Trade ideas and speculation

[TrueBlueGED]

My disagreement with these statements is that by my eye test, he/they played really well the 2nd half of the season when Bogosian was healthy. To me also, many defensive mistakes are not done by the D but are team mistakes. Having so many young forwards (yes Eichel and Samson included) did not help the Dmen much despite the occasional wow play, and Bogosian in particular and Gorges to an extent get ZERO credit for playing with a partner that is still very young or in McCabe's case was playing in his first year in the NHL. Do these guys not have growing pains and development time still to come without blowing up their partners while doing so???

 

I do agree with dudacek in that getting rid of any of these guys without upgrading the positions is not very bright. This team still needs to grow because of its youth and why I struggle with signing Stamkos. Not that he wouldn't really help the team but are we at the stage yet that his skill set will help us or hinder us as he gets older. When this team is ready to fly, will he be too old to help lead the way.

Who is suggesting getting rid of them without upgrading? You move them out to open up roster room for the upgrade.

[rakish]

While I agree Chz is one to listen to, I'd say there are a few others. However, according to what I've heard, the NHLPA has verified that Bogo does have a valid NMC.

 

Really? interesting

 

You were listening to me again, weren't you?

Edited June 19, 2016 by rakish

[Huckleberry]

While I agree Chz is one to listen to, I'd say there are a few others. However, according to what I've heard, the NHLPA has verified that Bogo does have a valid NMC.

 

This is is what I've been reading everywhere.   When the expansion draft happens bogo has a NMC.

[Rasmus_]

From Jim Matheson from the Edmonton Journal

 

• The Oilers have been on the Sabres for a long while to see if they can acquire defenceman Rasmus Ristolainen from them for a winger (Eberle has probably been pitched) but it’s a non-starter. Buffalo needs wingers, for sure, but Ristolainen is untouchable. Probably even for Hall because the Sabres already have a similar player in Evander Kane.

 

Rasmus Ristolainen is worth more than anyone on their roster outside of perhaps McDavid.  At this point it would take #4, Draisaitl, #19 and Nurse for me to even consider dealing Rasmus.  You don't deal #1 defensemen for Jordan Eberle or Taylor Hall.  HAH!

[TrueBlueGED]

While I agree Chz is one to listen to, I'd say there are a few others. However, according to what I've heard, the NHLPA has verified that Bogo does have a valid NMC.

Which begs the question: are we misinterpreting the CBA or did Murray inexplicably choose to honor the NMC?

[rakish]

No, Lanny reports Murray says he doesn't have any players with NMC.

 

I look forward to hearing the player's association argument.  I am very happy I am not making it. I'm guessing it goes something like "The clause is invalid because it invalidates Mr. Bogo's right to make a contract," which is somewhat better than "There are so many clauses, you can't expect us to read the whole CBA"

[Thorny]

While I agree Chz is one to listen to, I'd say there are a few others. However, according to what I've heard, the NHLPA has verified that Bogo does have a valid NMC.

 

 

Which begs the question: are we misinterpreting the CBA or did Murray inexplicably choose to honor the NMC?

 

 

No, Lanny reports Murray says he doesn't have any players with NMC.

 

I look forward to hearing the player's association argument.  I am very happy I am not making it. I'm guessing it goes something like "The clause is invalid because it invalidates Mr. Bogo's right to make a contract," which is somewhat better than "There are so many clauses, you can't expect us to read the whole CBA"

This is all getting pretty funny in its ambiguity. Clear as mud now with conflicting reports.

[Sabel79]

I've been staring at the CBA for half an hour now (Thanks, slow day at the office!) I have no clue how the NHLPA thinks there's an enforceable NMC unless the Sabres agreed to in in writing; and you'd think GMTM would have a recollection of doing that.  Pasting the Relevant language (I'm sure it's upthread but whatever):

 

11.8

Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement.

(a)

The SPC of any Player who is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent under Article

10.1(a) may contain a no-Trade or a no-move clause. SPCs containing a no-Trade or a no-move

clause may be entered into prior to the time that the Player is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent

so long as the SPC containing the no-Trade or no-move clause extends through and does not

become effective until the time that the Player qualifies for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency.

If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking

effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club. An acquiring Club may agree to continue to

be bound by the no-Trade or no-move clause, which agreement shall be evidenced in writing to

the Player, Central Registry and the NHLPA, in accordance with Exhibit 3 hereof.

