Hoss Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Depends if a Finn is there or not IMO. Seems to be a very elite top 3 then a slight drop, and the Ducks need offense now to win. I don't think it's a huge drop off after three. The drop off from 1 to 2 is bigger than the drop off from 3 to 4 in my opinion. If we're somewhere in the top six or seven then they can aim high dangling that pick and maybe Ennis or prospects. I agree with this. Unless our 1st is more like 10 than 5. Agreed. It will also depend on where Anaheim finishes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 With that much fire power I think you could make the playoffs with a sub-par 2nd pair. It's not like it's Weber - Franson out there The firepower needs a blue line capable of getting it the puck. It's possible McCabe leaps forward and Bogosian capitalizes on his junior career in year 8 as a pro...but let's just say I wouldn't be comfortable betting on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 The firepower needs a blue line capable of getting it the puck. It's possible McCabe leaps forward and Bogosian capitalizes on his junior career in year 8 as a pro...but let's just say I wouldn't be comfortable betting on it. True, it does, but I feel like worse teams have made the playoffs on a worse blue-line. It's not like the Flames, Avs, or Pens (as recent examples) had anything great going on back there, even in their 1st pair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 True, it does, but I feel like worse teams have made the playoffs on a worse blue-line. It's not like the Flames, Avs, or Pens (as recent examples) had anything great going on back there, even in their 1st pair. Sure, it's not impossible. But of your examples, only the Pens actually deserved to go :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) I'm going to make the Sabres a playoff team in two moves, neither of which will be popular on this board, both of which are plausible and in character for Murray 1) Trade our first pick (assuming it is not top 3) to the Ducks along with Cody Franson in exchange for the Ducks 1st and Cam Fowler. 2) Sign Steven Stamkos to a 7-year $70 million deal. Eichel gets his sniper. Jack, Steven and ROR become one of the league's best lines Reinhart centres line two with Kane and Ennis playing Domi and Duclair Three of Foligno/Larsson/Gionta/Girgensons form a badass third line, doing exactly what Bylsma wants his third line to do Schaller and Des are our key fourth liners with Moulson filling in as needed in the top six, and Bailey, Carrier and Fasching the top call-ups. Fowler gives Risto the smooth complement he needs on pair one McCabe and Bogo bring some snarl and decent skill to pair two Gorges slides down to play with Pysyk giving us one of the league's best third pairs. Sign a Weber type to be the 7th D and a Johnson type to back up Lehner and I promise we will do some damage. Those are big pieces to add, but we aren't that far away. And there's not a key guy on the squad over 26. This is good stuff. Depending on how we are able to manage the roster going forward beyond next year, I may be temped to sign the petition I assume you are currently drawing up, that you will be hand delivering to Murray himself, correct? It would be quite exciting if this were to happen. The Stamkos signing gives me more pause than trading the 1st actually, especially considering the type of D we could get back in a trade. At the end of the day though adding a guy like Stamkos would be exceptionally tempting, if he'd be willing to come here. Dudacek, I appreciate your gusto, but I don't think we're a playoff team if we're icing McCabe-Bogo as our 2nd pair. I'm also fairly certain the "don't sign Stamkos" table is much less populated than the "sign Stamkos" table :) I think we almost certainly make the playoffs with that roster and then some, depending of course on the injury situation. This is also assuming Ristolainen returns to form though. A Fowler - Ristolainen pair would be quite formidable, really easing up the load on the other D-men. If McCabe continues developing, I'd think we would have a solid D core with the potential for an explosive offense. Could we sign Yandle, too? Edited March 4, 2016 by Thorny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) I mean, that certainly gets us into the playoffs next year. I just think it neuters you for sustained success. Just MO thoughI'm not sure why. Your entire core will remain in its prime for at least five years, most of them for seven or eight. You may have to trade one of your core guys when Reinhart Kane and Eichel's contracts come up but that should net some affordable young talent to groom in behind the core. And