Defense wins championships, so how does Buffalo's look?

[qwksndmonster]

Excellent vision as always, Dudacek.  I think a move like that, along with a good 3rd pairing pick up are what we can expect of Murray this off season. I'd like to pick up 2 top 4 guys, but I don't think it's feasible.  If he does manage that, then Murray's an omniscient, magnificent bastard, but it very likely also means we missed out on Stamkos.

Edited April 28, 2016 by qwksndmonster

[thewookie1]

I will actually be surprised if Girgensons isn't traded along with a sweetener to the Wild for a defenceman, probably Brodin. They each had statistically poor seasons, they both have good upside.

 

The Wild can't pay all their defenceman, can't trade Suter, prefer Scandella, and Spurgeon really came on this year. Dumba and Reilly give them great depth.

 

Brodin is the perfect fit with Risto in that he has Gorges positioning and smarts, but can also skate and make a first pass.

Girgensons adds affordability grit and youth to a team that needs all three, with top six potential.

I'm sure they'd rather use Brodin to acquire a first-line centre, but given their cap issues I don't see a deal to be made.

 

Don't want to give up Girgensons, but with Larsson cementing centre three and Fasching and Bailey showing promise as middle six wingers we can afford the sacrifice.

 

Murray and Fletcher are buddies and the deal makes sense for both teams. Don't be surprised if Buffalo takes on more salary, maybe Kuemper.

 

Brodin doesn't make our defence great, but he is the right kind of player and he will allow everyone to shift into a more appropriate role.

To me, our biggest improvement should come from having five defenceman 25 and under, all coached by Terry Murray.

 

God I'm torn, my head says yes, but my heart says no. Girgs is my favorite player after all.

[Derrico]

I will actually be surprised if Girgensons isn't traded along with a sweetener to the Wild for a defenceman, probably Brodin. They each had statistically poor seasons, they both have good upside.

 

The Wild can't pay all their defenceman, can't trade Suter, prefer Scandella, and Spurgeon really came on this year. Dumba and Reilly give them great depth.

 

Brodin is the perfect fit with Risto in that he has Gorges positioning and smarts, but can also skate and make a first pass.

Girgensons adds affordability grit and youth to a team that needs all three, with top six potential.

I'm sure they'd rather use Brodin to acquire a first-line centre, but given their cap issues I don't see a deal to be made.

 

Don't want to give up Girgensons, but with Larsson cementing centre three and Fasching and Bailey showing promise as middle six wingers we can afford the sacrifice.

 

Murray and Fletcher are buddies and the deal makes sense for both teams. Don't be surprised if Buffalo takes on more salary, maybe Kuemper.

 

Brodin doesn't make our defence great, but he is the right kind of player and he will allow everyone to shift into a more appropriate role.

To me, our biggest improvement should come from having five defenceman 25 and under, all coached by Terry Murray.

Great analysis dudacek.  I'd like to see Girgs moved for a good Dman (especially considering our young guys on the way as you mentioned).  But how good is Brodin?  Only 7 points in 68 games all of last year??  Is he a gem defensively?  Whoever we get we want paired with Risto.  So considering Brodin likely wouldn't be on the PP we still need him playing probably 24 minutes per night.  I see he averaged that in 14/15 but he only averaged a little over 20 min last year.

[nfreeman]

Submitted for your consideration:  Brent Seabrook, RHD, 6'3", 220 lbs.

 

Age -- he turned 31 last week; he's played 11 full NHL seasons

 

Contract -- next season is the first year of an EIGHT-year extension with a cap hit of $6.9MM per year.  Full NMC.

 

Stats -- 49 pts in 81 games last year; just under 23 min per game in ice time.

 

 

 

Chicago has major cap probems and is going to need to take major steps this summer.  Still, I don't think they would unload Seabrook yet -- he's too integral to their core, and he has an NMC.

 

For discussion purposes, though -- would you take on that contract?  And would you give up, say, Zemgus, McCabe and #9 overall in this year's draft for him?

[LGR4GM]

Submitted for your consideration:  Brent Seabrook, RHD, 6'3", 220 lbs.

 

Age -- he turned 31 last week; he's played 11 full NHL seasons

 

Contract -- next season is the first year of an EIGHT-year extension with a cap hit of $6.9MM per year.  Full NMC.

 

Stats -- 49 pts in 81 games last year; just under 23 min per game in ice time.

 

 

 

Chicago has major cap probems and is going to need to take major steps this summer.  Still, I don't think they would unload Seabrook yet -- he's too integral to their core, and he has an NMC.

 

For discussion purposes, though -- would you take on that contract?  And would you give up, say, Zemgus, McCabe and #9 overall in this year's draft for him?

I think I would personally balk at that price coupled to that contract. 

[Taro T]

Submitted for your consideration:  Brent Seabrook, RHD, 6'3", 220 lbs.

 

Age -- he turned 31 last week; he's played 11 full NHL seasons

 

Contract -- next season is the first year of an EIGHT-year extension with a cap hit of $6.9MM per year.  Full NMC.

 

Stats -- 49 pts in 81 games last year; just under 23 min per game in ice time.

 

 

 

Chicago has major cap probems and is going to need to take major steps this summer.  Still, I don't think they would unload Seabrook yet -- he's too integral to their core, and he has an NMC.

 

For discussion purposes, though -- would you take on that contract?  And would you give up, say, Zemgus, McCabe and #9 overall in this year's draft for him?

There seem to be a bunch of other options that MAY be available this season at a more reasonable cost (an Anaheim D-man, Goligoski, Brodin, etc) that I'd rather see. I'd expect TM to make one of those happen before looking too seriously into snagging Seabrook.

