X. Benedict Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Let's talk about nonsense Freedman. Let's take a look at your latest gem. Trade our best forward and prospect for Weber. Absolutely brilliant! Now tell me genius, aside from trading in a position where we are the weakest which Waldo pointed out, with Weber, Regehr, Ehrhoff and Myers now hogging all the time on D, what ice time do you expect Sekera, MAGS, or Weber will receive in order to improve? Waldo called you out on it, but I didn't because I didn't want to pile on. But now you're asking for it. Next time try to think before writing. You know what they say about people in glass houses. I'm not sure exactly how the pissing started....but if Weber came East I'd probably put him as the 5th best player in the conference. (Crosby, Stamkos, Ovechkin, Thomas) If by some miracle he was placed on the Sabres this moment, he'd be the best player on the roster - That includes Miller, Vanek, Myers, Erhoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 I'm not sure exactly how the pissing started....but if Weber came East I'd probably put him as the 5th best player in the conference. (Crosby, Stamkos, Ovechkin, Thomas) If by some miracle he was placed on the Sabres this moment, he'd be the best player on the roster - That includes Miller, Vanek, Myers, Erhoff. true but would you trade 2 of those players for Weber... Would you trade Myers and Vanek for Weber... I wouldnt, it just doesn't make sense... I would rather wait on Myers and assume that he will keep getting better and turn into a Weber type player which I think he will. Also someone upthread (bullwinkle maybe?) asked about Mike Weber's and MAGS development because now we have Sekera and Ehrhoff and Myers and Regehr and I think lindy always rolls 3 defensive pairings so they are still going to get 16-19minutes of ice time a game most likely and I think Weber is going to play some time on a line with Ehrhoff because that will give you a major contrast. Bottom line I dont get the stink about Shea Weber and since he is not leaving Nashville for at least 2 more years who the :censored: cares? Not to mention our Defense is amazingly solid and yet we are still pissing and moaning about not having the best defender... Poor Tyler Myers, I thought thats what he was becoming but w/e :oops: :death: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 true but would you trade 2 of those players for Weber... Would you trade Myers and Vanek for Weber... I wouldnt, it just doesn't make sense... I would rather wait on Myers and assume that he will keep getting better and turn into a Weber type player which I think he will. Also someone upthread (bullwinkle maybe?) asked about Mike Weber's and MAGS development because now we have Sekera and Ehrhoff and Myers and Regehr and I think lindy always rolls 3 defensive pairings so they are still going to get 16-19minutes of ice time a game most likely and I think Weber is going to play some time on a line with Ehrhoff because that will give you a major contrast. Bottom line I dont get the stink about Shea Weber and since he is not leaving Nashville for at least 2 more years who the :censored: cares? Not to mention our Defense is amazingly solid and yet we are still pissing and moaning about not having the best defender... Poor Tyler Myers, I thought thats what he was becoming but w/e :oops: :death: Correct, I wouldn't make that trade either. Plus I forgot to include Leopold on the D list which complicates matters even further if, according to Freedman, you would have hobbled our offense by losing Vanek for an 8th defenseman. So then we would have Weber, Ehrhoff, Regehr, and Myers on D with Leopold, Weber, MAGS, and Sekera waiting in line to vie for ice time. How do you give the last four guys enough ice time? Completely crazy, even if Lindy dresses 7 D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Correct, I wouldn't make that trade either. Plus I forgot to include Leopold on the D list which complicates matters even further if, according to Freedman, you would have hobbled our offense by losing Vanek for an 8th defenseman. So then we would have Weber, Ehrhoff, Regehr, and Myers on D with Leopold, Weber, MAGS, and Sekera waiting in line to vie for ice time. How do you give the last four guys enough ice time? Completely crazy, even if Lindy dresses 7 D. If you have a top four that includes (Shea) Weber, Myers, and Ehrhoff long term, then the rest of it doesn't really matter much. Certainly, with Regehr for two years also, you have an amazing top-four until then. So, at most, you'll need one top-four defenseman in the next 5 years. You can thin the remaining four down by trading one or more away since you've just added a young corner-stone defenseman. I could see the argument about your offense taking a hit if you trade away Vanek, but to pass up the chance for a top defenseman (not just top-pair, but straight-up #1) just because it will reduce the ice time for some of your developing defensemen, who probably won't be above second-pair level anyway, seems a bit ... well, silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 true but would you trade 2 of those players for Weber... No Would you