Toggle sidebar

Roster thread: Get To Work (2022-2023 Season)

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh said:
One I wasn't comparing him directly with Lindholm... he was brought up to counter the argument 5hat any player is just going to get up and walk out if traded to Buffalo. It's just false.

Second .. ROR was traded to Buffalo on June 26th 2015 and signed his extension on July 3rd 2015... not a day and a half later.

They had no knowledge he was going to re-sign
Click to expand...

My apologies, I think i was remembering the trade date he was moved to St Louis and mixing that up with the date they acquired him.

And as @Djp stated, I remember reading that O'Reilly was expected to extend with Buffalo, not to mention that he was still under contract for an entire year.

But back to the discussion, how is saying "the same arguments for ROR" when talking about Lindholm, supposed to be seen as not comparing ROR to Lindholm?

Lindholm stated publically he was not interested in a rebuild while with the Ducks. That is the bottom line here. This entire discussion is ridiculous given that fact.
 
Irie said:
My apologies, I think i was remembering the trade date he was moved to St Louis and mixing that up with the date they acquired him.

And as @Djp stated, I remember reading that O'Reilly was expected to extend with Buffalo, not to mention that he was still under contract for an entire year.

But back to the discussion, how is saying "the same arguments for ROR" when talking about Lindholm, supposed to be seen as not comparing ROR to Lindholm?

Lindholm stated publically he was not interested in a rebuild while with the Ducks. That is the bottom line here. This entire discussion is ridiculous given that fact.
Click to expand...
Again.. it has nothing to do with Lindholm specifically. You stated that Buffalo has to play by different rules. You implied Buffalo can't make trades with players with short term deals because they will walk.

And no.. it was continually reported that the Avs never gave Sabres permission to speak with ROR and Tim Murray verified that their were no insurances in place at the time of the trade.
 
BritSabre said:
Peeke only got extended a few weeks ago. I can't think of any time a player signed a multi year extension and got moved on. Doesn't mean it's impossible, but for a team that's struggled to keep players in the past I can't see it.
Click to expand...
Yeah I pretty much agree, but they have Gudbranson, Boqvist, and Jiricek coming up soon. Not sure if any of them play the left side but thought maybe Peeke could be expendable.
 
Oh said:
Again.. it has nothing to do with Lindholm specifically. You stated that Buffalo has to play by different rules. You implied Buffalo can't make trades with players with short term deals because they will walk.

And no.. it was continually reported that the Avs never gave Sabres permission to speak with ROR and Tim Murray verified that their were no insurances in place at the time of the trade.
Click to expand...

We were talking about Lindholm, so I am not sure how your post has nothing to do with Lindholm. O'Reilly was not even in the discussion, so to bring him up and his situation, while night and day different, is a "comparison", and if you look at context, there is nothing comparable.

Even if what you say is true about Murray and the situation, which is not what I recall the narrative being, O'Reilly was coming off of a pretty big overpay from the unfortunate Calgary offer sheet. He was having a very down year compared to his contract and expectations. Offering him that 7 year 7+ million dollar deal in the offseason was panned as a super risky move, and the likelihood of O'Reilly taking that deal after only scoring 17 goals was probably viewed as nearly automatic.

Yes, Buffalo can trade for pending UFAs and resign them all if they are going to offer contracts far and above perceived market value. But that is bad business and not an option if Adams wants to build a contender under the cap.

If we are talking about fair market contracts, the Sabres currently have to play by different rules than the desirable location teams. They have to play by different rules than the low tax teams. They have to play by different rules than the Huge market teams with lucrative endorsement deals.

San Jose, another small market team offered Tavares 13 million. He signed in Toronto for 11. The taxes in Ontario are even higher than California, but Tavares is still coming out 3 to 4 times ahead due to very lucrative endorsements being in the Toronto Market.

It sucks. but it is a reality of their situation. You can pretend that Buffalo doesn't have an unfair UFA advantage, but currently that is just not the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dickiedunnwrotethis
My post has nothing to do with Lindholm because I specifically told you what I was talking about. The same thing you said about Lindholm is the same thing you say about Chychrun and other short termed players .. that is the comparison I am drawing.

Nobody felt ROR was overpaid because he had 9 less points in his final year in Col. ROR's value was a lot more than just points. Buffalo didn't have to overpay ROR some exaggerate amount to get him to sign. His contract was unique in the sense that they front loaded the hell out of it with bonus money but framing it as overpayment is a disingenuous argument.
 
Diaspora said:
What kind of D would VO plus VGK 2nd get?
Click to expand...

Djp said:
That gets a mid pair D

mid pair D get a 2nd+ return.
Click to expand...

Olofsson is only under contract for 1.5 seasons and largely gets by on one skill. If traded, he is more of a short term luxury piece to be added to a playoff team that just needs help on the PP. What team like that would be trading their mid pair defensemen for Vic?
 
