PerreaultForever

No, I meant his cap number didn't suit Minnesota for what he brought them. That's part of why they ditched him for a pick. We have lots of money at the moment. It's a non issue here.

Ah, maybe, but no. imo I think you want someone hard cold and ruthless at the top of the top to focus solely on winning and if that means some cold harsh decisions so be it. They all know it's a business and they are paid very well so when they get turfed like he was, it's just part of the territory. I've wanted a cold (maybe mean) hockey guy at the top for years. Advocated for Dudley because of Sabres roots but Rutherford would also have been an excellent choice. We need a guy like that instead of Pegula meddling.

Just to be clear, I'm not "removing context" for the sake of arguing and one upmanship, if I remove anything it's to try to stay on the main point of the argument and not to get lost in nuance and tangents. like they tell the dumb hockey players, keep it simple. What was the ROR trade attempting to accomplish in your opinion? I think it was trying to accomplish getting a Debbie Downer who didn't want to be here out of the locker room and getting as much as possible for him before his bonus kicked in (as the owner requested). Don't think there was a better offer out there and in the end we got one star player and one maybe regular D man so it wasn't a total failure, especially with hands being tied as they were. Do you think they were trying to accomplish something else?

I agree, but he should be more physical than he is to be truly effective. Pretty sure this is why Minnesota felt they could ditch him. Not physical enough and they already have more physical guys for those roles. Not good value for what they were paying him and their cap structure. I have zero problems with the trade of a 2nd for him. He's overpaid for what he brings but we have cap room so don't care about that. I'd gladly trade another 2nd for a good face off/PK guy to pair with him.

We did, but it's hard to judge a game like that because when it comes that incredibly easy it does have a tendency to make teams slack and thus a chance gets given up. Chicago's been lulling good teams to sleep as well and occasionally wins one as a result. If you're a better checking team you get an early lead and then coast through a shutdown but since we play wide open most of the time we also give up dumb chances. Worst part was the feeble PP. Showing zero signs of improvement. We should have buried them early with those chances.

I wouldn't trade Greenway because, although he does not play to his size or tough enough for what I want on our bottom 6, he does bring elements that are sorely lacking in many of our offensively leaning forwards. Like his PK ability.

I don't understand what you are arguing so vehemently for. All trades are choices. But both Eichel and ROR wanted out so there was pressure to make a deal but ultimately they are both still choices. I really don't see the difference.

Boy is Chicago ever a big bag of nothing. They literally have nothing with the injured guys out. I think that game set the season record for fasted game of the year. The lack of physical response is laughable.

This makes me think about the Mitts contract thread and the idea of trading a center if Mitts wants top dollars. Perhaps the Sabres want to evaluate Mitts in that 2C role and then field offers for Cozens if they sign Mitts to that money? But more likely it's just because that line hasn't been as good lately and Cozens hasn't been that good so shake it up and see what happens. Clearly, we should beat Chicago, we should be rested and ready to go, but with this team who knows?

That makes the argument/discussion complicated. Any time you trade older for younger (or established for prospect) you have a time component involved. There's very few immediate on both sides trades. Given what you say above you'd be against trading Eichel, Reinhart and Risto as well since those were all for futures (aside from Tuch) and those deals then set the organization back another 5 years right? But really, what was the alternative? I personally give a little acceptance or forgiveness in any forced trade scenarios. Hasek wanted out, ROR wanted out, Eichel wanted out. You never get full value when a deal HAS to be done. Rarely anyway. But sometimes the deal has to happen. A deal that doesn't need to be done but is a choice, like Marcus Foligno, is far worse in terms of grading imo.

Excuse me for not reading and remembering every post on here. You could have just said I'd pay Casey 6-7 million and be done with it. Would have saved you the time for cut and paste just to prove I get distracted easily and have a bad memory. I'd never deny that. All you had to do was ask.

ROR is getting old too. The trade is what it is and 20 years from now you look at it like we look at other old deals and we look at the total return. I too liked ROR and think he was a perfect 2C with Eichel drafted but I also believe we BLEW IT by not naming him captain and giving it to Eichel instead. ROR really likes to be the main man and that was the beginning of his lost love and thus the eventually necessity to trade him.

Enough with the "hyperbole" . You do it too. You still have sidestepped answering what you would pay Mitts. I'm not going over 5. If he wants more I am trading a center. If KA thinks Mitts will be better than Cozens and thus signs Mitts to Cozens money and trades Cozens I will accept that as a choice. A gamble, but a reasonable decision. So no hyperbole, one sentence. What do YOU pay Mitts?

Right, so when younger players are involved you can't evaluate a trade fully until those players reach their prime. Thus the ROR trade was not that bad.

Well sorry, but you put up that list as a list of comparables. Thompson is on the list. You're saying that's the kind of money he's earned and thus should get. If that is in fact the ask we absolutely have to trade him (or one of Cozens/Thompson). If we don't, our window will be really small and we are too far from winning to create a small window.

We traded away our 2C for a younger 1C and a defenseman (plus some garbage). While it seemed to be the worst trade ever at first, in total it's really not that bad. Unless you don't like Thompson as a top center.

So you want to pay Mitts Thompson money? Okay, sure, do that. Enjoy watching the cap space disappear while we stay in the bottom.

It's not about POINTS. It's the complete player and everything he brings that I am talking about. We're not talking about a 1C we are looking at a 2C/3C and what that guy has to bring. Your 1C can be all about the point totals and you can even have a one dimensional guy but viewing everyone by the same aspects is a mistake imo. Coyle is a far better player than Mitts. Far better.

Any number over 5 seems too high to me. I was thinking about centers who are 2C/3C depending and the best example of that I could think of was Charlie Coyle who makes 5.25 and no way is Mitts as good so given inflation from the time of signing, giving Mitts 5 would seem like a maximum number to me. I don't see Tuch being odd man out. Mitts is more likely to be the guy traded imo because Adams didn't pick him or trade for him. GMs prefer their own so that they can prove themselves to their owners. I'd love a Skinner buy out but I do not see that happening either. Depending on how free agency plays out I could see Mitts being a fairly in demand trade chip.

Are you Delaney? 🙂

Both times we traded away a Foligno.

Reasonable for sure. Not being in Buffalo I didn't even remember last year's news/weather. Disappointing that the field is green but what can you do. Just another NFL football game. Looks like your team is going to do pretty good though. Steelers shouldn't even be in the playoffs. You should have a good day. Enjoy.

Nice to win and nice for a shutout (unless I just jinxed it with 3 minutes left) but man was this a boring boring low event hockey game. They clearly don't care, full on tank, and we did just enough but didn't need to do too much. To listen to Rob and Dan though the Sabres are playing spectacularly. They live in a different universe.

Nah, I didn't mean to sound skeptical, I believed you and I did see some video last night but it just seemed so strange for Buffalo. I mean it's not like you're Texas where they shut down over an inch. Buffalo usually just shrugs it off as normal so clearly, this was unusual and severe.