we still have all our draft picks plus to replenish the pipeline. Dudacek, I appreciate your gusto, but I don't think we're a playoff team if we're icing McCabe-Bogo as our 2nd pair. I'm also fairly certain the "don't sign Stamkos" table is much less populated than the "sign Stamkos" table :)I'm with WC on this one.I gotta say it seems like Bogo has been playing better since you started building the bunker. More ice time than Risto tonight. I'm starting to think he's one of those guys who plays better with more ice time. And lately Jake really looks like a legit top four in the making to me. I agree with your argument about good d-men making the offence work better, but it also works both ways. Upgrading McGinn to Stamkos is really going to help the d on the counterattack, the breakout and on zone time. Come on boys, dare to dream. Edited March 4, 2016 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 We certainly have the room to add Jack's winger and a partner for Risto. Now, I'm not sure I'd call a McCabe/Bogo second pair "sub-par", but I can respect the Bogo Bunker Bunch. Bogo is the weaker defender of the two, but he has shown a knack for scoring. Ideally, he and a third or something are traded for his replacement. I have to say, though, and I trust GMTM implicitly by now to be fully on board with this, but whoever comes back needs more snarl than Bogo has. P.S. I would enjoy a Gorges/Pysyk third pair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) I'll dream with you guys then :D O'Reilly 7.5 mill Stamkos* 11 mill Reinhart 894K Laine 900k Eichel 925K Girgensons 2 mill Foligno 2 mill Larsson 1.5 mill Ennis 4.6 mill Deslauriers 1mill schaller 1mill Gionta 4.25 mill Moulson 5 mill - really no room for him but never know, I do expect a rebound season from him. *stamkos will get a 12 mill offer from toronto, but chooses the sabres for 11 mill :P To be serious though, Stamkos will demand a lot, but paying him higher the first 3 years and having it lowered would be the way to go. Risto 6.5 mill Fowler 4mill Bogo 5.142 mill McCabe 1.750 mill Pysyk 1.125 mill Gorges 3.9 mill Franson - (Ideally he is gone in the offseason). 3.325 mill Lehner 2.25 mill Ullmark 725k This team gives us a cap hit of 71.786.000 Traded Kane for fowler. Girgensons, larsson, McCabe, Deslauriers, schaller all on 2 year bridge deals. The only way any of these get paid more is if they agree to 5 year deal. But at this point none of them should be getting paid 1.5 - 2 mill more then what I put on them. the 2017 offseason will be important though, Franson and Gionta off the books, and moulsons buy out becoming reasonable, murray insured himself of a cheap buy out. Gorges replaced by Guhle hopefully we can save around 14mill to play with already. Ennis should be traded for picks with the emergency of either Bailey/Baptiste giving us close to 19mill in cap space. Wich will be needed in the summer of 2018 when Eichel/Samson reach RFA status. buying out Moulson this summer will cost you 3 mill, buying him out next summer will cut it down to 2mill. Edited March 4, 2016 by Huckleberry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 If the team is willing to dangle their first for a dman I think they could swing higher than Fowler (who I am very fond of). I also don't think you jam Eichel, ROR and Stamkos all on one line. But adding Stamkos and Fowler this offseason would be so dreamy. You get the first pick and the Yotes are in the top 5, trade it for OEL and their pick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 You get the first pick and the Yotes are in the top 5, trade it for OEL and their pick? I would draft Matthews and be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I would draft Matthews and be done. +1. Let him grow in and create the biggest draw for American hockey! Go SABRES! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I would draft Matthews and be done. I'm sure most people would but the prospect of adding a top pairing D and a top line winger sounds enticing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I'm sure most people would but the prospect of adding a top pairing D and a top line winger sounds enticing.I'd still add Matthews because he's above all the rest. He's really on Eichel level or a bit above at this point. I love the idea of filLing a need but not at Matthews expense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Dudacek, Thorny, WC: I tap, I tap! It can be a playoff team. Just LET GO OF MY SHOULDER! :cry: I do think it would be a roster built for playoffs disappointment though. *hops into a helicopter and flees* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsb Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Right now we are tied for 23rd in points in the league and are the only team besides CBJ and Edmonton that doesn't look like they are in complete tank mode. With that in mind getting the 8th pick or worse (with our drafting luck) gets us a good player but not necessarily someone who can help us this year. My hope for lines are: A Fin--ROR--Reinhart UFA--Eichel--Bailey Kane--Girgensons--Ennis Foligno--Larsson--Fasching UFA--Risto McCabe--Bogosian Gorges--Pysyk Lehner Johnson (1 more year) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) You get the first pick and the Yotes are in the top 5, trade it for OEL and their pick?I've been saying all year I would take Matthews and run. I think Matthews is on Eichel's level and maybe even better than him, but I think I might do the deal.I don't think Arizona does that, though, regardless of Matthews birthplace. I do think they would do OEL for Matthews straight up or OEL and their first for number one and a piece of two. Edited March 4, 2016 by Hoss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Right now we are tied for 23rd in points in the league and are the only team besides CBJ and Edmonton that doesn't look like they are in complete tank mode. With that in mind getting the 8th pick or worse (with our drafting luck) gets us a good player but not necessarily someone who can help us this year. My hope for lines are: A Fin--ROR--Reinhart UFA--Eichel--Bailey Kane--Girgensons--Ennis Foligno--Larsson--Fasching UFA--Risto McCabe--Bogosian Gorges--Pysyk Lehner Johnson (1 more year) My problem with your lineup is that both of the Finns are RHS and will be RW in the NHL. Even Laine with his RW/LW status is playing the RW. Also Not keeping Zemgus with Eichel is a huge mistake. Ennis - ROR - Reinhart Zemgus - Eichel - Laine/Puljujarvi Kane - Larsson - Gionta/Bailey Moulson - ?Schaller - Deslauriers/Fasching Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 "Keeping" Zemgus with Eichel? They aren't even playing together now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 "Keeping" Zemgus with Eichel? They aren't even playing together now. but he's been Eichel's most used linemate at 16%! Bylsma and his BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 You get the first pick and the Yotes are in the top 5, trade it for OEL and their pick? I do this all day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Dudacek, Thorny, WC: I tap, I tap! It can be a playoff team. Just LET GO OF MY SHOULDER! :cry: I do think it would be a roster built for playoffs disappointment though. *hops into a helicopter and flees* What about if we can add Yandle, too? Trading our pick for Fowler and signing Yandle and Stamkos, if that's possible, gets us in the playoffs, and quite a bit more, I believe. I've been saying all year I would take Matthews and run. I think Matthews is on Eichel's level and maybe even better than him, but I think I might do the deal. I don't think Arizona does that, though, regardless of Matthews birthplace. I do think they would do OEL for Matthews straight up or OEL and their first for number one and a piece of two. I'm not convinced that Matthews is the better prospect, there are a fair few scouts that do think he is, but at least an equal amount, and probably more, that think Eichel is the better among the two. I guess we'll see. I do agree though that I do that deal. I would rather have OEL and lets say, Tkachuk, than Matthews, and it's not really close. We would be adding in two places of need, at the expense of a place of strength. Our team would be better for it immediately, and I would argue long term as well. Highly doubt Arizona trades their pick and OEL for 1st overall though, agreed on that, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 What about if we can add Yandle, too? Trading our pick for Fowler and signing Yandle and Stamkos, if that's possible, gets us in the playoffs, and quite a bit more, I believe. Well, that's a whole new ball game. I'd like that lineup quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I'm not against Yandle; he will make the team better. But I admit to feeling about him the way some of you do about Stamkos: not necessarily great value for what you'll pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Well, that's a whole new ball game. I'd like that lineup quite a bit. And you call my dreams of Hall unrealistic :lol: I do this all day. Hands down, and it's not even close Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted March 6, 2016 Report Share Posted March 6, 2016 Article on possible future line mates for Eichel. http://www.wgr550.com/pages/22538824.php?contentType=4&contentId=18538800 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.