Grigorenko called up

[LTS]

No maybe. Someone else might be on the block, but not Grigorenko. I would say that, because they have a chance to recall him, they're going to see where he's at, and if he can stay. If he can stay, he'll replace someone else who IS on the block.

 

I think any GM and coach league-wide knows that trading Grigorenko right now would be a huge mistake. While he's making strides, he's making strides because the organization has provided stability since his SNAFU introduction to North American pro hockey. The dude is believing in himself and the organization - shaking that up on him could set him back.

 

Not only the above, but he is a Murray type of player: big, engaged, skill. He's the kind of player Murray would take a chance on.

 

My guess is that they want to see where to concentrate their efforts. How much focus should they put on the active roster versus the prospect pool. Knowing what Grigorenko, and probably Armia, can bring to the NHL roster will help them figure out what to do going forward.

 

So, if I follow what you saying...

 

They had an opportunity to call up a player.

They know they are going to trade some players at some point.

They called up the player who should be on an NHL roster at some point.

They hope to learn some information on how he has progressed to date.

 

Okay.. if that's it.. we're good. Sounds like every day in the NHL. (I'm not picking on you, using your post as confirmation against the conspiracy theorists floating around here.) :)

 

Now, on the bright side. We all get to analyze how he plays tonight! So that should eat up some precious board bandwidth.

[K-9]

Yea fixed it

 

I see that Stewart and Mitchell are commutative. I wouldn't have guessed that before you broke it down scientifically with irrefutable mathematical proof. Well done.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[JJFIVEOH]

I know why Luke Adam wasn't called up.............. :P

[MattPie]

I know why Luke Adam wasn't called up.............. :P

 

He was so mad he demanded a trade.

[mcbainforprez]

 

 

Apparently Grigorenko will be skating between Stafford and Deslauriers.

 

TM might not specifically be shopping Grigorenko. There could be a larger deal in the works and some other GM asked to see Grigorenko play some NHL minutes while they're out in Western Canada. Doesn't mean a trade is imminent, this type of thing happens all the time in the NHL.

Let's say for a second that the call up is not related to injury and was due to a gm wanting to see him preform at the nhl level. Let's even say that another gm holds grigorenko in a much higher regard than his own team does (which tends not to happen too often with prospects). What exactly would his value be? What are you getting back that makes him expendable? I guess he could be part of a larger trade for hall, but I don't think that Edmonton would be interested. Although I envy their position in the league right now, they are under pressure to preform better now and this trade surely wouldn't help that. I look around the league and can't picture any scenario where we are selling top prospects and other teams are acquiring them. I guess you can never say never, but please explain one possible trade that could be plausible for both teams?

[Doohickie]

I agree — was just stirring the pot.

 

[mcbainforprez]

Ha sorry I didn't mean across as attacking. I just am interested to see if someone can come up with something that makes me question my own line of thinking. In a lighter manner of speaking, what would it take for you to move grigs?

[MattPie]

Ha sorry I didn't mean across as attacking. I just am interested to see if someone can come up with something that makes me question my own line of thinking. In a lighter manner of speaking, what would it take for you to move grigs?

 

A center that would likely be at least a 2nd line player to start. ideally someone that could push Girgensons down to the third line assuming Reinhart or this years pick is the #1 center. The Sabres are just now getting to the point (as others have pointed out) where center isn't a liability for the team, let's not mess that up.

[Huckleberry]

If he trades grigorenko i'll be superpissed, he is the most natural developped center we'll have the next two years.

[pi2000]

Looked like the same old Grigorenko to me. Thought he'd be flying up and down the ice, still looks slow footed and a step behind.

 

That said, he deserves a longer look... until early April at least, ????

[Andrew Amerk]

 

 

They were. The music was just great. Music within the last 4-5 years has really come back into form as well, especially in the alternative rock/indie rock realm. It's a fun little renaissance for good tunes.

