Andrew Amerk Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Don't worry, man. All we gotta do to get you out is to get ten percent of ten million dollars. Which by our calculations is... ...F***ing impossible, man! Kenny: In eleven days I'm as good as skewered! Ever take your clothes off and run backwards through a cornfield? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 I'm a day late on this as well, but if either Parise or Weber becomes available (and I think the chances are better that Weber does than Parise), the Sabres need to take their best shot at him. I would trade Vanek and Kassian for either Parise or Weber in a heartbeat. Anything is possible in Hockey Heaven! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 I'm a day late on this as well, but if either Parise or Weber becomes available (and I think the chances are better that Weber does than Parise), the Sabres need to take their best shot at him. I would trade Vanek and Kassian for either Parise or Weber in a heartbeat. Anything is possible in Hockey Heaven! Looking at it by purely a financial point of view, Lieno and Stafford have a cap hit of $8.5 million over the next four seasons. How good would the Sabres be if that $8.5 mil cap space was being spent on a Shea Weber? You could easily be looking at the best collection of blueliners the Sabres have ever assembled and possible the best hockey has seen in a good long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Nashville just went through a possible franchise move last season. They are on shaky ground and so can't afford to play around with a star like Weber. The problem is the same as the Sabres had in past years - money. But given the hit the franchise would take, I'd think they'd bite the bullet and give him what he wants. Only problem is, then Rinne will expect what he wants, etc. If what you say is right, and there is no proof of that, then Weber wanting a two year deal is simply telling them, "I'm outta here ASAP.", which is contrary to what his agents are saying. So either his agents are lying or not. If not, Nashville should have paid him the bucks and tie him up long term. If so, Nashville is in a world of hurt and the only answer is to trade him. I'm glad I'm not a Predators fan. Players and agents never think it is lying when they say they want to stay somewhere but what they really mean is stay IF they get as much money as they would get as an unrestricted free agent. I hear what you are saying when you say the proof that they don't want to pay him is that he is not signed, but the opposite works too: The proof he doesn't really want to stay is that he hasn't agreed to a deal. Looking at it by purely a financial point of view, Lieno and Stafford have a cap hit of $8.5 million over the next four seasons. How good would the Sabres be if that $8.5 mil cap space was being spent on a Shea Weber? You could easily be looking at the best collection of blueliners the Sabres have ever assembled and possible the best hockey has seen in a good long time. Luke Adam better be ready to roll ... would be interesting but you are just torturing yourself considering that kind of thing. On the other hand, Malkin's cap hit is about the same as those guys' too ... now see what you started! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Players and agents never think it is lying when they say they want to stay somewhere but what they really mean is stay IF they get as much money as they would get as an unrestricted free agent. I hear what you are saying when you say the proof that they don't want to pay him is that he is not signed, but the opposite works too: The proof he doesn't really want to stay is that he hasn't agreed to a deal. Let's put this simply...if both sides wanted to make a deal, it would have happened. But one side or the other or both, didn't want a deal. Therefore Weber is on borrowed time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 Looking at it by purely a financial point of view, Lieno and Stafford have a cap hit of $8.5 million over the next four seasons. How good would the Sabres be if that $8.5 mil cap space was being spent on a Shea Weber? You could easily be looking at the best collection of blueliners the Sabres have ever assembled and possible the best hockey has seen in a good long time. Well, I'd trade Leino and Stafford for Weber as well, but if we're talking about keeping cap powder dry for an opportunity like Weber, I'd much rather have Leino and Stafford on the Sabres at $8.5MM than Pommer and Hecht at $8.8MM (not to mention the fact that Pommer and Hecht got their deals when the cap was much lower, so the Sabres wasted a much higher %age of their cap on those 2). Either way, it would be the best Sabres D group of all time, but not as good as Pronger and Niedermayer for Anaheim in 2006-07. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 I'm a day late on this as well, but if either Parise or Weber becomes available (and I think the chances are better that Weber does than Parise), the Sabres need to take their best shot at him. I would trade Vanek and Kassian for either Parise or Weber in a heartbeat. Anything is possible in Hockey Heaven! Trying to understand your reasoning here. You would trade a 35-40 goal very durable winger with 50 goal 40 point potential,and a proven ability to produce in the playoffs, who happens to play on a team with Erhoff, Regehr, Weber,Grigani, Sekerra, Leopold, Myers and Miller for a 16 goal 20 something assist defenseman? Because?...Buffalo needs more defensemen and less offense? Would'nt the logical move be to trade a few defensemen for him? Granted he is a great defenseman but where is the + in that deal? Makes more sense if we are talking Parise, but there are some major problems with that deal too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 Trying to understand your reasoning here. You would trade a 35-40 goal very durable winger with 50 goal 40 point potential,and a proven ability to produce in the playoffs, who happens to play on a team with Erhoff, Regehr, Weber,Grigani, Sekerra, Leopold, Myers and Miller for a 16 goal 20 something assist defenseman? Because?...Buffalo needs more defensemen and less offense? Would'nt the logical move be to trade a few defensemen for him? Granted he is a great defenseman but where is the + in that deal? Makes more sense if we are talking Parise, but there are some major problems with that deal too. I agree with your reasoning. We are deep at D, not at forward, so why weaken ourselves there further for another Dman? I can see trading a prospective forward or Boyes or Hecht along with Leopold and Sekera for Weber, but not much more than that. Plus of course, there's always the issue of cap space. Parise is another matter. And while it looks like Weber will be moved, Parise is a possibility but not a likelihood. Still, I would give up some forward depth