LabattBlue Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 I want no part of Hemsky. Often unjured(look at his game totals for the last 3 years), will turn 29 over the summer, and a pending UFA. He should not be a part of a Sabres rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Edmonton would be getting a long term guy for someone they have no future with. They're the one that would probably have to throw in a pick or two to make the deal happen. But they are getting a player that might just need a change of scenery and they can control for a few more seasons. Buffalo is helping them out by clearing cap space for a guy they would lose at the end of the year for nothing. Basically the Sabres are doing them a favour giving them stafford for Cap relief this offseason. If they truly want Stafford to upgrade their team, they may have to give up a pick and Hemsky to sweeten the deal for Buffalo. I don't think the Sabres will sign Hemsky as a UFA. So, why not get rid of Stafford for a pick, but I guess the Oilers would want to get rid of Hemsky and his salary. Oh, well ... seems I asked and answered my question in my post. Carry on. It may not be for a pick, but it gives them cap space this offseason for taking Hemsky til the end of the season. No one is saying Hemsky would be part of the rebuild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 couldn't we just trade stafford for the pick and not get hemsky involved? I mean that clears capspace for us to make other possible moves... and why would we trade for a guy we won't resign in a season we won't make the playoffs. I refuse to believe that Stafford is equivalent to the value of a craptastic rental player. Of course another season like he had this year and he will be. If you are rebuilding you trade for picks and prospects not over the hill rental players. Hell couldn't we just send drew to Rochester if we wanted to dump salary? Food for thought. Rebuild = Picks or Prospects Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 (edited) But they are getting a player that might just need a change of scenery and they can control for a few more seasons. Buffalo is helping them out by clearing cap space for a guy they would lose at the end of the year for nothing. Basically the Sabres are doing them a favour giving them stafford for Cap relief this offseason. If they truly want Stafford to upgrade their team, they may have to give up a pick and Hemsky to sweeten the deal for Buffalo. You have me confused here. Earlier it looked like you were saying Buffalo would have to add a pick. Now you're saying the opposite. couldn't we just trade stafford for the pick and not get hemsky involved? I mean that clears capspace for us to make other possible moves... and why would we trade for a guy we won't resign in a season we won't make the playoffs. I refuse to believe that Stafford is equivalent to the value of a craptastic rental player. Of course another season like he had this year and he will be. If you are rebuilding you trade for picks and prospects not over the hill rental players. Hell couldn't we just send drew to Rochester if we wanted to dump salary? Food for thought. Rebuild = Picks or Prospects There's real money being moved around as well. Edmonton may not want to add payroll to their current roster. That's what is happening with this idea people are throwing around. Edited January 23, 2012 by shrader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 You have me confused here. Earlier it looked like you were saying Buffalo would have to add a pick. Now you're saying the opposite. There's real money being moved around as well. Edmonton may not want to add payroll to their current roster. That's what is happening with this idea people are throwing around. Sorry, meant to say the oilers might have to throw in a pick (Probably a 3rd or later) to sweeten the deal. If you are Edmonton, you are getting a player who has potential and may just need a change of scenery to get back his production from last year and they get to dump Hemsky. The advantage for the Sabres taking Hemsky back is that they get him for a few months to see if he can be a better replacement for Stafford and re-sign him this offseason, or they let him walk and save over $4mil in cap space for next season. If you send Drew down to the minors, you get nothing in return, still have to pay him out his contract, AND is there not still a partial cap hit they would face? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 If you send Drew down to the minors, you get nothing in return, still have to pay him out his contract, AND is there not still a partial cap hit they would face? That would never happen. Stafford wouldn't clear waivers. There would be no cap hit if he somehow did though. There's only a cap hit if he signed the deal while over 35 years old (Buffalo take the entire cap hit) or if he's claimed on re-entry waivers (Buffalo gets half of the cap hit). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 (edited) Sorry, meant to say the oilers might have to throw in a pick (Probably a 3rd or later) to sweeten the deal. If you are Edmonton, you are getting a player who has potential and may just need a change of scenery to get back his production from last year and they get to dump Hemsky. The advantage for the Sabres taking Hemsky back is that they get him for a few months to see if he can be a better replacement for Stafford and re-sign him this offseason, or they let him walk and save over $4mil in cap space for next season. If you send Drew down to the minors, you get nothing in return, still have to pay him out his contract, AND is there not still a partial cap hit they would face? No. That is why that D man with the last name starting with "M" is down there and why Kotalik would be, if he were not in Europe. The NHL salary has to be paid, but no cap hit. This is assuming he clears waivers, which I highly doubt. If he didn't clear waivers I believe the Sabres would be responsible for paying part of his salary and take a partial cap it. There would be a partial cap hit also if the Sabres just bought him out ... like Tim