assorted chaff for Kakko. Not ZLH. But if it ever came down to like Lauzon+2nd or something like that, I'd take that over any of the Cozens proposals floated here. He's not a center, but then... Cozens probably isn't either.
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,532
- 13,399
And Josi. Well, not that I'm against trading him either. But I don't see that ever happening, so might as well list him with the other UnMovables.
O'Reilly is an interesting case however.... he has no protections. His contract isn't actually dumb relative to what he provides. He would be very marketable. I know that Trotz would never trade him, nevertheless. But if there is one guy we might actually be able to cash in somewhat big on, it's probably O'Reilly.
So Haslam just sits in a corner and remains silent like a ventriloquist's dummy?
I don't want a Jerry Jones, but I don't want the above either.
Armourboy
Hey! We suck!
I'm not trading ZLH for Cozens, end of story. If we were talking a situation like Stone that would be different, but Cozens isn't anywhere near that. I'm willing to take a gamble, but the goal is to get better, and long term I don't see that trade really doing that. Buffalo wants to move Cozens, that alone means I'm not giving away top young prospects for him that I think are going to be good solid NHL players.
Kappo Kakko is kind of the same thing. If I can get him at a reasonable price, fine, but he hasn't shown me enough that I would give up anything of major value for. If they want roster players, fine you can have your pick of any above the age of 25, I don't care who it is.
Kappo Kakko is kind of the same thing. If I can get him at a reasonable price, fine, but he hasn't shown me enough that I would give up anything of major value for. If they want roster players, fine you can have your pick of any above the age of 25, I don't care who it is.
From what have gather he is involved, but part of his agreement in the purchase plan was that he wouldn't rock the boat. My guess is until it is finalized and he has full majority ownership he's not going to do anything to risk screwing that up, if he even does then. We don't really know what kind of owner he will be once his hands are more or less untied.
Sam Girard (508 NHL games, 215 pts, 5 with the Preds, 3 pts)
Kevin Fiala (499 NHL games, 446 pts, 204 games and 97 pts with the Preds). I think Fiala needed more time in Milwaukee before being a NHL player. He was rushed before he was ready.
Tanner Jeannot, (254 NHL games and 86 pts, 152 games and 62 pts with the Preds)
Yakov Trenin, (283 of his 328 NHL games, 79 of his 85 pts with Nashville)!
He seems to have fallen apart for the Avs and the Wild.
Be careful with comments like that, people may think you’re in the overcook them in the AHL camp.
Armourboy
Hey! We suck!
Eh Fiala is what he was always going to be, Gretzky in his own mind, but not so much on the ice. Nothing about his game has changed no matter what team he has been on.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
1) Dubois was never traded to the Jackets; he was a CBJ draftee. Maybe you meant when he was traded from here to Winnipeg?
2) Dubois was considered a higher upside player, and was younger when he was traded.
On the other hand, Cozens hasn't done anything even remotely like The Shift. It's not a fair comparison in either direction.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
I like to think I did my part in helping people realize what kind of a horror show that would have been.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Normally that's what it costs. But also, normally a team in our situation has more than one or two of those guys and so can afford the risk.
Armourboy
Hey! We suck!
I just think some of the Buffalo fans are living in a dream world thinking Cozens is going to pull a better player as a main piece. Normally that might be the case, but part of that is usually the other team lowering their cap and in most cases they wouldn't even be doing that with Cozens.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
The problem with this is that it presumes Cozens will be traded or has to be traded. Their responses are consistent with a situation in which there's no reason for them to trade him at this time,
Armourboy
Hey! We suck!
Sure but we've seen that reasoning used around here for years as a way to justify a better return that never happens.
Latest posts
-
News Article: Quebec City, Andlauer and the Sparticat Fiasco- Latest: BonHoonLayneCornell
-