for Parise as I have made clear in earlier posts. I still feel he will be an essential component of a winning team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 I agree with your reasoning. We are deep at D, not at forward, so why weaken ourselves there further for another Dman? I can see trading a prospective forward or Boyes or Hecht along with Leopold and Sekera for Weber, but not much more than that. Plus of course, there's always the issue of cap space. Parise is another matter. And while it looks like Weber will be moved, Parise is a possibility but not a likelihood. Still, I would give up some forward depth for Parise as I have made clear in earlier posts. I still feel he will be an essential component of a winning team. Totally agree Winkle..If you want to pursue either there are so many other ways to do it than throwing your best offensive treat into the mix. I would consider giving up ANY of my D men in a package for Weber,even Myers, if the deal was right.On the offensive side the only guys not on the table for Parise would be Vanek, Miller and Leino. Wow Vanek and Parise with the right centers, fill in the rest. Two scoring lines with 40+ guys who can produce in the playoffs.. Chills.... Not even going to mention the pp with those two and Erhoff on the same line or the posibility of rolling them ocassionally together given the fact Vanek can play either side.. frightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 This is so last century. I have to agree. Nolan is so far past his prime. He could help them in certain situations but it smacks of being a little desperate on the part of Mike Gillis and maybe he's starting to worry about replacing the parts he's lost this summer.IMO that team has taken a step back this off season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 I have to agree. Nolan is so far past his prime. He could help them in certain situations but it smacks of being a little desperate on the part of Mike Gillis and maybe he's starting to worry about replacing the parts he's lost this summer.IMO that team has taken a step back this off season. Who is to say Nolan is "past his prime?" We all saw how Recchi was for the Bruins. Anyone can see Hasek's current stats overseas and see how he still can perform despite his age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 I have to agree. Nolan is so far past his prime. He could help them in certain situations but it smacks of being a little desperate on the part of Mike Gillis and maybe he's starting to worry about replacing the parts he's lost this summer.IMO that team has taken a step back this off season. It's not like they're bringing him in to be some top line forward who will carry the team on his shoulders. They're hoping for a solid depth forward. It's a very low risk move, no desperation here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Trying to understand your reasoning here. You would trade a 35-40 goal very durable winger with 50 goal 40 point potential,and a proven ability to produce in the playoffs, who happens to play on a team with Erhoff, Regehr, Weber,Grigani, Sekerra, Leopold, Myers and Miller for a 16 goal 20 something assist defenseman? Because?...Buffalo needs more defensemen and less offense? Would'nt the logical move be to trade a few defensemen for him? Granted he is a great defenseman but where is the + in that deal? Makes more sense if we are talking Parise, but there are some major problems with that deal too. Obviously I would prefer not to have to trade Vanek, but my point was that Weber is one of the best half-dozen or so players in the league. To get a guy like that, you have to give up a major asset. I'd rather give up Vanek than Myers. Nashville isn't going to take Gragnani and Sekera for Weber. I agree with your reasoning. We are deep at D, not at forward, so why weaken ourselves there further for another Dman? I can see trading a prospective forward or Boyes or Hecht along with Leopold and Sekera for Weber, but not much more than that. Plus of course, there's always the issue of cap space. Parise is another matter. And while it looks like Weber will be moved, Parise is a possibility but not a likelihood. Still, I would give up some forward depth for Parise as I have made clear in earlier posts. I still feel he will be an essential component of a winning team. Are you on drugs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Are you on drugs? Most of his posts have this effect on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Obviously I would prefer not to have to trade Vanek, but my point was that Weber is one of the best half-dozen or so players in the league. To get a guy like that, you have to give up a major asset. I'd rather give up Vanek than Myers. Nashville isn't going to take Gragnani and Sekera for Weber. Are you on drugs? I don't think he meant that the package he named would actually be enough to land Weber, but was just saying those are really the only pieces we could give up without hurting our offense too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetterDays06 Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Will Vokoun be the starter for the Capitals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 weber is not coming here and we would be better off going after Malkin than trying to get Weber... just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Are you on drugs? Are you always this obnoxious or are you just having a good day? Don't bother...I already know the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Will Vokoun be the starter for the Capitals? Now that's a good question. I think with the inconsistencies of the Caps goaltending last year, Vokoun would be a shoe-in for starter. I think it might be his job to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Most of his posts have this effect on me. Thanks pal. Then don't read them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 weber is not coming here and we would be better off going after Malkin than trying to get Weber... just saying I agree, Weber won't be coming here...but neither will Malkin. Pitt has no reason to let him go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Thanks pal. Then don't read them! It probably doesn't help that I read them all in a Bullwinkle voice. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 It probably doesn't help that I read them all in a Bullwinkle voice. ;) :censored: Now you've got me doing that. :doh: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 It probably doesn't help that I read them all in a Bullwinkle voice. ;) Now you have me laughing...never considered that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 I agree, Weber won't be coming here...but neither will Malkin. Pitt has no reason to let him go. Doesn't mean the Sabres can't give them a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.