trade Myers and Vanek for Weber... No. I wouldnt, it just doesn't make sense... I would rather wait on Myers and assume that he will keep getting better and turn into a Weber type player which I think he will. Also someone upthread (bullwinkle maybe?) asked about Mike Weber's and MAGS development because now we have Sekera and Ehrhoff and Myers and Regehr and I think lindy always rolls 3 defensive pairings so they are still going to get 16-19minutes of ice time a game most likely and I think Weber is going to play some time on a line with Ehrhoff because that will give you a major contrast. Bottom line I dont get the stink about Shea Weber and since he is not leaving Nashville for at least 2 more years who the :censored: cares? Not to mention our Defense is amazingly solid and yet we are still pissing and moaning about not having the best defender... Poor Tyler Myers, I thought thats what he was becoming but w/e :oops: :death: I don't think Vanek and a prospect for Shea Weber would be a ridiculous valuation in the hypothetical trades that won't happen world. :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Correct, I wouldn't make that trade either. Plus I forgot to include Leopold on the D list which complicates matters even further if, according to Freedman, you would have hobbled our offense by losing Vanek for an 8th defenseman. So then we would have Weber, Ehrhoff, Regehr, and Myers on D with Leopold, Weber, MAGS, and Sekera waiting in line to vie for ice time. How do you give the last four guys enough ice time? You wouldn't, you'd continue to deal, a defensemen for a forward in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 I probably should not speak for nfreeman, but I think his point was that the package of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera was simply not net nearly enough to make Nashville consider it, and in order to make them interested you'd have to include top-end offensive talent, which they are lacking. hence mentioning Vanek and Kassian. Obviously more moves would need to be made to ease the logjam on defense and maybe replace some of the offense traded ... I seriously doubt he would RATHER trade Vanek and Kassian instead of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera ... but that's the kind of talent that will be in the discussion when someone does trade for Weber. No one is going to get him for a rental forward and a couple second-pairing guys at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 If you are going to try to start that hypothectical discussion during a slow week in August just for S&G's, Vanek, Miller, Erhoff and Leino are at not on the Sabres will trade list.(and in reality they are not) Myers--Stafford......Myers- Pom .....Srafford-Ennis ....Myers- Ennis....Stafford - Gerbe ...Leopold -Myers or any combination thereof and then, if need be, you add some young defensive talent and / or a pick or two. There is plenty of juice in the aformentioned names to cause them to listen. If you are really lucky and they are a little drunk that day, you try to slip either Boyes , Hecht or Kotilik into the deal as a strait add, better you use them to go three way and get something they want from a third team ( from a team trying to hit the cap floor) and use them to get that chit. But it is ,imo, a silly trade in the final analysis, even for a slow day in August.. The Sabres will be fine defensively without him. Finding a center is another issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 If you are going to try to start that hypothectical discussion during a slow week in August just for S&G's, Vanek, Miller, Erhoff and Leino are at not on the Sabres will trade list.(and in reality they are not) Myers--Stafford......Myers- Pom .....Srafford-Ennis ....Myers- Ennis....Stafford - Gerbe ...Leopold -Myers or any combination thereof and then, if need be, you add some young defensive talent and / or a pick or two. There is plenty of juice in the aformentioned names to cause them to listen. If you are really lucky and they are a little drunk that day, you try to slip either Boyes , Hecht or Kotilik into the deal, better yet you go three way and get something they want from a third team (preferably trying to hit the cap floor) and use them to get that chit. But it is ,imo, a silly trade in the final analysis, even for a slow day in August.. The Sabres will be fine defensively without him. Finding a center is another issue. OR... just make Weber play center. ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 I probably should not speak for nfreeman, but I think his point was that the package of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera was simply not net nearly enough to make Nashville consider it, and in order to make them interested you'd have to include top-end offensive talent, which they are lacking. hence mentioning Vanek and Kassian. That's how I understood it. Probably even that wouldn't do it considering Nashville's reluctance to pay Weber and Vanek's current price tag. Obviously more moves would need to be made to ease the logjam on defense and maybe replace some of the offense traded ... I seriously doubt he would RATHER trade Vanek and Kassian instead of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera ... but that's the kind of talent that will be in the discussion when someone does trade for Weber. No one is going to get him for a rental forward and a couple second-pairing guys at best. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 OR... just make Weber play center. ha :D His feet are too big! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Game 6 vs Dallas on NHLN right now. God I hate the Stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 You wouldn't, you'd continue to deal, a defensemen for a forward in this case. Sure...if you could find such a deal. Good Luck. When teams know you're dealing from a need, you get taken. You trade D to get D when your forward ranks are simply adequate and you certainly don't overload your D prospects by trading your best forward for another Dman, even if he is in the top 5, unless his first name is Bobby. MAGS, Weber, and Sekera won't develop in Rochester, they're ready for the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Sure...if you could find such a deal. Good Luck. When teams know you're dealing from a need, you get taken. You trade D to get D when your forward ranks are simply adequate and you certainly don't overload your D prospects by trading your best forward for another Dman, even if he is in the top 5, unless his first name is Bobby. MAGS, Weber, and Sekera won't develop in Rochester, they're ready for the NHL. First bold: So you are suggesting a rental (Boyes) and two defensemen (Leopold and Sekera) who are not top-pairing guys for Shea Weber ... yet you think HE is being unrealistic? Second bold: Therefore it should not be too hard to find a taker for them, don't you think? Again, I am not advocating trading Vanek and Kassian for Weber, far from it ... just saying THAT's more what Nashville will be looking for and it is no more crazy than your suggestion of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera. EDIT: From a realism standpoint I mean. It's more crazy from a "what would you rather have as a Sabres fan" standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Game 6 vs Dallas on NHLN right now. God I hate the Stars. Patrick just hit the crossbar again. And again and again on replay. I am going to throw up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Patrick just hit the crossbar again. And again and again on replay. I am going to throw up. Oh wtf didn't he learn 12 years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Let's talk about nonsense Freedman. Let's take a look at your latest gem. Trade our best forward and prospect for Weber. Absolutely brilliant! Now tell me genius, aside from trading in a position where we are the weakest which Waldo pointed out, with Weber, Regehr, Ehrhoff and Myers now hogging all the time on D, what ice time do you expect Sekera, MAGS, or Weber will receive in order to improve? Waldo called you out on it, but I didn't because I didn't want to pile on. But now you're asking for it. Next time try to think before writing. You know what they say about people in glass houses. That's your reason not to bring in a truly elite player? That Sekera, Gragnani and Mike Weber would get less ice time? If Poile were to call Darcy today and offer Weber in exchange for Vanek and Kassian, what do you think Darcy would say? BTW, Vanek and Kassian are wingers, and wing is not the position at which the Sabres are weakest -- that would be center. I'm not sure exactly how the pissing started....but if Weber came East I'd probably put him as the 5th best player in the conference. (Crosby, Stamkos, Ovechkin, Thomas) If by some miracle he was placed on the Sabres this moment, he'd be the best player on the roster - That includes Miller, Vanek, Myers, Erhoff. If you have a top four that includes (Shea) Weber, Myers, and Ehrhoff long term, then the rest of it doesn't really matter much. Certainly, with Regehr for two years also, you have an amazing top-four until then. So, at most, you'll need one top-four defenseman in the next 5 years. You can thin the remaining four down by trading one or more away since you've just added a young corner-stone defenseman. I could see the argument about your offense taking a hit if you trade away Vanek, but to pass up the chance for a top defenseman (not just top-pair, but straight-up #1) just because it will reduce the ice time for some of your developing defensemen, who probably won't be above second-pair level anyway, seems a bit ... well, silly. I probably should not speak for nfreeman, but I think his point was that the package of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera was simply not net nearly enough to make Nashville consider it, and in order to make them interested you'd have to include top-end offensive talent, which they are lacking. [/b]hence mentioning Vanek and Kassian. Obviously more moves would need to be made to ease the logjam on defense and maybe replace some of the offense traded ... I seriously doubt he would RATHER trade Vanek and Kassian instead of Boyes, Leopold and Sekera ... but that's the kind of talent that will be in the discussion when someone does trade for Weber. No one is going to