Last edited:
Me too. CBJ currently has 5 legit NHL RHD and that doesnt include Blankenburg and Cuelemans. They want a center and they could use a wing to replace Voracek and Nyquist is a UFA after this season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uberpecker and Club
Oh said:
My post has nothing to do with Lindholm because I specifically told you what I was talking about. The same thing you said about Lindholm is the same thing you say about Chychrun and other short termed players .. that is the comparison I am drawing.

Nobody felt ROR was overpaid because he had 9 less points in his final year in Col. ROR's value was a lot more than just points. Buffalo didn't have to overpay ROR some exaggerate amount to get him to sign. His contract was unique in the sense that they front loaded the hell out of it with bonus money but framing it as overpayment is a disingenuous argument.
Click to expand...
This interaction has become truly dizzying. I am unclear as to what point you are making. You responded to a post I made about "how Lindholm was never going to sign with Buffalo". Lindholm publicly stated that he has no interest in being part of a rebuild. You implied i was wrong and you brought O'Reilly into the discussion. I say that the two are Apples to Oranges, you then tell me it was never about Lindholm.

You tell me it is now about my statement that Buffalo has a tougher time signing UFAs than other clubs(which was just some support for further reason why Lindholm was not likely to re-sign in Buffalo).

So I then responded and gave reasons, smallest American market, lack of endorsements, high taxes, less desirable destination, and you ignored the response to focus back on O'Reilly.

If I understand you correctly from your last post, you are taking exception with my statement that "Buffalo has a tougher time signing UFAs than a lot of other clubs", right?

If that is what you are taking issue with, please tell me how this is not the case, and why it is that Buffalo is the preferred destination for UFAs.

Unfortunately the search function is broken, otherwise I could steer you to a few links here where we could view the general consensus of the threads that pertain to the other off-topic "concerns" you have added to the interaction.
 
Irie said:
This interaction has become truly dizzying. I am unclear as to what point you are making. You responded to a post I made about "how Lindholm was never going to sign with Buffalo". Lindholm publicly stated that he has no interest in being part of a rebuild. You implied i was wrong and you brought O'Reilly into the discussion. I say that the two are Apples to Oranges, you then tell me it was never about Lindholm.

You tell me it is now about my statement that Buffalo has a tougher time signing UFAs than other clubs(which was just some support for further reason why Lindholm was not likely to re-sign in Buffalo).

So I then responded and gave reasons, smallest American market, lack of endorsements, high taxes, less desirable destination, and you ignored the response to focus back on O'Reilly.

If I understand you correctly from your last post, you are taking exception with my statement that "Buffalo has a tougher time signing UFAs than a lot of other clubs", right?

If that is what you are taking issue with, please tell me how this is not the case, and why it is that Buffalo is the preferred destination for UFAs.

Unfortunately the search function is broken, otherwise I could steer you to a few links here where we could view the general consensus of the threads that pertain to the other off-topic "concerns" you have added to the interaction.
Click to expand...
Ok just to clear things up.. I agree with you.. Lindholm was obviously not signing here. But it's not because "Oh Buffalo" .. We obviously weren't trading for a rental at trade deadline while being bottom of the league.

All I have been pushing back against is your contention that Buffalo can't trade for players with short term contracts because they won't sign here. So while I agree Lindholm specifically wasn't an option I disagree with your reasoning.

But now you are just saying Buffalo has a tougher time which again I can agree with especially with UFAs but most teams are in the same boat.

The biggest factor is winning or ability to show you can win in near future which I believe Buffalo is finally starting to show.
 
Diaspora said:
What kind of D would VO plus VGK 2nd get?
Click to expand...
The problem is VO's salary, the fact that he's signed for next season, and the lack of cap space around the league.

Adams would likely have to find a D that is struggling a bit elsewhere and makes a good chunk of change to get someone to take VO in a deal.
 
Jim Bob said:
The problem is VO's salary, the fact that he's signed for next season, and the lack of cap space around the league.

Adams would likely have to find a D that is struggling a bit elsewhere and makes a good chunk of change to get someone to take VO in a deal.
Click to expand...
In other words: he's not worth anything so please stop putting him in trade proposals.
 
Jim Bob said:
The problem is VO's salary, the fact that he's signed for next season, and the lack of cap space around the league.

Adams would likely have to find a D that is struggling a bit elsewhere and makes a good chunk of change to get someone to take VO in a deal.
Click to expand...

Doug Prishpreed said:
In other words: he's not worth anything so please stop putting him in trade proposals.
Click to expand...

Jim Bob said:
If Adams can move him, it would likely be a move where the Sabres are taking on a D with a bad contract.

Or he's just salary moving in a bigger deal (like the Chychrun idea).
Click to expand...
Or retain 50%
 
Der Jaeger said:
Or retain 50%
Click to expand...
Even at $2.375M, it might be tough to find a team to bite given that he is under contract for next season.

He has 2g & 5pts in his last 14 games played and 4g & 8pts in his last 24 games played. And he is so bad 5v5 that the Bruins talked openly about attacking his line when it was out there.

I really wonder what GMs out there think that their team could turn him around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doug Prishpreed
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom