Lorenzo Von Matterhorn Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 I'm almost certain Halak is gone before Wednesday, but I think if they don't get anyone back in another trade, they would bring up hackett or someone else from Rochester to ride out the season over Dubnyk Yeah I thought about this too I do not want another goalie back if/when we trade Halak, so the next man up would be Hackett but I think it would be more beneficial for him to finish the season in Rochester, maybe go through a playoff run with our younger guys than back up Enroth and play maybe a handful of games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 They got him from the Oil when they signed Bryz. Maybe Rinne is ready to return from injury or they're trading for another Goaltender. Pekka is back! He played a couple of games down on the farm in Milwaukee on a conditioning assignment and looked good in both (two wins). So he is back up with the Preds and may or may not start tomorrow against Pittsburgh. As for the comment above about Dubnyk. ###### NO! He is the worst goaltender I have ever seen. He was terrible in Edmonton and both of his starts in Nashville were catastrophes. He is hopeless. I think the guy we dressed after the Miller trade is probably better than Dubnyk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Murray has said he isn't going to tear up Rochester. He'll probably look for a stop-gap so Hackett and Lieuwen can stay down. Dubnyk would be a cheap example who wouldn't factor into the long-term plans. Taking away the goalie who is getting maybe half the starts is hardly tearing up Rochester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Taking away the goalie who is getting maybe half the starts is hardly tearing up Rochester. Still going to shake them up for no reason. They'll probably want to keep the kids down there this year to make a run for the playoffs. Then Hackett up next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Still going to shake them up for no reason. They'll probably want to keep the kids down there this year to make a run for the playoffs. Then Hackett up next year. If you are going to be trading away so many of these current NHL guys they're going to have to move someone up from Rochester. They body count was a wash in the Miller deal, but if they move others beyond Moulson, they're not bringing back NHL bodies in those deals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorenzo Von Matterhorn Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 I can't understand any argument for bringing up Hackett if we move Halak. Hackett is still developing and is much better off in Rochester growing with the other prospects, making a playoff run than he is getting called up to back up Enroth for a couple of games and playing with the worst team in the NHL right now when he probably isn't even NHL ready based on his numbers this season. I am in favor of moving Halak, but I don't want his value to be diminished because we need a backup goalie in return. The sensible thing would be to claim Dubnyk because he only has 1 year remaining and would be a stopgap just for the rest of this season. This increases the return in a trade involving Halak & Hackett can continue to grow in Rochester instead of ruining his confidence from playing with our team during this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) I can't understand any argument for bringing up Hackett if we move Halak. Hackett is still developing and is much better off in Rochester growing with the other prospects, making a playoff run than he is getting called up to back up Enroth for a couple of games and playing with the worst team in the NHL right now when he probably isn't even NHL ready based on his numbers this season. I am in favor of moving Halak, but I don't want his value to be diminished because we need a backup goalie in return. The sensible thing would be to claim Dubnyk because he only has 1 year remaining and would be a stopgap just for the rest of this season. This increases the return in a trade involving Halak & Hackett can continue to grow in Rochester instead of ruining his confidence from playing with our team during this season. No one is saying the deal for Halak has to contain a goalie coming back though, they could work out another deal that includes a goaltender who actually looks like he can play in the NHL.If i was Murray, i would be looking at the Ducks and trying to get Fasth, if they won't give up Gibson, in a deal for either a defencemen or forward while dealing Halak to the Wild (or Philly), or use a 3rd and try to get Neuvirth from the Capitals. I would be looking to make a deal for a goaltender who can compete with Enroth for the #1 job now if disrupting the minor league teams playoff hopes isn't allowed. of course I would be looking to try and make this team credible and competitive now with an eye towards the future, instead of throwing away the present and putting all the hope in the future. Edited March 3, 2014 by apuszczalowski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 @NHLPlayerSafety Washington's Dmitry Orlov suspended for boarding. Video: http://s.nhl.com/uceGM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 @TSNBobMcKenzie On waivers today: Trevor Smith (TOR), Jake Dowell (MIN), Corey Potter (EDM), Joe Corvo and Cory Conacher (OTT), Derek Smith (CGY) plus... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 hmmm, any of these moves necessary ones, or are these hints to future deals going down and teams clearing roster spots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorenzo Von Matterhorn Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 @TSNBobMcKenzie On waivers today: Trevor Smith (TOR), Jake Dowell (MIN), Corey Potter (EDM), Joe Corvo and Cory Conacher (OTT), Derek Smith (CGY) plus... @JeremyWGR 3m If Linus Omark, Matt D’Agostini, and Zenon Konopka are worth claims…come on. Conacher. Easy call. I agree with him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 @JeremyWGR 3m If Linus Omark, Matt D’Agostini, and Zenon Konopka are worth claims…come on. Conacher. Easy call. I agree with him No brainer for TM. He definitely knows Conacher given the Sens roots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 No brainer for TM. He definitely knows Conacher given the Sens roots. that could be a strike against cory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Go get him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 No brainer for TM. He definitely knows Conacher given the Sens roots. Which might be a reason he would stay awayWhy would the Sens just give up on him and put him on waivers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 that could be a strike against cory But for a team who is currently starting a second line with D'agostini and has had Leino as a first liner, Conacher is an obvious scoring upgrade from those guys. Other point of looking at waivers is to see the precursers of a trade. OTT is clearing up two players from active roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Timmy has his rating on Conacher. That number, whatever it is, I'm sure fits into a different place on the Sabres roster compared to the Sens. Pick him up Timmy! I also see Scott Clemmensen is on waivers - a very cheap pickup to finish the year as Enroths backup once Halak is traded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 But for a team who is currently starting a second line with D'agostini and has had Leino as a first liner, Conacher is an obvious scoring upgrade from those guys. Other point of looking at waivers is to see the precursers of a trade. OTT is clearing up two players from active roster. not by muchConacher has 20 points in 59 games Leino has 12 points in 42 games D'Agostini has 9 points in 37 games D'Agostini has the same amount of goals as Conacher does in less games Timmy has his rating on Conacher. That number, whatever it is, I'm sure fits into a different place on the Sabres roster compared to the Sens. Pick him up Timmy! I also see Scott Clemmensen is on waivers - a very cheap pickup to finish the year as Enroths backup once Halak is traded. Timmy would also know him well and why Ottawa would be willing to put a 24 year old that was a big part of the Bishop trade on waiversIf he is valuable or doesn't have some issues, why would they not be using him as trade bait or in a package deal? Couldn't they use him as part of a deal to Buffalo for Stewart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 not by much Conacher has 20 points in 59 games Leino has 12 points in 42 games D'Agostini has 9 points in 37 games D'Agostini has the same amount of goals as Conacher does in less games Understood, but it wouldn't be a decision between Conacher and D'Agostini. It's Conacher or Matt Ellis/John Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Understood, but it wouldn't be a decision between Conacher and D'Agostini. It's Conacher or Matt Ellis/John Scott I used those 2 because they were brought upAlso they are 2 guys that fans seem to bring up as being worthless or shouldn't be here, yet in less games, their stats aren't off of Conachers by much as for Ellis/Scott, Ellis in 29 games playing on the 4th line has one less goal then Conacher and his role here is more for leadership then point production. will you get that from Conacher? Scotts role here on the 4th line is also not for point production, its to be an enforcer/good/intimidation, will you get that from Conacher? (Scott is also versatile that he can play defence in emergency situations) I'm not against bringing in a 24 year old Conacher, but I really question why Ottawa would be wiling to expose him to waivers, and was pointing out that points/goal scoring from him isn't that much off of what the Sabres currently have in guys fans want run out of town Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 I used those 2 because they were brought up Also they are 2 guys that fans seem to bring up as being worthless or shouldn't be here, yet in less games, their stats aren't off of Conachers by much as for Ellis/Scott, Ellis in 29 games playing on the 4th line has one less goal then Conacher and his role here is more for leadership then point production. will you get that from Conacher? Scotts role here on the 4th line is also not for point production, its to be an enforcer/good/intimidation, will you get that from Conacher? (Scott is also versatile that he can play defence in emergency situations) I'm not against bringing in a 24 year old Conacher, but I really question why Ottawa would be wiling to expose him to waivers, and was pointing out that points/goal scoring from him isn't that much off of what the Sabres currently have in guys fans want run out of town I agree with pretty much everything you mention here. My point of contention is more that Conacher, at 24 years old, given his production in Tampa, has a much higher ceiling than that of established quantities named above. And the opportunity cost of acquiring him is losing any current roster player to the AHL. That can be the Ellis/Scott/Sultzers of the world. Just a year ago Conacher had 24 points in 35 games. Our worst roster player (whoever you think it is) doesn't have that kind of scoring potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Just wait to see what Conacher will turn into under the coaching of Teddy Nolan! All-Star baby! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Sabres have first refusal... An underhand move in a trade? (something to do with the number of player contracts we have - this gives us 24 hours to make room but gives them instant room to accept players?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 I agree with pretty much everything you mention here. My point of contention is more that Conacher, at 24 years old, given his production in Tampa, has a much higher ceiling than that of established quantities named above. And the opportunity cost of acquiring him is losing any current roster player to the AHL. That can be the Ellis/Scott/Sultzers of the world. Just a year ago Conacher had 24 points in 35 games. Our worst roster player (whoever you think it is) doesn't have that kind of scoring potential. After tomorrow I doubt our best roster player has that potential. Like I said, I have no problem with trying to get him, but I question why Ottawa would be willing to put him on waivers and lose him for nothing when he could be packaged in a deal or traded if he doesn't have issues/bagage Sabres have first refusal... An underhand move in a trade? (something to do with the number of player contracts we have - this gives us 24 hours to make room but gives them instant room to accept players?) But why not just include him in the trade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Conacher for Scott.. Immediate, tangible upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.