 

The majority of the keys of this team is 25 & under. If the cap is handled well they could be contenders for 6+ years starting in a couple seasons. Might he be like Chelios and stay effective into his late 30's (& 40's in Cheaplios' case)? Yes. But if he isn't, dealing w/ that contract could become a real albatross.

 

If he only had 4 years left, it'd be great to land him. As is, would definitely have him as a plan B (or C or D or lower even).

[Drunkard]

Submitted for your consideration:  Brent Seabrook, RHD, 6'3", 220 lbs.

 

Age -- he turned 31 last week; he's played 11 full NHL seasons

 

Contract -- next season is the first year of an EIGHT-year extension with a cap hit of $6.9MM per year.  Full NMC.

 

Stats -- 49 pts in 81 games last year; just under 23 min per game in ice time.

 

 

 

Chicago has major cap probems and is going to need to take major steps this summer.  Still, I don't think they would unload Seabrook yet -- he's too integral to their core, and he has an NMC.

 

For discussion purposes, though -- would you take on that contract?  And would you give up, say, Zemgus, McCabe and #9 overall in this year's draft for him?

 

8 more years at almost $7 million for a 31 year old? My God that's ridiculous. I know he's good but very few defensemen age like Nick Lidstrom. Chicago is going to be up creek once their core guys start to decline. Of course they'll probably just convince the GM in Florida to take on the contract after they no longer want it.

[nfreeman]

There seem to be a bunch of other options that MAY be available this season at a more reasonable cost (an Anaheim D-man, Goligoski, Brodin, etc) that I'd rather see. I'd expect TM to make one of those happen before looking too seriously into snagging Seabrook.

 

The majority of the keys of this team is 25 & under. If the cap is handled well they could be contenders for 6+ years starting in a couple seasons. Might he be like Chelios and stay effective into his late 30's (& 40's in Cheaplios' case)? Yes. But if he isn't, dealing w/ that contract could become a real albatross.

 

If he only had 4 years left, it'd be great to land him. As is, would definitely have him as a plan B (or C or D or lower even).

 

You are probably right.  But still:

 

- Seabrook is significantly better than the other defensemen you mentioned.

 

- It's reasonable to expect him to continue to play at a very high level for the next 2 seasons, and at a pretty solid level for the 2 seasons after that.  Thereafter?  He could keep going at a reasonably good level, or he could easily fall off the table.

 

- Leadership, playoff experience, locker-room credibility, etc., etc. 

 

- If the Sabres want to make a serious playoff run, say, the season after next -- Seabrook would contribute more than any other defenseman likely to be available this summer.

[Taro T]

You are probably right. But still:

 

- Seabrook is significantly better than the other defensemen you mentioned.

 

- It's reasonable to expect him to continue to play at a very high level for the next 2 seasons, and at a pretty solid level for the 2 seasons after that. Thereafter? He could keep going at a reasonably good level, or he could easily fall off the table.

 

- Leadership, playoff experience, locker-room credibility, etc., etc.

 

- If the Sabres want to make a serious playoff run, say, the season after next -- Seabrook would contribute more than any other defenseman likely to be available this summer.

Seabrook is better at present. Would be curious to hear what the "fancy staters" have to say about how much of thst is merely appearance due to getting to play w/ Keith so much. (Seriously, haven't looked to see if much (if any) of it is due to quality of partner. Regardless of how much of it is Keith, he is a d*mn fine defenseman in his own right.)

 

If the Sabres weren't already saddled w/ Hodgson's small hit & Moulson's eventual (& nearly inevitable) large hit, would probably be more open to it. They aren't quite ready for true contender status (though 2-3 players brought in like him & they could be) so it seems the timing isn't quite right. Would he even consider waiving his NMC to come to Buffalo?

 

Like I said, I would consider bringing him in, but would rather look at other fits 1st. (And seeing what happens tomorrow night could (though likely won't) change everything.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Taro T

[dudacek]

Like the player, but the contract is a bad fit.

At the price suggested an absolute no

[Randall Flagg]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/best-defencemen-proficient-offence/ 

 

Interesting article about puck-moving defensemen. I wish I had data on McCabe, he seemed to just flip the puck out of the zone as his first option way too often.

[TrueBlueGED]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/best-defencemen-proficient-offence/ 

 

Interesting article about puck-moving defensemen. I wish I had data on McCabe, he seemed to just flip the puck out of the zone as his first option way too often.

 

That article gave me an erection.

[LGR4GM]

That article gave me an erection.

First, ewww

 

Second, I think Ristolainen needs to get better at successful zone exits and we need to bring in a LHD who can do this as well. 

[Brawndo]

From Matthew Coller

 

http://www.wgr550.com/10-defenseman-the-Sabres-could-target-in-the-offse/22729191

[dudacek]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/best-defencemen-proficient-offence/ 

 

Interesting article about puck-moving defensemen. I wish I had data on McCabe, he seemed to just flip the puck out of the zone as his first option way too often.

That is great piece. #fancystatsthatevenbrianburkeshouldunderstand

[TrueBlueGED]

First, ewww

 

Second, I think Ristolainen needs to get better at successful zone exits and we need to bring in a LHD who can do this as well. 

 

Don't knock it till you've seen it.

[LGR4GM]

Don't knock it till you've seen it.

 

NASA's been trying to see it for year though...

[Thorny]

From Matthew Coller

 

http://www.wgr550.com/10-defenseman-the-Sabres-could-target-in-the-offse/22729191

Good list. Please no Enstrom. Eye test over here shows he's a train wreck.