3putt Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 I should have noted that the GR guys premised this upon Kane being ok with it. They said the first step would be for Murray to talk with Kane. Buttfugly had 60+ points from the blueline last year. Do we think the Sabres are getting that with a mid-first-round 2016 pick? I'm more concerned about salary issues down the road. Maybe not a mid rounder, but we will be picking in the top 10 in 2016. And yes, we will do as good if not better than Buff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Byfuglien is exactly what this team needs, but as has been said, that's a grenade pin I don't want to pull. Also, if he ends up getting over $7m on a new contract, I can't see that fitting unless Reinhart or Eichel busts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Bad idea on so many levels: 1. Kane and Byfuglien don't have the best history with the whole track suit issue and the middle finger picture from whatever article got posted on here a while back 2. Byfuglien is on an expiring contract so trading for him means we'd likely lose assets only to see him bolt unless we luck into a seller's market at the deadline but even then we aren't likely to recoup later what we'd have to give up now 3. He is 30 so re-signing him would likely mean overpaying him only to watch him decline over the course of the contract extension 4. He's a right handed shot and our hole is on the left side. Just once could we please get a square peg to put into a square hole? Please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 He's 30!?!?! Holy crap time flies. Nevermind then, I wouldn't want him even if the Kane thing wasn't a potential issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 He's 30!?!?! Holy crap time flies. Nevermind then, I wouldn't want him even if the Kane thing wasn't a potential issue. Whoa. Yeah, that changes it for me, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted July 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 No to Buff in Buff. You're essentially guaranteeing that you've acquired Winnipeg's problem because everybody says it was either Kane or Buff. I'm confident we got the non-issue player. Let's keep it that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 No to Buff in Buff. You're essentially guaranteeing that you've acquired Winnipeg's problem because everybody says it was either Kane or Buff. I'm confident we got the non-issue player. Let's keep it that way. Also, if we are looking to acquire players, can we pick ones from teams that were actually good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted July 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Also, if we are looking to acquire players, can we pick ones from teams that were actually good? The Jets were a playoff team, but you have a fair point. Good teams generally only look for cap dumps, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stinky finger Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 The guy I'd target is Krug, the guy puts up points, is a solid player, and is an American who played well with Eichel Me likey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Also, if we are looking to acquire players, can we pick ones from teams that were actually good? Sure, if they're parting with the players that actually helped them be good rather than just ancillary pieces, but we know that normally doesn't happen. Good-but-not-great players on winning teams get overrated while good-but-not-great players on bad teams get underrated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Sure, if they're parting with the players that actually helped them be good rather than just ancillary pieces, but we know that normally doesn't happen. Good-but-not-great players on winning teams get overrated while good-but-not-great players on bad teams get underrated. So, Moulson then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 So, Moulson then? Yes. Although, given his age, I do think it's likely his best hockey is behind him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Yes. Although, given his age, I do think it's likely his best hockey is behind him. Nah moulson has 3 more good years atleast, he came into the league later than most players to, less physical wear and tear on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 But Sizzle wears an Elvis jumpsuit and Hoss kinda looks like a young Rick Jeanneret... See no Evel, hear no Evel, speak no Evel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Nah moulson has 3 more good years atleast, he came into the league later than most players to, less physical wear and tear on him. Of course he can have three good years left. I just don't think he's getting 30 goals and 65 points again. Just because I think he's declined doesn't mean I think he's dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Of course he can have three good years left. I just don't think he's getting 30 goals and 65 points again. Just because I think he's the league scorinig has declined doesn't mean I think he's the leagure is dead. Fixed! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Of course he can have three good years left. I just don't think he's getting 30 goals and 65 points again. Just because I think he's declined doesn't mean I think he's dead. If he doesn't, he's dead to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 Jason Garrison anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 Jason Garrison anyone? Depends on what you're proposing to give up for this 31-year-old defenseman making $5M / year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 (edited) A 3rd and a 5th? 2nd in 2017? Edited July 31, 2015 by thewookie1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 A 3rd and a 5th? 2nd in 2017? I might. Do you think Tampa wants him off the books that badly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 I might. Do you think Tampa wants him off the books that badly? If no one bites on Carle, they'll be in some trouble potentially. They will have a mere 1.7mil in cap space once they put Ohlund on LTIR and next year while Coburn and Ohlund come off the books they'll have all these RFA/UFAs including Stamkos, Killorn, Brown, Namestnikov, Kucherov, Paquette, and Witkowski, Coburn. The following year they'll have Hedman, Boyle, Johnson, Palat, Drouin, and both goalies. So while not desperate, they will have some problems in the near future, and he was acquired for a 2nd, a college guy, and a 7th a year ago. So we maybe looking at more of a 3rd and 2nd in 2017 but I'd still do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted August 25, 2015 Report Share Posted August 25, 2015 Another guy I'd be very interested in is Brian Campbell, I'd have no problem taking the vet who can still play big minutes for a couple years. He's older but would fit our needs perfectly in being a PP guy, and minute muncher for a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted August 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2015 I mentioned Campbell a while back. He can't play big minutes anymore (let alone for a couple years), but he'd be an upgrade to what we have. The sentimental value is obviously there, and he's only got one year left on his monster deal. I still support the idea of bringing him back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted August 25, 2015 Report Share Posted August 25, 2015 I think murray wants a young team that grows together, Campbell doesn't fit that, besides I doubt florida will let him go from mentoring ekblad. 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.