sicknfla Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Change Grigs to Girgs and next year's third to Reinhart and they might do it.How is that? So this year's #3 is that much better than last year's #2 that you need to add Girgs to the equation as well? Sometimes I think we look at the # of the pick more than the player. I wouldn't trade Reinhart straight up for #3 - yet alone give them add ons. Reinhart, #21, Girgs for #3. Yes you are right - they would listen. And Murray would get run out of town. Girgs and #21 maybe - and even then I would be apprehensive. Edited June 10, 2015 by sicknfla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Yes lets overpay for a #3 draft pick, Zadorov alone should land you that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 How is that? So this year's #3 is that much better than last year's #2 that you need to add Girgs to the equation as well? Sometimes I think we look at the # of the pick more than the player. I wouldn't trade Reinhart straight up for #3 - yet alone give them add ons. Reinhart, #21, Girgs for #3. Yes you are right - they would listen. And Murray would get run out of town. Girgs and #21 maybe - and even then I would be apprehensive. I'm not saying they're equal in value, the proposal I quoted was laughable. If we were being serious about getting number three, we would have to give up more than it is worth, like the one I changed it to. I would never make that trade either, that's the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 I'm not saying they're equal in value, the proposal I quoted was laughable. If we were being serious about getting number three, we would have to give up more than it is worth, like the one I changed it to. I would never make that trade either, that's the point. Sometimes in here it is hard to tell who is being serious and who isn't. I have seen some pretty crazy trade proposals in here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Sometimes in here it is hard to tell who is being serious and who isn't. I have seen some pretty crazy trade proposals in here. You mean "Malkin for Grigorenko and a ham sandwich, but Pittsburgh better ask nicely or I might change my mind?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 You mean "Malkin for Grigorenko and a ham sandwich, but Pittsburgh better ask nicely or I might change my mind?" Something like that. But let's be realistic, they would atleast include a side salad in the deal as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Yes lets overpay for a #3 draft pick, Zadorov alone should land you that. There is no way that Zadorov alone gets you #3. Maybe I'm a little low on Big Z, but I don't think he alone even gets you into the top 8 or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Why give up #13 when the Kings can just buy Richards out?if they buy him out does a portion of it count against the cap? That may determine what else they are willing to give up to get him off the books Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 You mean "Malkin for Grigorenko and a ham sandwich, but Pittsburgh better ask nicely or I might change my mind?" Depends. What type of ham is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanny Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 if they buy him out does a portion of it count against the cap? That may determine what else they are willing to give up to get him off the books According to this, Yes https://www.hockeyscap.com/buyout_calculator/mike_richards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Y'alls' GMTM avatars are too similar, I keep quickly reading and assuming dejeanerret is Liger. Well if the poster says Bro a bunch it isn't me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 According to this, Yes https://www.hockeyscap.com/buyout_calculator/mike_richards So basically, it's all about those two big payouts in year four and five. If the Sabres could flip that cap hit to year one and two, then this would be a no-brainer. I bet the Kings, the Sabres, the Leafs and a couple other teams are turning the CBA upside down right now searching for loopholes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) No way in hell I consider trading for the #3 pick no matter the circumstances. We're done. Time to move forward. Make trades to fill in the holes. (Yes, I know it's a thread about trades) Edited June 10, 2015 by JJFIVEOH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Agreed. I thought Liger was actually arguing and insulting himself until I looked closer. I must thank Wildcard for absolutely ensuring nobody would have an avatar similar to mine. Sounds a little schizophrenic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Now GMBM said he wants a young player and a draft pick (pretty vague) for a goaltender. Not sure how much I want to give up for Lehner. He's not proven and has had concussion issues. I'd rather take Anderson. He's not slowing down any and has 3-4 good years left. I guess it all depends on whether or not GMTM wants to build around Lehner for the future or he wants a stopgap. I'm going to assume this link has been posted already, but I'll post it again because I referenced it. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/senators-want-young-player-draft-pick-for-goalie/ Edited June 10, 2015 by JJFIVEOH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 I still want Talbot or Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 According to this, Yes https://www.hockeyscap.com/buyout_calculator/mike_richards Taro, or anyone else, would the cap hit numbers be different if we bought him out instead of LA? And how does the recapture issue figure into this? It really seems impossible to figure out if there is a scenario where this works for Buffalo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stads Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Garth from Hockeybuzz thinks this package would get it done fo the third pick: #21 Grigorenko Hodgson Big Z He thinks since Darcy drafted Zadorov and Grigs, he'd be enamored with getting them. He also traded for Hodgson and Garth thinks Darcy still has a man crush on him. I want some of whatever Garth is smoking if he thinks that would be enough. I'm unable to post a link, but the story is on the Hockeybuzz main page under Garth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 A #21 overall, a #12 overall with 2 years development, a #16 overall with 1 year development, AND a rostered NHL vet for #3? Way too steep IMO. This isn't a franchise player we'd be drafting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 A #21 overall, a #12 overall with 2 years development, a #16 overall with 1 year development, AND a rostered NHL vet for #3? Way too steep IMO. This isn't a franchise player we'd be drafting. Just for poops and giggles if Murray maneuvered into pick 3 who does he take? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Garth from Hockeybuzz thinks this package would get it done fo the third pick: #21 Grigorenko Hodgson Big Z He thinks since Darcy drafted Zadorov and Grigs, he'd be enamored with getting them. He also traded for Hodgson and Garth thinks Darcy still has a man crush on him. I want some of whatever Garth is smoking if he thinks that would be enough. I'm unable to post a link, but the story is on the Hockeybuzz main page under Garth. I don't read Hockeybuzz much. But I think it is a mistake to overestimate Darcy's influence on the very competent Don Maloney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Just for poops and giggles if Murray maneuvered into pick 3 who does he take? No idea. But I don't believe anyone left is worth 2 prospects with high top ends, #21, and Hodgson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 No idea. But I don't believe anyone left is worth 2 prospects with high top ends, #21, and Hodgson. Me either. I would rather give up less to get into the 6-10 range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Taro, or anyone else, would the cap hit numbers be different if we bought him out instead of LA? And how does the recapture issue figure into this? It really seems impossible to figure out if there is a scenario where this works for Buffalo. Haven't seen the details of his contract, so no data currently. If Chz or other hasn't addressed the q by the weekend, I'll look into it. (Have a few things that have to go out the door over the next couple of days, or I'd look into it now.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 11, 2015 Report Share Posted June 11, 2015 A #21 overall, a #12 overall with 2 years development, a #16 overall with 1 year development, AND a rostered NHL vet for #3? Way too steep IMO. This isn't a franchise player we'd be drafting. This might not be a franchise player. It could turn into one easily. #3 in this draft could be very very good if you take the correct player. There is a 3rd overall pick right now trying to win his 3rd cup in 5 years. Just for poops and giggles if Murray maneuvered into pick 3 who does he take? Mitch Marner without a question. Garth from Hockeybuzz thinks this package would get it done fo the third pick: #21 Grigorenko Hodgson Big Z He thinks since Darcy drafted Zadorov and Grigs, he'd be enamored with getting them. He also traded for Hodgson and Garth thinks Darcy still has a man crush on him. I want some of whatever Garth is smoking if he thinks that would be enough. I'm unable to post a link, but the story is on the Hockeybuzz main page under Garth. I don't read Hockeybuzz much. But I think it is a mistake to overestimate Darcy's influence on the very competent Don Maloney. Exactly. Darcy Regier is not the GM of Phoenix, Maloney is. 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.