Roster Speculation 2017-18 Part 3
- Thread starter Icicle
- Start date
- Status
Husko
Registered User
truthbluth
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2011
- 7,570
- 6,999
Re: Kane+8OA <-> Nichushkin+3OA
Ok, so does Dallas consider this? Evander Kane scored more goals than any Star last season, so secondary scoring is clearly an issue for them. Nichushkin and Kane are only separated by 3 drafts, so it's not like they are selling a young prospect for an aging vet. On top of that, Nichushkin walked away from Dallas. There may still be some resentment in the organization for that move, and this would give Nichushkin a fresh start. It also fixes a potential problem for the Stars who would have to protect Nichushkin in the expansion draft, which is a gamble considering he's just 50/50 to return. The Sabres don't have as hard a decision to make on a gamble, and this would largely depend on information GMBot would have to get from Nichushkin's agent about willingness to come to Buffalo.
On the draft pick, Dallas has decent defensive depth in their farm system, specifically in puck movers, so even though the defensemen might be tops on their board, they have greater need for impact forwards in their organization. The difference between forwards likely to be available at 3 and 8 is not as stark as the difference between defensemen likely to be available at 3 and 8, imo. So maybe Dallas doesn't see a big drop off. If I were them, I'd just take Cody Glass since I think he has as good a shot as anybody of being the best player out of this draft, but it's not like Dallas couldn't use Casey Mittelstadt or Owen Tippett or even a guy like Martin Necas.
I think the needs align well for this move, though I'd prefer to trade Kane for a dman, I'm just not enamored with the type of D that are likely to be available for Kane.
Ok, so does Dallas consider this? Evander Kane scored more goals than any Star last season, so secondary scoring is clearly an issue for them. Nichushkin and Kane are only separated by 3 drafts, so it's not like they are selling a young prospect for an aging vet. On top of that, Nichushkin walked away from Dallas. There may still be some resentment in the organization for that move, and this would give Nichushkin a fresh start. It also fixes a potential problem for the Stars who would have to protect Nichushkin in the expansion draft, which is a gamble considering he's just 50/50 to return. The Sabres don't have as hard a decision to make on a gamble, and this would largely depend on information GMBot would have to get from Nichushkin's agent about willingness to come to Buffalo.
On the draft pick, Dallas has decent defensive depth in their farm system, specifically in puck movers, so even though the defensemen might be tops on their board, they have greater need for impact forwards in their organization. The difference between forwards likely to be available at 3 and 8 is not as stark as the difference between defensemen likely to be available at 3 and 8, imo. So maybe Dallas doesn't see a big drop off. If I were them, I'd just take Cody Glass since I think he has as good a shot as anybody of being the best player out of this draft, but it's not like Dallas couldn't use Casey Mittelstadt or Owen Tippett or even a guy like Martin Necas.
I think the needs align well for this move, though I'd prefer to trade Kane for a dman, I'm just not enamored with the type of D that are likely to be available for Kane.
No.... not even for a split second. Everything else you typed was just homerism
truthbluth
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2011
- 7,570
- 6,999
How does that relate to secondary scoring? I mean, Evander Kane could've score more goals than any Star... that would still be true even if they had 6 20 goal scorers (in which case, secondary scoring wouldn't be an issue for them.
So, not only is your correlation... wrong. It also starts out with a wildly misleading "fact". Sure Kane scored more goals than any Star... does that mean he's a better goal scorer than Benn and Seguin?
Should I go on?
truthbluth
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2011
- 7,570
- 6,999
Actually no. I just realized that I don't care about anything you have to say, even the nonsensical rant above.
It was a poorly-worded sentence by the author, I think. He writes for a Vancouver newspaper, so he was referencing Tanev and then two defensemen for the Kings - likely based on reports that LA has interest in Kane.
I understood what he was saying.
Der Jaeger
Generational EBUG
That deal, plus Kane for Muzzin, and a lot just got solved for the Sabres.
Tuch is the perfect winger for Eichel. He can skate with Eichel, he's big, he can score, and he'll do the dirty work.
Eventually......
Girgensons - Eichel - Tuch
Wouldn't that also describe Fasching though too? Wall work, retrivals and playmaking are strengths for him too.
I'm not sure why we would want the above Kane for nuke deal.
None of the d in this draft are going to be impactful in the NHL next year. So I don't see a huge benefit in moving up in the draft. And we have the rights to nuke who maybe comes back maybe doesn't and is a lesser version of Kane.
I'd take my chances with whoever we draft at 8 and trade Kane for a current nhler, knowing full well we might only get a guy at McCabe's level. If we trade Kane I want help now, not for restocking the defense prospects.
None of the d in this draft are going to be impactful in the NHL next year. So I don't see a huge benefit in moving up in the draft. And we have the rights to nuke who maybe comes back maybe doesn't and is a lesser version of Kane.
I'd take my chances with whoever we draft at 8 and trade Kane for a current nhler, knowing full well we might only get a guy at McCabe's level. If we trade Kane I want help now, not for restocking the defense prospects.
The bigger question is whether Botterill feels the same way as you. He can afford to take a longer view than next season. If the Kane-centric market for an established NHL defenseman is weak, perhaps he's good with moving up and guaranteeing himself his pick of the litter defenseman in the draft.
In any event, I don't think Dallas does that deal.
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
The only way Dallas does that deal is if Nill is on the hot seat and needs an upgrade for 2017-18.
Although, if he dangles 3+Nuke, he can probably do a lot better than Kane+8.
Paxon
202? Stanley Cup Champions
You don't see the benefit in moving from #8 to #3 where you can pick whomever you determine is the top defenseman in the draft? For those who see Makar as a legitimate potential Karlsson-lite, it's a no-brainer. Kane is on the way out. Nichushkin will come back, I'd bet on it. I'm not a huge fan, but he'd plug in fine. He could always be flipped. The real prize of the trade is moving up to #3.
I don't see why you focus on the fact the selection won't be impactful in the NHL next year. Did I miss the memo about an upcoming Cup run?
Does Nichushkin count against the in-season cap for Dallas? If not, I can't figure why they would be the ones providing a very significant pick upgrade to dump him. I would think they would tell us the deal is #3 for #8 and Kane, take it or leave it. Hanging onto him shouldn't be hurting them as long as he's playing overseas of his own volition.
Paxon
202? Stanley Cup Champions
That's not what he's saying. He's saying Kane gets us one of those players by upgrading our 8th overall pick.
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
I believe he left as an un-signed RFA, so he has no contract to count against the cap.
That's a silly perspective to take.
I'd do Kane and 8 for 3. Every Sabres fan should be signing up for that deal.
Two things.
First, he absolutely could disagree with the first bolded. Perhaps he thinks one of these young guys is ready. I don't.
Second, I too agree with a long view, but that has to be balanced out with the present as well. To me in a draft like this, the asset use to get your pick of the litter is a bad use.
I don't think anyone can be sure that anyone of the top d available are going to be better than the next. It's entirely possible that Liljegren or Brannstrom becomes the best guy in the draft.
We all have our favorites, but with that understanding, I personally would rather gamble on my selection at 8, plus whatever defender Kane can return vs one gamble with the puck at 3. I think that limits your risk and gives you help now and long term.
This is all in the dark to some degree. If Botterill knows today that he is looking at a terrible return for Kane. Like far worse than most on this board have speculated, so say a gorges type, then ya if Kane is that valueless, sure throw him in.
I'll be happy if Kane with a small plus (or an extended Kane) gets us something like a Muzzin.
But I am firm in the belief that we should build ourselves similarly to the Nashville setup on defense. Quick players who can move the puck up the ice, pinch with ease in order to keep possession in the offensive zone, and be able to skate back if they get caught off guard because of a mistake.
Antipin is a start.
Guhle will add to it.
Drafting one of Makar/Liljegren/Brannstrom would be another step.
That would give us a group with 3 puck movers long term. At least one per pairing.
This would also work with a group forwards that long term look to be a team that transitions very well and very quickly (Eichel/O'Reilly/Girgensons/Bailey/Baptiste/Pu/Asplund/Nylander) is at least two forwards per line that will have some good wheels.
I just think this team should be playing a real up-tempo style. I believe that's what Botterill wants as well, so I'm pretty happy. But I think if possible I'd rather take Housley to implement this as opposed to Tocchet. Housley seems to really understand the evolution that is going on with NHL defenses, and is ahead of the curve.
But I am firm in the belief that we should build ourselves similarly to the Nashville setup on defense. Quick players who can move the puck up the ice, pinch with ease in order to keep possession in the offensive zone, and be able to skate back if they get caught off guard because of a mistake.
Antipin is a start.
Guhle will add to it.
Drafting one of Makar/Liljegren/Brannstrom would be another step.
That would give us a group with 3 puck movers long term. At least one per pairing.
This would also work with a group forwards that long term look to be a team that transitions very well and very quickly (Eichel/O'Reilly/Girgensons/Bailey/Baptiste/Pu/Asplund/Nylander) is at least two forwards per line that will have some good wheels.
I just think this team should be playing a real up-tempo style. I believe that's what Botterill wants as well, so I'm pretty happy. But I think if possible I'd rather take Housley to implement this as opposed to Tocchet. Housley seems to really understand the evolution that is going on with NHL defenses, and is ahead of the curve.
I certainly see the possible benefit, but I also acknowledge that the benefit could be useless if the wrong call is made. And in this years draft there are several defenders who I think it's fair to say, make it difficult to believe a gm can have a distinct separation on who will be the right guy.
Nuke is a wild card that is not something of major value in my opinion.
As to the present cup run, check my response to zip, but in my opinion, if this team is able to get two quality NHL defensemen, I don't think it's ridiculous for them to get in the playoffs and win a round or two. So no, I don't expect them to get to the finals next year, but that doesn't equate to using one of our most disposable assets to get an investment that will likely be two years away from any use.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Post-Game Talk: GAME 19 - Extra, Extra, Read all about it! Blues 3 Bruins 2 (OT)- Latest: Mr. Make-Believe
