Jump to content

2016-'17 Lineup


Taro T

Recommended Posts

Nash.

 

Hmmm.

 

Whatever. I'd be in.

 

Did the Sabres try to court him in the year he signed with the Rangers?

I thought I remember that they did but he wouldn't even give them a meeting.  That was the year we 'settled' on Leino wasn't it :wallbash:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I remember that they did but he wouldn't even give them a meeting.  That was the year we 'settled' on Leino wasn't it :wallbash:

 

Second best forward in UFA that year .........

 

I hear he can play centre .........

Nash didn't sign in NY, he was traded there from Columbus. You crazy kids are thinking of Brad Richards, who though he undoubtedly found more success there than Leino did here, was similarly expunged from the roster via compliance buyout.

 

Expunged, eh?

 

Does that mean it never happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nash didn't sign in NY, he was traded there from Columbus. You crazy kids are thinking of Brad Richards, who though he undoubtedly found more success there than Leino did here, was similarly expunged from the roster via compliance buyout.

He didn't sign a contract extension in NY though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nash didn't sign in NY, he was traded there from Columbus. You crazy kids are thinking of Brad Richards, who though he undoubtedly found more success there than Leino did here, was similarly expunged from the roster via compliance buyout.

Yes, yes I was.  My bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, didn't Darcy have a deal on the table with Le Thrashers to move up to 2nd overall to draft Nash?

Columbus moved up to one by flipping with Florida, who took the guy they wanted all along, Bouwmeester, at 3.

 

I think the trade involved our picks, 11 and 20, plus something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, didn't Darcy have a deal on the table with Le Thrashers to move up to 2nd overall to draft Nash?

Columbus moved up to one by flipping with Florida, who took the guy they wanted all along, Bouwmeester, at 3.

 

I think the trade involved our picks, 11 and 20, plus something else.

 

I have no recollection of this whatsoever, but I have no doubt that from Darcy's perspective, Atlanta's insistence on including Ghyslain Rousseau in the deal was the deal-breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, didn't Darcy have a deal on the table with Le Thrashers to move up to 2nd overall to draft Nash?

Columbus moved up to one by flipping with Florida, who took the guy they wanted all along, Bouwmeester, at 3.

 

I think the trade involved our picks, 11 and 20, plus something else.

 

I don't recall that, but that strikes me as a very non-Darcy type move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the Sabres be interested in a 31 year old who's numbers have fallen off of the cliff? 

 

Adding older players on the downside is what you do when it's time to fine tune the roster, not during the early stages of rebuilding and not for the money/assets it would require. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the Sabres be interested in a 31 year old who's numbers have fallen off of the cliff? 

 

Adding older players on the downside is what you do when it's time to fine tune the roster, not during the early stages of rebuilding and not for the money/assets it would require. 

Yeah, why would the sabres be interested in a player who had 42 goals last year. An injury ridden year has made his numbers fall off the cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, why would the sabres be interested in a player who had 42 goals last year. An injury ridden year has made his numbers fall off the cliff.

50 games, 12 goals this season and he will be 32 going into next season. The days of 40 goals are behind Nash. 30 at this point maybe a long shot. Add in age and price and this is not a good fit for a team at the beginning stages of the building process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're talking a bit about Fowler in the Stamkos thread, but I figured I'd try to move the discussion here. The focus on Fowler for us is understandable because of our need for a puck-moving LHD and his logical availability given Anaheim's internal budget and Dman crunch (both Lindolm and Vatanen needing new contracts, and the inexplicable decision to give Bieksa $4 million and a NMC). But what if Fowler isn't the odd-man out? He's the same age as Vatanen and under contract for $4M for two more years, whereas Vatanen reportedly is seeking a $6Mx6 contract. Fowler also has a longer track record of success in the NHL.

 

I think it makes most sense to move Fowler because of their depth at LHD vs. RHD, but let's just play the what if game. Vatanen is a RHD so he doesn't fit our needs nearly as well, but would anyone still have interest? I sure would. He still brings a skill set we sorely lack, and it would make me feel better about using somebody like Pysyk (or Bogo !?!?!?! :D ) in a trade for maybe a LHD or a forward.

 

Granted, Anaheim may be smart and offload 1-2 of the Bieksa/Stoner/Despres triumvirate and screw our dreams of Fowler/Vatanen, but hey, now is the time for optimism!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...