get him for a rental forward and a couple second-pairing guys at best. Thank heaven for the voices of reason. I agree with all of this. BW: unless PAFan returns, you're my new nemesis. I'll be watching you and ready to pounce, so you'd better raise your game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Patrick just hit the crossbar again. And again and again on replay. I am going to throw up. Sounds like a close game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Sure...if you could find such a deal. Good Luck. When teams know you're dealing from a need, you get taken. That assumes a lot. Much more than S. Weber's valuation. My only point in this weird discussion is that S. Weber's value (regardless of respective teams needs) is higher than anyone currently on the Sabres roster. Disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Fantasy foo foo formula: http://www.tsn.ca/fantasy_news/feature/?ID=10467 Market value: Weber vs Vanek 7.5 vs 7.140 NHL player Rankings? Pick a list you like. On the question of whether Weber would be the best player on the Sabres. Vanek is so close in market value it is a toss up.(especially when you consider he has not played with a #1 center for three/four years . What does Millers value to the Sabres look like after he has a year under his belt playing behind this defense? Given the present defensive corp line up and the future potential of Myers(which may or may not ever materialize) I could pass on Weber at 7.5 , give Myers 5.5 to 6 for five and be happy with the roll of the dice. Or i could put Myers in a deal for Weber with others and let Nashville deal with it and be happy. The question in the second option is can you resign Weber for 7.5 now ??? Thats a huge question mark and probably a no, so we are back to why give up Myers and Ennis or others for a guy you cannot sign and/ This is a silly conversation and it is still August.I am happy now . I think i circular reasoned that to death? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 That assumes a lot. Much more than S. Weber's valuation. My only point in this weird discussion is that S. Weber's value (regardless of respective teams needs) is higher than anyone currently on the Sabres roster. Disagree? I disagree. He is equivalent to Miller, I'd say. But since we're dealing in fantasy, outside of Miller, his value would probably be two or more Sabres. And if it were to be made, I wouldn't trade Miller for him nor any of our top forwards. Defensemen and picks probably, and we'd most likely lose either Myers or Ehrhoff. That's why I say 'No deal'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 Fantasy foo foo formula: http://www.tsn.ca/fantasy_news/feature/?ID=10467 Market value: Weber vs Vanek 7.5 vs 7.140 NHL player Rankings? Pick a list you like. On the question of whether Weber would be the best player on the Sabres. Vanek is so close in market value it is a toss up.(especially when you consider he has not played with a #1 center for three/four years . What does Millers value to the Sabres look like after he has a year under his belt playing behind this defense? Given the present defensive corp line up and the future potential of Myers(which may or may not ever materialize) I could pass on Weber at 7.5 , give Myers 5.5 to 6 for five and be happy with the roll of the dice. Or i could put Myers in a deal for Weber with others and let Nashville deal with it and be happy. The question in the second option is can you resign Weber for 7.5 now ??? Thats a huge question mark and probably a no, so we are back to why give up Myers and Ennis or others for a guy you cannot sign and/ This is a silly conversation and it is still August.I am happy now . I think i circular reasoned that to death? You probably did. But hey, it's August and news is very thin. It's another 30+ days until the sports season begins again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 You probably did. But hey, it's August and news is very thin. It's another 30+ days until the sports season begins again. 33 days until training camp! :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 You probably did. But hey, it's August and news is very thin. It's another 30+ days until the sports season begins again. :clapping: :worthy: :worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 Someone please tell me why when we have 4,871 defenders chomping at the bit to play for the sabres we are discussing trading the limited number of forwards we have for yet another defender? It doesn't make sense.... not to mention did everyone forget this guy named Tyler Myers? He is still 4.5 years younger than Weber and showed major signs in the playoffs he will be as good as Weber in the next 2-4 years so no, I don't want Weber. I would rather sign Myers long term and not give up anything for a player who is basically already on the roster... AKA I vote for Myers. Also, hockey crap came up with our top 10 prospects and I think 6 are defenders and also I find it interesting that Catenacci makes their list http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=37516 Catenacci is a player whose progress I look forward to watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.