 

I remember hanging out in a canvas tent in my backyard listening to 103.3 The FOX/The Edge when I was a kid. I'm pretty sure "Lump" by PUSA was 8 year old me's favorite song. :lol:

 

It doesn't seem like this board was listening to the right 90's music.

[X. Benedict]

 

:blush: :wub:

 

 

I am a one forum kind of guy.

 

 

Except for my profile on sabreymadison.com I'm a monogomous hockey forum guy.

[LGR4GM]

Looked like the same old Grigorenko to me. Thought he'd be flying up and down the ice, still looks slow footed and a step behind.

 

That said, he deserves a longer look... until early April at least,

His skating was more fluid and his defensive zone play was solid. Didn't get much time in the o-zone because, well that game was bound to be a disaster. Grigs is still growing into the player he can be. His passing was better than both his linemates and his decision making looked sound. I was actually annoyed with him because in the d-zone he deliberately was hanging back covering the middle and I wanted to see his offensive ability. I think in the end he only won like 54% of his draws but that part of his game I liked as well.

[X. Benedict]

His skating was more fluid and his defensive zone play was solid. Didn't get much time in the o-zone because, well that game was bound to be a disaster. Grigs is still growing into the player he can be. His passing was better than both his linemates and his decision making looked sound. I was actually annoyed with him because in the d-zone he deliberately was hanging back covering the middle and I wanted to see his offensive ability. I think in the end he only won like 54% of his draws but that part of his game I liked as well.

I wasn't unhappy with his play last night. He was disciplined and for the most part played a safe 2 way game.

[dudacek]

Yeah, I thought he was deliberately cautious. The kid is well-aware of his perceived flaws and anxious to prove he won't be a liability.

 

Given the way Hodgson was stapled to the bench after the shortie, I wonder if Grigo will get a chance to steal his roster spot.

[LGR4GM]

Yeah, I thought he was deliberately cautious. The kid is well-aware of his perceived flaws and anxious to prove he won't be a liability.

 

Given the way Hodgson was stapled to the bench after the shortie, I wonder if Grigo will get a chance to steal his roster spot.

I would send Grigs back to Rochester if we have anyone returning before Saturday. He really does need the entire year in Rochester and then next year, next year we can see what we have in him.

[Drunkard]

 

I would send Grigs back to Rochester if we have anyone returning before Saturday. He really does need the entire year in Rochester and then next year, next year we can see what we have in him.

 

The only problem with that is next year he is no longer waiver exempt so if he struggles with the big club next year we have to keep him up or risk exposing him to waivers. I'd like to see him play at least a handful of games now before sending him back. If he improves we can then give him another shot after we move bodies at the trade deadline.

[nfreeman]

Yeah, I thought he was deliberately cautious. The kid is well-aware of his perceived flaws and anxious to prove he won't be a liability.

 

Given the way Hodgson was stapled to the bench after the shortie, I wonder if Grigo will get a chance to steal his roster spot.

 

Something occurred to me this morning: can the Sabres buy out Hodgson's contract? I don't think they can use "compliance" buyouts any longer, but I think there is still a regular buyout mechanism, innit?

 

I really think having a highly-paid player who contributes nothing, game after game and year after year is a psychological drag on the rest of the team.

 

I don't think a trade is possible, as no one is going to take that contract. So it's either keep him for another 4 freaking years after this one, or buy him out.

 

Thanks again for that one, Darcy.

[Derrico]

It was one of Darcy's last parting gifts.

[LastPommerFan]

Something occurred to me this morning: can the Sabres buy out Hodgson's contract? I don't think they can use "compliance" buyouts any longer, but I think there is still a regular buyout mechanism, innit?

 

I really think having a highly-paid player who contributes nothing, game after game and year after year is a psychological drag on the rest of the team.

 

I don't think a trade is possible, as no one is going to take that contract. So it's either keep him for another 4 freaking years after this one, or buy him out.

 

Thanks again for that one, Darcy.

