Roster speculation part XIV

[Ace]

I think Buffalo has a strong enough leadership group in place to offset the addition of a player with a questionable work ethic/attitude problems, but I don't want the player added to be Vanek (been there, done that).

Either way, the Sabres' "kids" aren't mentally frail children. Adding Vanek would change very little in the room (and it probably wouldn't change much on the ice, either).

I don't want anyone with questionable work ethic. At all. We have a strong enough leadership group to deal with questionable off ice attitude...fine. But when it's time to go to work it's time to go to work. I've never cared about the off ice/field. I don't need Angels...but I need people to work.

 

[Chainshot]

I'd rather stick a flagpole up my urethra before signing Kyle Okposo to the contract he's going to get in UFA.

So Okposo it is!

Well, glad that's settled.

 

[Zip15]

So you're saying you don't want to sign him?

You're either being very open about some strange...interests, or really not into Okposo, eh?

So Okposo it is!

Well, glad that's settled.

Okposo at or above $6m AAV for six years would make me very, very upset. I've repeatedly said we have to avoid an albatross contract this summer, and that would be an albatross sooner than later.

 

[Paxon]

I'm not that into an Okposo signing either. Serious backfire potential.

 

[Chainshot]

Okposo at or above $6m AAV for six years would make me very, very upset. I've repeatedly said we have to avoid an albatross contract this summer, and that would be an albatross sooner than later.

I agree--I was attempting to be funny. Clearly my material needs work.

 

[Zip15]

I agree--I was attempting to be funny. Clearly my material needs work.

I got the humor.

I was just reiterating my position in a less dramatic way.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

I liked Vanek. No interest in bringing him back.

With good reason!

 

[Myllz]

Nobody can get Vanek to play at the level he should be playing at.

 

[TheStorm]

And people on the main board thought the Sabres were the worst for getting rid of Vanek/poms.

 

[TehDoak]

And people on the main board thought the Sabres were the worst for getting rid of Vanek/poms.

It's not really shocking that Vanek and Pomniville dropped off after the age of 30. Combine that with scoring dropping league wide, you're seeing bad numbers out of everyone. Hell, Toews won't break 60 points this year.

 

[Sabre Dance]

It's not really shocking that Vanek and Pomniville dropped off after the age of 30. Combine that with scoring dropping league wide, you're seeing bad numbers out of everyone. Hell, Toews won't break 60 points this year.

Makes McDavid scoring at over point per game more impressive.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Interesting ideas from a mock draft on the mock draft board. It's the 2016 7-round mock, 2.0 run by jawallstar1

1.) Juolevi D
2.) Grundstrom F

Trades:
- Pick 129 (Canadiens 5th rounder) to Dallas for rights to Kris Russell.
- Pick 65 (Buffalo's 3rd), Catenacci, and Deslauriers to Colorado for Soderberg and pick 165 (6th round pick).
- Rodrigues and Lieuwen to Edmonton for Korpikoski and Lagesson.

Overall, I'd be on the fence for a while but would take it if it were a package all-or-nothing draft day deal based on the draft picks. My thoughts on the individual moves:

Draft picks: if Murray came away with Juolevi and Grundstrom, I'm happy. Those two are perfect additions to the team.

Russell trade: not sure. I'd much rather spend assets on a better partner for Ristolainen, but that may need to wait until after the expansion draft. But I wouldn't mind signing Russell to a two-year deal at the cost of cap space and a 5th rounder.

Colorado trade: would rather have the pick 65 and add a later pick, and have Colorado drop the 6th. Not sure I want Soderberg's contract either, though he only has a NTC and could be exposed in an expansion draft.

Edmonton trade: meh. Don't really want Korpikoski, and I don't know enough about Lagesson.

 

[Ace]

Russell is awful. Supremely awful. Ungodly awful.

 

[Reddawg]

Russell is awful. Supremely awful. Ungodly awful.

That's because his team's try to deploy him as a 2 when he's a 4. As a 4, he's perfectly fine. Not when he's getting paid to be a 2 though.

 

[Zip15]

Absolutely not on Russell. He's going to be commanding $4m-$5m per, and he's not good. No, no, no.

 

[Der Jaeger]

That's because his team's try to deploy him as a 2 when he's a 4. As a 4, he's perfectly fine. Not when he's getting paid to be a 2 though.

That's my thought, too. Why I'd rather try to go after someone like Enstrom. Though I think that move needs to wait until after expansion.

 

[TehDoak]

Some long term LW Thoughts:

Currently, Our LW Depth looks like:

Kane
Girgensons
Foligno
Deslaurier
Carrier
Dupuy

In listening to Murray's comments, he seemed to suggest that adding a LW for the Eichel-Reinhart line was something he'd be looking into this summer. Assuming that is in the plans

We have two RFA LW's for one spot (Girgensons/Foligno).

Assuming that Buffalo adds a LW for Eichel-Reinhart, Whom do you re-sign and who do you trade and why?

 

[26CornerBlitz]

Anyone still want this guy?

 

[Myllz]

Going to the Mikhail book of excuses on that one.

 

[Paxon]

Going to the Mikhail book of excuses on that one.

Nikita

 

[signalIInoise]

What's it going to take before Drouin acts like a grown-ass man? At this point I wouldn't trade Franson for him.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Some long term LW Thoughts:

Currently, Our LW Depth looks like:

Kane
Girgensons
Foligno
Deslaurier
Carrier
Dupuy

In listening to Murray's comments, he seemed to suggest that adding a LW for the Eichel-Reinhart line was something he'd be looking into this summer. Assuming that is in the plans

We have two RFA LW's for one spot (Girgensons/Foligno).

Assuming that Buffalo adds a LW for Eichel-Reinhart, Whom do you re-sign and who do you trade and why?

Assuming Murray doesn't envision Reinhart as a center, and looking for a RW for Eichel.

 

[Djp]

Some long term LW Thoughts:

Currently, Our LW Depth looks like:

Kane
Girgensons
Foligno
Deslaurier
Carrier
Dupuy

In listening to Murray's comments, he seemed to suggest that adding a LW for the Eichel-Reinhart line was something he'd be looking into this summer. Assuming that is in the plans

We have two RFA LW's for one spot (Girgensons/Foligno).

Assuming that Buffalo adds a LW for Eichel-Reinhart, Whom do you re-sign and who do you trade and why?

He'd like to get a goal scoring winger for Eichel

We have talked abouth this quite a bit with MCGinn on the team and the issue of resigning him.

Without any trades the bear term outlook looks like....

Kane
Girgensons
Foligno
Deslauriers
Carrier and DuPuy should have 2 full ys left on his ELC.

In 2018/19 season.....

I think Girgensons gets a bridge this year then a decision is made between Kane and Girgensons for one LW.

I see them acquiring a LW either this years draft if they win a lottery pick or trade/UFA ( Hoffman).

Then the third would be Foligno or Carrier or another prospect

The 4th line winger could be Foligno or carrier or some other free agent they acquire or another prospect.

Girgensons, if they choose to keep a Kane could also be kept as a checking centerover Larsson ( assuming Reinhart and Eichel are centers and ROR is a winger)

I though DuPuy was a center...some past projects talked of him as a 4th line center.

 

[Myllz]

Nikita

Derp, right.

 

[slip]

What's it going to take before Drouin acts like a grown-ass man? At this point I wouldn't trade Franson for him.

What happened now? I thought he was turning it around.