[Hoss]

I was fully confident that Bogo does not have and will not have a no-movement clause, but I'm now just as confused.

 

I understand Murray, apparently, went on WGR and said none of his players have no-movement clauses, but it sounds like his NMC hasn't kicked in yet anyways (if it exists). So this quote can be true and Bogo and also have a NMC that will activate later.

On why an acquiring team would honor a NMC - I have no idea unless Bogo had a no-trade or no-movement clause at the time of the trade and only agreed to waive it if the Sabres would honor the terms of his contract.

 

I hope his NMC is irrelevant, anyways. I like Bogo. I want him to stick around. I won't cry if we acquire a guy like Shattenkirk, Lindholm or others and move him due to excess, but I wouldn't move him unless this is the case.

[kas23]

Chz posted the other day that there is a clause in the CBA that states, traded players lose their NMC. You can read it yourself, off the top of my head it's 11b, but find Chz's post to get the real number

 

That and how exactly can a player who had a NMC be traded to us? Wouldn't he have had to waive that NMC before being traded to us?

[thewookie1]

Someone proposed this on the hfboards.....

 

 

Pysyk for Pearson (LAK) 

 

What do you guys think, it was met with support from both sides.

 

 

 

Also who would you rather have? Yandle or Stamkos

[Taro T]

I've been staring at the CBA for half an hour now (Thanks, slow day at the office!) I have no clue how the NHLPA thinks there's an enforceable NMC unless the Sabres agreed to in in writing; and you'd think GMTM would have a recollection of doing that.  Pasting the Relevant language (I'm sure it's upthread but whatever):

 

11.8

Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement.

(a)

The SPC of any Player who is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent under Article

10.1(a) may contain a no-Trade or a no-move clause. SPCs containing a no-Trade or a no-move

clause may be entered into prior to the time that the Player is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent

so long as the SPC containing the no-Trade or no-move clause extends through and does not

become effective until the time that the Player qualifies for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency.

If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking

effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club. An acquiring Club may agree to continue to

be bound by the no-Trade or no-move clause, which agreement shall be evidenced in writing to

the Player, Central Registry and the NHLPA, in accordance with Exhibit 3 hereof.

Seem to be a few possible explanations for the discrepancy:

 

1. Either TM is misinformed &/or lying;

 

2. The spokesperson for the NHLPA is misinformed &/or lying;

 

3. Somebody w/ the Sabres (other than TM) provided the relevant parties w/ written documentation that the Sabres are honoring the NMC (which overlaps w/ 1); or

 

4. Someone w/ the Sabres (possibly including TM) has verbally agreed to honor the NMC but has not made that commitment in writing (which overlaps w/ 2). This would explain the NHLPA believing the NMC is still valid & the apparent uncertainty on the part of the Sabres.

 

Any other possibilities?

[Brawndo]

Someone proposed this on the hfboards.....

 

 

Pysyk for Pearson (LAK)

 

What do you guys think, it was met with support from both sides.

 

 

 

Also who would you rather have? Yandle or Stamkos

The Pysyk for Pearson Trade was originally proposed by Dennis Bernstein from The Fourth Period yesterday. It was in response to to Sabres Fans tweeting him trade proposals between the Sabres and Ducks. He feels The Kings and Sabres would be better trade partners.

[Taro T]

That and how exactly can a player who had a NMC be traded to us? Wouldn't he have had to waive that NMC before being traded to us?

Players can sign contracts that include a NMC that kicks in after a certain date. It appears Bogosian was traded prior to the NMC going into effect. So he would not have waived the NMC. And per the wording of the CBA, it would be up to the Sabres whether the clause would be honored by them in the Bogosian case.

 

Players w/ NMC's / NTC's can & do waive them on occassion. Typically to keep from being the only veteran piece stuck on a team that decides to go through a rebuild. (Pretty sure Regheir waived a NTC to come to Buffalo.) Not sure if the NTC/NMC can be reinstated w/ the new club after it has been waived; would expect that to go case by case if viable.

[WildCard]

@NHLExpertPicks tweets Boston, Edmonton,and Buffalo are interest in Shattenkirk

 

Is that a legitimate account?

[TrueBlueGED]

@NHLExpertPicks tweets Boston, Edmonton,and Buffalo are interest in Shattenkirk

 

Is that a legitimate account?

It looks fake, sounds fake, and smells fake...it's fake. Yes, it has an odor. Waft it in.

[Hoss]

@NHLExpertPicks tweets Boston, Edmonton,and Buffalo are interest in Shattenkirk

 

Is that a legitimate account?

No, not legitimate.

 

Look for:

1. Blue checkmark. If it's a verified account it means it's a verified individual who has a legitimate reason to distinguish their account. Doesn't automatically mean their Tweets are gospel, but it's a good sign.

2. An actual name of either an individual or association with a team or news organization. If it's just a generic "NHL rumors" or "MLB daily" account then it's probably just a rumor-mongering account.

3. Look at the information itself. Is it a ridiculous assertion? Probably fake. Is it really basic info that any random person could just say? Another sign it's one of those "throw at the wall and hope it sticks" accounts.

 

I don't mind the posting of this stuff as long as it's clarified that the source isn't legitimate and it's just being posted for the sake of discussion.

Someone proposed this on the hfboards.....

 

 

Pysyk for Pearson (LAK) 

 

What do you guys think, it was met with support from both sides.

 

 

 

Also who would you rather have? Yandle or Stamkos

I'd probably make this move, but it's not my most preferred use of Pysyk as an asset.

I would rather have Stamkos than Yandle almost regardless of cost. I also saw one reporter, Joe Yerdon I think?, mention that he doesn't think we'll pursue Yandle. He doesn't believe Yandle is the type Murray would want to pair with Risto.

[Hoss]

But, on the "NHLExpertPicks" subject, it looks like they were just stealing content from Bruce Garrioch. He mentioned in an article that the Bruins, Oilers and Sabres have talked to St. Louis. Garrioch said Murray is being "aggressive" in looking for blueline help.

 

http://www.ottawasun.com/2016/06/18/calgary-flames-eye-move-into-top-three-or-four-at-nhl-draft

 

Other rumors in there:

• Flames trying to move up for Puljujarvi or Tkachuk
• Blue Jackets listening on Foligno, trying to move Tyutin and Hartnell
• Panthers could be looking to move Nick Bjugstad and/or Dmitry Kulikov (lefty)
• Rangers listening to offers on Stepan
• Unlikely Eric Staal heads back to Carolina
• Blues prefer to extend Shattenkirk
• Teams are showing interest in Matt Dumba

 

I know Garrioch isn't well liked (by me or other board members), but these are all interesting to think about. And there's no doubt the guy has some type of connections.

[WildCard]

Thanks Hoss. That's why I was unsure about the account, all of those rumors make sense

Edited June 19, 2016 by WildCard

[TrueBlueGED]

Kulikov, eh? Interesting. I have some research to do.

[Hoss]

http://www.csnne.com/NHL-rumor-Boston-Bruins-Dmitry-Kulikov-Florida-Panthers

 

Boston has been talking to Florida about Kulikov. Other reports say Florida is also looking to extend him and that trade talk is because teams are calling them and not the other way around.

[Sabel79]

Seem to be a few possible explanations for the discrepancy:

1. Either TM is misinformed &/or lying;

2. The spokesperson for the NHLPA is misinformed &/or lying;

3. Somebody w/ the Sabres (other than TM) provided the relevant parties w/ written documentation that the Sabres are honoring the NMC (which overlaps w/ 1); or

4. Someone w/ the Sabres (possibly including TM) has verbally agreed to honor the NMC but has not made that commitment in writing (which overlaps w/ 2). This would explain the NHLPA believing the NMC is still valid & the apparent uncertainty on the part of the Sabres.

Any other possibilities?

The only other possibility that doesn't involve gross incompetence or outright bald-faced lying on at least one party's part would be GMTM doing a Bill Clinton-esque parsing of verb tenses when he says "We don't have anybody on an NMC.... [Now]". I find this unlikely given the context in which he has appeared to say this.

[Randall Flagg]

But don't the Sabres have enough room to absorb the full $7.8MM for 2 years? Especially in the highly unlikely event that they don't get Stamkos?

This is the attitude I like to see  :beer:

 

Remember that time Edmonton drafted Darnell Nurse over Rasmus? Sucks to be them.

 

The only way I trade Rasmus to Edmonton is for a deal involving McDavid, otherwise we're losing out.

Same. I have no interest in any of their other players.

[Hoss]

Same. I have no interest in any of their other players.

I absolutely have interest in Hall and Eberle, but I'm not giving them Risto for them.

[Randall Flagg]

I absolutely have interest in Hall and Eberle, but I'm not giving them Risto for them.

I don't really want Eberle, and am not interested in Hall because there is no deal that would work that I'd be okay with sending out.