 

Not only can we buy him out, but a buy out this summer has a cap hit around $800k, while a buyout anytime after that would have a cap hit closer to $1.6M (according to capgeek's calculator.)

 

It seems there will be a decision to make come June.

 

2015 Buyout:

Cody Hodgson buyout from CapGeek.com

• 2015-16: $1,041,667
  
• 2016-17: $541,667
  
• 2017-18: $41,667
  
• 2018-19: -$458,333
  
• 2019-20: $791,667
  
• 2020-21: $791,667
  
• 2021-22: $791,667
  
• 2022-23: $791,667
  

 

2016 Buyout:

Cody Hodgson buyout from CapGeek.com

• 2016-17: $1,416,667
  
• 2017-18: $916,667
  
• 2018-19: $416,667
  
• 2019-20: $1,666,667
  
• 2020-21: $1,666,667
  
• 2021-22: $1,666,667
  

Edited December 17, 2014 by Glass Case Of Emotion

[mcbainforprez]

Not only can we buy him out, but a buy out this summer has a cap hit around $800k, while a buyout anytime after that would have a cap hit closer to $1.6M (according to capgeek's calculator.)

 

It seems there will be a decision to make come June.

 

2015 Buyout:

 

Cody Hodgson buyout from CapGeek.com

• 2015-16: $1,041,667
  
• 2016-17: $541,667
  
• 2017-18: $41,667
  
• 2018-19: -$458,333
  
• 2019-20: $791,667
  
• 2020-21: $791,667
  
• 2021-22: $791,667
  
• 2022-23: $791,667
  

2016 Buyout:

 

Cody Hodgson buyout from CapGeek.com

• 2016-17: $1,416,667
  
• 2017-18: $916,667
  
• 2018-19: $416,667
  
• 2019-20: $1,666,667
  
• 2020-21: $1,666,667
  
• 2021-22: $1,666,667
  

 

yes, while I would like to see another year to see if he can put it together, it makes sense to buy him out now. Since we would only have to pay 1/3 of his remaining salary as opposed to 2/3 of it once he turns 26 (buyouts can only happen in June so this season would be his last since he is 24 now with a Feb b-day), this summer TMGM will have a semi-difficult decision IMO.

[darksabre]

Grigorenko back to Rochester.

[Huckleberry]

normal, sabres don't play untill saturday.

[LabattBlue]

Something occurred to me this morning: can the Sabres buy out Hodgson's contract? I don't think they can use "compliance" buyouts any longer, but I think there is still a regular buyout mechanism, innit?

 

I really think having a highly-paid player who contributes nothing, game after game and year after year is a psychological drag on the rest of the team.

 

I don't think a trade is possible, as no one is going to take that contract. So it's either keep him for another 4 freaking years after this one, or buy him out.

 

Thanks again for that one, Darcy.

I'd hate to give up on a talent like Hodgson at his age, but his unwillingness to play defense, lack of production this year, and the joke of a contract make it a tough call. If he is trying to play his way off the team, he is well on his way to his wish.

 

Losing Hodgson, Stafford, Stewart, and Myers(despite the love professed for him on SS) off the team either now or in the offseason wouldn't bother me at all.

 

PS Hodgson is a reminder to all those who have their pants around their ankles when looking at the prospect list, that the majority of them WILL NOT amount to anything regardless of their draft position and/or amateur numbers.

Edited December 17, 2014 by LabattBlue

[spndnchz]

I'd hate to give up on a talent like Hodgson at his age, but his unwillingness to play defense, lack of production this year, and the joke of a contract make it a tough call. If he is trying to play his way off the team, he is well on his way to his wish.

 

Losing Hodgson, Stafford, Stewart, and Myers(despite the love professed for him on SS) off the team either now or in the offseason wouldn't bother me at all.

 

PS Hodgson is a reminder to all those who have their pants around their ankles when looking at the prospect list, that the majority of them WILL NOT amount to anything regardless of their draft position and/or amateur numbers.

 

Losing all those would put you under the cap floor. Hmmmm