Drunkard Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Beat me to it. CBJ had to give up a 1st and a 2nd to get Vegas to take Clarkson, who has about the same cap hit as Bogo. Anaheim had to give up Shea Theodore, a good D prospect, to get Vegas to take Stoner, who is a real defenseman and has a much smaller cap hit (1 year for $3.25MM) than Bogo. Pittsburgh gave Vegas a 2nd to take Fleury, but Fleury is a much more valuable player than Bogo. Anaheim was in a pinch because they had to expose a good defensemen no matter what so that's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. Pittsburgh was in a pinch because they really wanted to protect Murray. We weren't up against the wall as much as either of those 2 teams. So what do you think it would have cost us to bribe Vegas to take either Bogosian or Moulson? I don't imagine it would have costs much more than Carrier and pick 37, but I could be wrong. It's not like they would have demanded Eichel or our 1st round pick in order to make a deal. They were gobbling up picks and prospects from whomever was offering them. It's also important to note that while Bogosian would be considered a cap dump by us that he probably would have just taken a regular spot in their lineup since (injuries aside) he's at least as good as McNabb and he's been in their lineup all season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Anaheim was in a pinch because they had to expose a good defensemen no matter what so that's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. Pittsburgh was in a pinch because they really wanted to protect Murray. We weren't up against the wall as much as either of those 2 teams. So what do you think it would have cost us to bribe Vegas to take either Bogosian or Moulson? I don't imagine it would have costs much more than Carrier and pick 37, but I could be wrong. It's not like they would have demanded Eichel or our 1st round pick in order to make a deal. They were gobbling up picks and prospects from whomever was offering them. It's also important to note that while Bogosian would be considered a cap dump by us that he probably would have just taken a regular spot in their lineup since (injuries aside) he's at least as good as McNabb and he's been in their lineup all season. The Sabres had to expose Carrier as the price for getting Vegas not to take Ullmark (a JBott decision that looks pretty good now, BTW). So to Vegas, Carrier wasn't worth much -- just the value of passing on a goalie prospect. To compare your proposal with what actually happened -- they get Carrier in both scenarios, they pass on Ullmark in both scenarios and in your proposal they get a #2 and Bogo. So really you're back to giving them a #2 for taking Bogo. Again, it's nowhere near enough. I don't think it's reasonable to compare Bogo to McNabb, for the reason that -- as you state -- McNabb has been in their lineup all season. Everyone knows at this point that Bogo can't stay on the ice. And Bogo is making $5.5MM this year, $6MM next year and $6MM the following year. When Vegas took McNabb, he was making $1.7MM and had 1 year left on his contract. The closer comparable is Clarkson, who isn't playing at all and who cost CBJ a #1, a #2 and exposing a prospect that Vegas wanted. Clarkson's contract also only costs $2MM, $1MM and $1MM in actual cash for the 3 years that Bogo's contract costs a total of $17.5MM. Obviously Bogo has more value since he actually plays 50-60 games per year, but I think the price to get Vegas to take Bogo would've been more like the #2 you proposed plus Guhle or Nylander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'd rather have Bogo, Ullmark and Davidsson then carrier and Ullmark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 @DarrenDreger Trade interest in Evander Kane is heating up. Still could be deadline deal as market grows. Reinhart trade unlikely in next 2 months. That seems like such an odd thing to throw in. Is he implying there’s a good chance Reinhart gets moved in the offseason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 That seems like such an odd thing to throw in. Is he implying there’s a good chance Reinhart gets moved in the offseason? I'm gonna bet someone asked him about Kane and Reinhart in the same question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'm gonna bet someone asked him about Kane and Reinhart in the same question For sure. It still seems like he’s implying that Reinhart is a player for which a trade may be in the cards. Pretty vague though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabills Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 For sure. It still seems like he’s implying that Reinhart is a player for which a trade may be in the cards. Pretty vague though. Reinharts name has been thrown around a bit lately; he's a young player, high draft pick, but hasn't really panned out yet (at least not out to the level expected for a #2 pick). Next year is when his entry level contract is up. Some team might be interested in him as a rehab project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'm interested in him as a reclamation project because I don't think we'll get a good value from trading him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'm interested in him as a reclamation project because I don't think we'll get a good value from trading him. Right. Value wise it's good to keep him. I would only trade him if he's "part of the problem". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Right. Value wise it's good to keep him. I would only trade him if he's "part of the problem".Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Reinharts name has been thrown around a bit lately; he's a young player, high draft pick, but hasn't really panned out yet (at least not out to the level expected for a #2 pick). Next year is when his entry level contract is up. Some team might be interested in him as a rehab project. His ELC expires this year. He is RFA for 2018-19. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabills Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 His ELC expires this year. He is RFA for 2018-19. Sorry, that's what I meant; his contract is up this upcoming offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Reinharts name has been thrown around a bit lately; he's a young player, high draft pick, but hasn't really panned out yet (at least not out to the level expected for a #2 pick). Next year is when his entry level contract is up. Some team might be interested in him as a rehab project. My gut says he’s available for the right price (like most players, really), and with Botterill looking to make moves, Reinhart is a player they are ready to listen on. But I think a big component of how Botterill values him will be determined by how Sam plays the rest of the season. I don’t think Botterill has his mind made up with regards to Reinhart, one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Sorry, that's what I meant; his contract is up this upcoming offseason. I had a feeling that is what you meant, but it was a bit unclear. No worries and no need to apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) I'm interested in him as a reclamation project because I don't think we'll get a good value from trading him. But that’s the thing: we don’t know how Botterill values him, and we don’t know how potential trade partners do/will. Edited January 19, 2018 by Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'd be very curious to know what Botterill has made his mind up about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 ...and we don't know what his future value is. That's the kicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'd be very curious to know what Botterill has made his mind up about. ...and we don't know what his future value is. That's the kicker. And there isn’t really a blanket statement applicable that says we won’t get good value for him as is. We have no idea. We do know from reports that “everyone is on the table” trade wise, aside from Jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 No. It is the responsibility of each poster not to post in an offensive or obnoxious manner. The real question is the definition of "offensive." I wasn't as put off by the post in question as Radar was, but I could be in the minority on that. If enough people find it offensive -- it's offensive and it's the fault of the poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 If you're offended by something you see written on a message board, that's your problem and you should probably learn to prioritize that which you pay attention to more. Your feelings are your responsibility and no one else's. Secondly, the human body and it's natural responses are nothing to be ashamed of or get offended about. That all being said, if Bogosian is traded to the Kings and we're not sending a ridiculous package to them in addition, I'll end up actually feeling something for this team again and if I ever see JBots I'd give him a big ol kiss on his caveman face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHAAAUGHT!!! Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) "It is the responsibility of each poster not to post in an offensive or obnoxious manner. The real question is the definition of "offensive." I wasn't as put off by the post in question as Radar was, but I could be in the minority on that. If enough people find it offensive -- it's offensive and it's the fault of the poster." Oh boy here we go... Easy solution maybe we should consider: as long as the poster isn't personally attacking someone, if you don't like it, comment that you don't like it (if you want) and move on. I find it more offensive that someone considers majority rules to gauge right and wrong because, in general, people get really stupid and easy to manipulate when fired up about something. I've played in a few Xbox online hockey leagues and the personal attack rule allows people to goof on each other playfully, without taking it "over the line." Regarding this specific comment, sure it was childish and immature and maybe would have been funny if I was in middle school (or highly intoxicated), but I've seen worse comments about Cody Hodgson and Ville Leino on this board. There's my two cents that no one asked for. :P Anyhow... can the Sabs make some trades already??!!! Edited January 19, 2018 by SHAAAUGHT!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) If you're offended by something you see written on a message board, that's your problem and you should probably learn to prioritize that which you pay attention to more. Your feelings are your responsibility and no one else's. Secondly, the human body and it's natural responses are nothing to be ashamed of or get offended about. That all being said, if Bogosian is traded to the Kings and we're not sending a ridiculous package to them in addition, I'll end up actually feeling something for this team again and if I ever see JBots I'd give him a big ol kiss on his caveman face. Stupid. Are you offended by that. Being"ashamed of the human body and It's responses" I'm not. Using that in the context it was is to me a totally unnecessary. Further, are you saying that the poster isn't responsible for what he posts without regard for others? Sorry, I don't find your post offensive just a bit hair scratching. Further moderators please feel free to cancel my account. I came here to discuss hockey not bodily functions. Edited January 19, 2018 by Radar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 More from Dreger interview on GR this AM With the race in the West, someone will probably meet Botterill's Asking Price for Kane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7+6=13 Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I don't see Reinhart getting traded but I'd like to see it happen for a player in a similar situation. I'd like a player back that hasn't reached potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Briere Dumont Kane, we have had some success w such players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts