Jump to content

2020 Off-season gameplan


GASabresIUFAN

Recommended Posts

I think GM Adams will look to add a few vets on one years deals, and then go after the prize of younger RFA's and big UFA's after next season.  

20-21 season will already be a weird one with it most likely being a shortened season and with the Kracken expansion draft after next year.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, sweetlou said:

I think GM Adams will look to add a few vets on one years deals, and then go after the prize of younger RFA's and big UFA's after next season.  

20-21 season will already be a weird one with it most likely being a shortened season and with the Kracken expansion draft after next year.  

If he is going after big UFA's he has already failed at team building. 

  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sweetlou said:

Vancouver trade - no thank you.

 
NYR- I see the point of getting the third however Cirelli is not coming by way of offer sheet. Especially for under $6m.  The NYR need to pay in excess of a first round to take King Henry. Think Leafs/Carolina.   Not the Sabres paying with a #8/Casey.  Big overpay.

I’m in the minority but I think Tuch is highly overpaid. I can accept him on the first line with Jack And Jeff,  but ONLY if it means Reinhart and Victor are there with a reliable 2c.  I would trade Montour and a future second (21/22) for Tuch and stastny, both overpaid cap dumps by Vegas needing to reset after a Cup run.   


Lastly, why trade Risto for some Magic beans?  They can fill in the 4th line with Lazar and Okposo and a Street UFA making $800k or Roch.  Risto is as good as gone, but a right shot D with a reasonable contract who plays PP and second line minutes brings more.  
 

Always appreciate your trade ideas!

Edited by Broken Ankles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

That's a hint at a certain trade Kevyn Adams is working on...

I've spreadsheeted and whiteboarded a lot.

The following is all baseless conjecture, and I don't know anything:

The math says Monahan and someone for Reinhart, Ristolainen, and some playoff-performance pick/prospect add that isn't Cozens or 8.

I figured almost from the start Reinhart had to be involved to make the math work...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sabresparaavida said:

Why would a team trade 2 of their top6 if there wasn't at least one top 6 coming back. I don't think many teams would be willing to completely decimate this offense like that.

That would lean to Monahan & Calgary. Seeing as Tampa couldn't afford to sign Reinhart.

To be honest I still much rather have Cirelli as I'm not all that high on Monahan and Johnny Hockey

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

Why would a team trade 2 of their top6 if there wasn't at least one top 6 coming back. I don't think many teams would be willing to completely decimate this offense like that.

Reinhart, Cozens and Montour for Gaudreau and Monahan.

That would be what, the 3rd biggest trade in franchise history, after Gare/Foligno and Lafontaine/Turgeon.

Talk about a statement move.

(I think the Flames fans would riot.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

That would lean to Monahan & Calgary. Seeing as Tampa couldn't afford to sign Reinhart.

To be honest I still much rather have Cirelli as I'm not all that high on Monahan and Johnny Hockey

Reinhart for Monahan is tough, it fits the need we're trying to fill.

Risto + asset = ?T6W is the interesting part...

I hope it's Lindholm, I fear it's Gaudreau...

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Reinhart, Cozens and Montour for Gaudreau and Monahan.

That would be what, the 3rd biggest trade in franchise history, after Gare/Foligno and Lafontaine/Turgeon.

Talk about a statement move.

(I think the Flames fans would riot.)

Giving up Reinhart and Cozens for Monahan would be terrible. I would riot.

Edited by Gabrielor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Reinhart, Cozens and Montour for Gaudreau and Monahan.

That would be what, the 3rd biggest trade in franchise history, after Gare/Foligno and Lafontaine/Turgeon.

Talk about a statement move.

(I think the Flames fans would riot.)

No thank you, I'd do it with Mitts vs Cozens perhaps but I'd want Bennett too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

No thank you, I'd do it with Mitts vs Cozens perhaps

Flames would have to think a lot more of Mitts than most Sabrespacers do to make that deal.

Neither Monahan, nor Gaudreau are perfect, but they are legitimate 1st line players. Two in one deal would cost a ton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Flames would have to think a lot more of Mitts than most Sabrespacers do to make that deal.

Neither Monahan, nor Gaudreau are perfect, but they are legitimate 1st line players. Two in one deal would cost a ton.

Not worth Cozens in my opinion, Monahan is offensively gifted but isn't all that good defensively.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Re signing in Buffalo would not be a priority for Gaudreau, so hopefully there are other targets 

I doubt we can afford him, but what makes you say that?

The only other top 6 wing I can think of in Calgary is Tkachuk, and he's not going anywhere 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Not worth Cozens in my opinion, Monahan is offensively gifted but isn't all that good defensively.

It would be a coup to keep Cozens in a trade for Monahan and Gaudreau.

3 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Re signing in Buffalo would not be a priority for Gaudreau, so hopefully there are other targets 

Definitely a concern. Winning might change things.

A top six of Jack, Johnny, Sean, Jeff, Victor and a rock would be upper echelon.

2 minutes ago, WildCard said:

I thought he was a center?

He was drafted a centre and has played it in the NHL, but he's mostly been a winger over his pro career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

Why would a team trade 2 of their top6 if there wasn't at least one top 6 coming back. I don't think many teams would be willing to completely decimate this offense like that.

Winnipeg would also make sense like Ehlers and something. I wonder if it is Ehlers and Copp for Reinhart and something. 

Edited by LGR4GM
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...