Kennedy. Edited January 23, 2012 by Sabres Fan In NS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Thats what I figured, just wasn't 100% sure. I knew they had to pay the out the remainder of the contract. And someone would definitly claim him on re-entry waivers. Theres also a very good chance that a team with cap space would claim him on waivers just to take a chance on the whole "change of scenery" idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 OK, seriously - does anyone really know anything about the "family issues Drew is dealing with?" This is the first I have heard of anything resembling that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 OK, seriously - does anyone really know anything about the "family issues Drew is dealing with?" This is the first I have heard of anything resembling that. Yeah. He can't score. His ol lady is pissed about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obstructedorangeseats Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 OK, seriously - does anyone really know anything about the "family issues Drew is dealing with?" This is the first I have heard of anything resembling that. She's pissed because he's the one getting (golden) helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 You guys missed the boat. The jokes were higher up in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obstructedorangeseats Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 You guys missed the boat. The jokes were higher up in the thread. It's Drew Stafford. You know, the gift that keeps on giving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 He's just found out he has not only one, but two, two vajayjay's. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 He's just found out he has not only one, but two, two vajayjay's. That's worth $1M from the porn industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 He's just found out he has not only one, but two, two vajayjay's. One he calls Roysie. What is the other one called? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 One he calls Roysie. What is the other one called? Pegula's meat wallet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyhound Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I would have to agree that it is time for Stafford to move on. Would teams consider Drew Stafford in a trade? I am interested in seeing Patrick Kane in the Blue and Gold; however, I don't think a trade like that would involve Drew Stafford's name. I maybe going out on the limb but, I would like to see Buffalo trade Jason Pominville to the Blackhawks for Patrick Kane. Patrick Kane is in a huge slump right now, and after listening to the Blackhawk media, it sounds like he is in a bad way on several front's. It maybe be the away to procure a young talented wing with some attitude. Changing of the guard. Kane and Kassian; looks like a couple of needed fire starters to me, especially when we don't even have smoke right now. I am sure there are a lot of problems that would make this deal impossible; I can think of a couple: 1. Kane would really have be in a bad way with the organization, and be looking to be traded. 2. The Blackhawks are one of three teams that lead the goals for statistic, are they in need of anymore offense? They are in that position without Patrick Kanes production. They can afford to wait for Kane's slump to end. It's never that simple is it? Edited January 25, 2012 by hockeyhound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 You won't get Kane for just Pomminstein, maybe for Vanek or Myers straight up Kane was a #1 overall pick and younger then Pomminstein, he has also been a better player in his short career then Pomminstein. A little slump he is in now will not have the 'Hawks trading him for just anyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I would have to agree that it is time for Stafford to move on. I maybe going out on the limb but, I would like to see Buffalo trade Jason Pominville to the Blackhawks for Patrick Kane. Straight up? Never going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 You won't get Kane for just Pomminstein, maybe for Vanek or Myers straight up Kane was a #1 overall pick and younger then Pomminstein, he has also been a better player in his short career then Pomminstein. A little slump he is in now will not have the 'Hawks trading him for just anyone Darcy would have to give up this entire draft to get Kane. Plus McNabb and Kassian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyhound Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Straight up? Never going to happen. Would you like to see Kane in the Blue and Gold? Darcy would have to give up this entire draft to get Kane. Plus McNabb and Kassian. That seems a bit excessive. Are you saying 1st round draft pick, McNabb and Kassian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) Would you like to see Kane in the Blue and Gold? Absolutely. But, it would take more than Pominville to get him ... were talking Vanek, or Myers and probably some picks going both ways. Edited January 25, 2012 by Sabres Fan In NS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyhound Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) You won't get Kane for just Pomminstein, maybe for Vanek or Myers straight up Kane was a #1 overall pick and younger then Pomminstein, he has also been a better player in his short career then Pomminstein. A little slump he is in now will not have the 'Hawks trading him for just anyone If the Blackhawks thought they could still get the job done without Kane, wouldn't it be tempting to deal him off, thus creating some cap space for themselves among other things? Absolutely. But, it would take more than Pominville to get him ... were talking Vanek, or Myers and probably some picks going both ways. Draft pick, and Vanek? I didn't realize this guys stock was so pricey. I would have to disagree, I think Vanek is far more valuable than Kane. Edited January 25, 2012 by hockeyhound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Drugs are bad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts