Jump to content

Gabrielor

Members
  • Posts

    484
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gabrielor

  1. 14 minutes ago, Hoss said:

    This might get some rocks thrown at me for this but ... is anyone else kind of excited about this? There’s a few factors at play here, most of which are short-term thinking.

    1. It’s good to have some clarity here. Eichel clearly doesn’t want to be here. No more rumors. Dude ***** hates it here.

    2. It’s something to talk about for a while here and elsewhere and something to at least make us pay attention to this team for.

    3. Superstar trades in sports are fun. Just to see how someone is valued in their profession and the many pieces that end up going the other way. Plus all the rumors and proposals leading up to it.

     

    None of this makes this team better (unless you absolutely knock it out of the park with the trade) ... but it’s something, I guess.

    Before today, when the Eichel sun was still shining, I was still playing around with moving him for the right deal. The Reinhart presser sucked more to me personally, because he's the guy I wanted to fill that center hole.

     

    My reaction to Eichel leaving will be entirely tied to what we get in return. If it's an elite-prospect to fit into the new Dahlin,Cozens era (Byfield, Lafreniere, Zegras) then I'll miss Jack, but I'll recover. If it's some shoty package of assets like what Colorado got from us for ROR (decent assets, no big prize), I'll be upset. If it's our ROR trae to STL, then I'll cease giving anything Sabres 1 cent or 1 second of my time until Terry and Kim are gone.

    • Like (+1) 3
  2. 21 minutes ago, Gatorman0519 said:

    To trade Eichel we need to get a Lafontaine in return. You don’t trade franchise centers just going into their prime without getting something similar in return. Kakko, 2 D prospects, and a first round is a loss for us. 

    If we have to trade Eichel, I definitely tell NYR to piss off, and call LAK, going after Byfield. That's the kind of asset to center an Eichel deal around that we can live with.

    • Like (+1) 2
  3. 20 minutes ago, JohnC said:

    I listened to the clip from WGR. Paul Hamilton was simply giving his opinion/speculating as to which one of the two players the organization would protect with the ownership factoring in on the decision. I'm not sure that it is a factor at all. The discussion between protecting Asplund over Thompson is an interesting discussion. In my view Asplund is more of a well rounded player while Thompson has more goal scoring upside. If I had a say I would prefer to expose Girgs and Bjork and hope to keep Asplund and Thompson protected. If I had to protect either Asplund or Thompson I would protect Thompson and lament the loses of Asplund if that materialized. I would not criticize anyone protecting the other player. It's a tough call.  

    Yeah, he clearly got me. It was too early for my brain to process, and came off as factual.

    • Like (+1) 1
  4. Paul Hamilton on WGR 5/7/2021 8:30am-ish:

    (paraphrasing):

    "I think ownership would want to protect Thompson over Asplund...They want that trade to work out in the worst way..."

    The implication that the Pegulas still have that much of a say in personnel decisions, despite Adams' insistence that he's calling the shots...I'm not surprised, but nonetheless disappointed.

    • Like (+1) 1
  5. 30 minutes ago, JohnC said:

    Considering Hall had the clause in his contract to determine where he would go how do you conclude that the deal to Boston was a bad deal. The GM got the best deal he could get considering the circumstances. When you don't have the leverage then you don't have the leverage. 

    He took 'the best deal available' a full day before the deadline. He could've easily waited. The deal he did was the bare minimum expected. Nothing for playoff performance. Nothing for re-signing him / exclusive negotiation window. If you're telling me Sweeney shut all that down and hardballed a 2nd and a middle six player, then I stay by saying Adams did a poor job.

     

    I said it before/during/after, but regardless of the control Hall had, staying in Buffalo post-deadline would've been much worse for him than for us missing out on a 2nd. Adams had negotiation power he could've used to get more. Instead, he took a basic deal that was a total win in every way for Boston.

  6. 2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

    Dude, asked you a question & then explained why the question was asked.   You do realize that in the process of exercising an ordinary course buy-out the team typically waives the player, right?  (Your reply implies that you DON'T/DIDN'T and the request for clarification was reasonable.

    So, while waiving a player != buying him out; waiving a player also doesn't equal sending him to Ro-cha-cha.  Waiving the player INITIATES either process in MOST circumstances; it is not the sum whole of exercising the process. 

    And, to further muddy the waters, though it was clear you didn't imply this next situation (so whether this is what you meant wasn't asked), a team can waive a player and then involve him in NO transaction which allows the team to forego waiving him for up to 30 days to involve him in another transaction such as sending him to the minors.

    Thanks for the clarification.

    I did actually know that, but didn't know the no transaction paragraph.

     

    Thank you for the clarification. I'll shorthand waive to Roch in all future Eakin/Okposo mocks, because no mock I make won't waive those two to Roch, at least.

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Thanks (+1) 1
  7. 1 minute ago, Doohickie said:

    You need to get over yourself.

    What's there to get over? I come on hockey forums and post what I'm thinking. I often agree with others, take others' opinions when their knowledge is superior, and don't have any kind of ego.

     

    Folks like you muddy the experience by doing exactly what you're doing.

×
×
  • Create New...