Speculation: New GM Candidates?

[Moskau]

If Patty makes the call not to trade Miller and he leaves as a UFA this summer I will beyond mad

Sabres may not have much of a choice. If St Louis offers Halak and a 4th would that really make you happy?

 

[BUCKSHOT]

Sabres may not have much of a choice. If St Louis offers Halak and a 4th would that really make you happy?

something is better than nothing

I think there is a market now, but not at the Sabres price. The longer this drags out the worse it is going to get

 

[Beerz]

something is better than nothing

I think there is a market now, but not at the Sabres price. The longer this drags out the worse it is going to get

I'd rather let him walk then take that TBH

 

[ZZamboni]

Any asset no matter what size it is.... Is always always always better than absolutely no asset. Ego and hurt feelings will say the opposite. But logic says anything is better than nothing. If the only choices were a NHL fourth liner or nothing because Miller walks ... I take the fourth liner.

 

[Beerz]

Any asset no matter what size it is.... Is always always always better than absolutely no asset. Ego and hurt feelings will say the opposite. But logic says anything is better than nothing. If the only choices were a NHL fourth liner or nothing because Miller walks ... I take the fourth liner.

Anything below reasonable fair value for a player like Miller ..as a GM I walk away on principle.

 

[NotABadPeriod]

Any asset no matter what size it is.... Is always always always better than absolutely no asset. Ego and hurt feelings will say the opposite. But logic says anything is better than nothing. If the only choices were a NHL fourth liner or nothing because Miller walks ... I take the fourth liner.

A couple of exceptions.

1) A bad long-term contract. I wouldn't trade Miller for Brad Richards for instance. It would be better to walk away from Miller for nothing (and have the cap space) then saddle oneself with an albatross contract like that.

2) Fringe players that are a waste of a contract slot (eg. Riley Boychuk)

Granted, it is highly, highly, highly unlikely that those are the only choices of course.

Anything below reasonable fair value for a player like Miller ..as a GM I walk away on principle.

And 29 other GMs say "whatever" and move on...the principled stand achieves nothing. Besides, fair market value may not be what you want it to be.

 

[Myllz]

Anything below reasonable fair value for a player like Miller ..as a GM I walk away on principle.

Why? If Miller straight up tells you he isn't coming back and the best you can get for him is a third at the deadline, take it and move on. Being stubborn and not getting anything for him accomplishes nothing.

 

[Beerz]

A couple of exceptions.

1) A bad long-term contract. I wouldn't trade Miller for Brad Richards for instance. It would be better to walk away from Miller for nothing (and have the cap space) then saddle oneself with an albatross contract like that.

2) Fringe players that are a waste of a contract slot (eg. Riley Boychuk)

Granted, it is highly, highly, highly unlikely that those are the only choices of course.



And 29 other GMs say "whatever" and move on...the principled stand achieves nothing. Besides, fair market value may not be what you want it to be.

Halak and a 4th is not reasonable IMO .. If I'm not improving my team..I'm sure as hell won't be improving somebody elses.

 

[Beerz]

Why? If Miller straight up tells you he isn't coming back and the best you can get for him is a third at the deadline, take it and move on. Being stubborn and not getting anything for him accomplishes nothing.

Sets bad precedent.

 

[Djp]

Halak and a 4th is not reasonable IMO .. If I'm not improving my team..I'm sure as hell won't be improving somebody elses.

Buffalo would get a 3rd for Millers negotiation rights.

 

[ZZamboni]

Why? If Miller straight up tells you he isn't coming back and the best you can get for him is a third at the deadline, take it and move on. Being stubborn and not getting anything for him accomplishes nothing.

Which was exactly my point. Of course as G&G says there are some absurd trades that would do more harm than good. But if the choice was some asset vs. no asset, I take the less asset. I hate it, but I reflect and say if that's the best available, so be it. Ego and "principle" can sometimes cloud logic. Especially stubbornness.

 

[Myllz]

Sets bad precedent.

For what?

 

[Beerz]

For what?

Teams thinking they can low ball you.

Look at the Iginla trade. Calgary had no leverage...Jarome was going to Pitt.. Feaster was still given a reasonable offer when you consider the circumstances of there literally being no market for him. I would expect the same thing in a deal for Miller.

 

[Myllz]

Teams thinking they can low ball you.

Look at the Iginla trade. Calgary had no leverage...Jarome was going to Pitt.. Feaster was still given a reasonable offer when you consider the circumstances of there literally being no market for him. I would expect the same thing in a deal for Miller.

And you believe Calgary is now somehow hamstrung into only making bad trades now because of the Iginla trade? He was leaving either way and Feaster did what he could to get something for him. That's all you can expect.

 

[Beerz]

And you believe Calgary is now somehow hamstrung into only making bad trades now because of the Iginla trade? He was leaving either way and Feaster did what he could to get something for him. That's all you can expect.

I didn't say that at all. Most thought it was a "bad" trade but it was still reasonable trade in the end and Flames acquired at least one piece that was of actual worth to their rebuild. You think Flames fans would of been "well at least he got something" if Pens offered a 3rd for Iginla? No they'd be calling for Feasters head even more than they do now.

 

[HamiltonOHL]

Any idea of who u guys are leaning towards as ur new gm yet... Rumor wise?

 

[Paxon]

Any idea of who u guys are leaning towards as ur new gm yet... Rumor wise?

Not really. Take your pick from the many assistant GM's the Sabres are said to have either sought permission to interview or have interest in. I don't think anyone can credibly guess at this point.

 

[SamuraiArt]

Any idea of who u guys are leaning towards as ur new gm yet... Rumor wise?

Allegedly, Lafontaine was highly interested in Rick Dudley. When that fell through, Lafontaine was left with several less experienced but still talented AGMs including Fenton, Botteril, Treliving, Benning, Loiselle, and Murray.

Many people feel that the most important attribute our next GM should have is a talent for drafting but it's a lot easier to pick quality players at #1-4 rather than later on. I believe the most interesting moves that any future Sabres GM will make involve the 2014 free agents that we pick up next summer. If the GM can sign a few highly touted free agents for a short term/quick money contract then our team might actually be interesting to watch next year. If we're lucky we may even pick up a few vet additions that can nicely complement our young 2015/16 roster.

As it stands I wouldn't mind keeping around Tallinder/Ott around for vet support (provided the deals are >3-4years). It'll be important to have vet guidance if/when we want to turn this team into a winner again.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

I'd like to see a GM get creative with Miller.

Miller and a pick swap turn say third into a 2 or a 2 and a 4 into a 1. Otherwise I'm not gonna be upset that somebody didn't fall over to make sure they got mid round pick. It's just so unlikely that the pick hasany value in the long term that I couldnt bring myself to care, Halak and a fourth is pretty much can't bring myself to care value. A footnote goalie and a pick, I'd rather they got players for a Roc playoff run then a mid round pick. Id say getting Girgs Grigs Risto Larsson Armia McNabb 5-10 playoff games is more valuable than a fourth rounder.

 

[jBuds]

LaFontaine reiterating on the Rangers' intermission report that if the right candidate isn't available until the summer, he will wait.

Which puts even more pressure on the potential candidate to be immaculate.

"You are so good that we waited to be able to speak with you" type of golden Bruschi boy.

I don't like it.

 

[MacOfNiagara]

Allegedly, Lafontaine was highly interested in Rick Dudley. When that fell through, Lafontaine was left with several less experienced but still talented AGMs including Fenton, Botteril, Treliving, Benning, Loiselle, and Murray.

I dont think that is accurate. I know Dudley had some interest in the job, but all indications seemed to be that Pat was looking for a young and upcoming GM as his first option, not as a backup plan to not getting Dudley.

 

[Prospector74]

Which puts even more pressure on the potential candidate to be immaculate.

"You are so good that we waited to be able to speak with you" type of golden Bruschi boy.

I don't like it.

Not crazy about that aspect but more concerned that the guy needs to be here by JAN to really be able to work phones to see what the potential trades are for our upcoming UFA's and potentially other pieces on the roster then take that information and look at how it all folds in to making us better. After that he pulls the trigger on the trades that fit a well thought out plan for the future. If we delay too long, the guy may not make the most ideal moves for what the team needs in the future. We have some big chips to move and getting the right (not the most) returns out of those guys is important.

 

[Jim Bob]

I'd rather let him walk then take that TBH

Why?

What is the upside to keeping him and losing him for nothing instead of getting something in return?

 

[Jim Bob]

Sets bad precedent.

And letting a key UFA walk for nothing is a good precedent?

 

[1point21Gigawatts]

Sets bad precedent.

Remember how good of a precedent we set when we let Briere and Drury walk for nothing? Yeah, neither do I.