Jump to content

2020-21 Trade Rumors and Speculation


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I wouldn't trade Cozens for Kane straight up even if Chicago took back some of Kane's contract. As you stated this is an internet bravado whose fantasy hockey imagination has run amuck. Because of the age differential I wouldn't even trade Reinhart in a straight up deal.   

Feelings about the article aside, this feels like an over correction. You wouldn’t trade Cozens for Kane straight up with Chicago retaining some salary? That’s honestly way more overboard than the article. 

Edited by I-90 W
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Feelings about the article aside, this feels like an over correction. You wouldn’t trade Cozens for Kane straight up with Chicago retaining some salary? That’s honestly way more overboard than the article. 

I would absolutely not trade Cozens in a straight up deal for Kane. Kane is on the downside of his prime. He still is an elite player but how long is that going to last? Maybe the next few years or so. Cozens is starting his career. It might take him another year or so to become an established player. But after that he could be a prime time player for the next decade or so. No thank you. I'm not interested in giving away our future for a short term boost. That's not how you build a serious team and have sustained success. 

Edited by JohnC
  • Like (+1) 4
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I guarantee TP and KA would take that deal in a heartbeat, as would any GM in the league. Kane is 31 not 40. He scored 84 points in 70 games last season and your not gonna trade him for a prospect with salary retained?

Yeah, okay. 

Edited by I-90 W
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Bold prediction. Rasmus Dahlin scores more points per 60min than Kane this year. 

If Chicago called and asked for Dahlin I'd laugh them off the phone. 

If your bold prediction comes true, Buffalo is a solid playoff team. If your bold prediction comes true and they get any kind of goaltending, Buffalo is a contender 

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

Since Chicago views Kane, like Buffalo views Eichel or Dahlin ... Kane  leaving Chicago won’t happen unless it’s an overpayment and if he even wants to waive his NMC.

Every 8-10 months for the past 10+ years this whole Kane to Buffalo topic in different forms rears it’s ugly and unlikely head. Then phases out after 2-3 weeks. Then like clockwork ... another thread pops up eventually. Yawn.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Since Chicago views Kane, like Buffalo views Eichel or Dahlin ... Kane  leaving Chicago won’t happen unless it’s an overpayment and if he even wants to waive his NMC.

Every 8-10 months for the past 10+ years this whole Kane to Buffalo topic in different forms rears it’s ugly and unlikely head. Then phases out after 2-3 weeks. Then like clockwork ... another thread pops up eventually. Yawn.

You're not wrong, but I think all of this is a compelling argument (aside from giving up Dahlin which is no starter imo)

https://thehockeywriters.com/kane-sabres-trade-makes-sense/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, tom webster said:

If your bold prediction comes true, Buffalo is a solid playoff team. If your bold prediction comes true and they get any kind of goaltending, Buffalo is a contender 

Even if LGR's prediction about Dahlin's scoring projection doesn't come to fruition the hope is that Hall and Skinner can both return to scoring form that will significantly add to the scoring numbers that will give this team more of a margin to work with. And as you wisely point out the most important factor that will make this team a contender is a reasonable level of goaltending. Solid to good goaltending and better PK play (both related to each other) are going to make the difference between having a successful season or another disappointing season.  

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Meh 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Since Chicago views Kane, like Buffalo views Eichel or Dahlin ... Kane  leaving Chicago won’t happen unless it’s an overpayment and if he even wants to waive his NMC.

Every 8-10 months for the past 10+ years this whole Kane to Buffalo topic in different forms rears it’s ugly and unlikely head. Then phases out after 2-3 weeks. Then like clockwork ... another thread pops up eventually. Yawn.

If they view him that way, they likely won’t get anything for him in return. Chicago is a couple steps away from a full rebuild. I can’t see how Kane will be part of that and would probably start dropping hints of a trade. Plus, Kane will be a shell of his former self by the time they are rebuilt. Geez, we think we’re wasting away Jack in his prime, look at Chicago. Teams know he doesn’t fit into he Hawk’s long-term plans, so they’ll wait them out.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, I-90 W said:

^ I guarantee TP and KA would take that deal in a heartbeat, as would any GM in the league. Kane is 31 not 40. He scored 84 points in 70 games last season and your not gonna trade him for a prospect with salary retained?

Yeah, okay. 

Cozens is 18 or 19 yrs old who is expected to be our 2C in a year or two. It would make no sense to deal this player with expected high end potential for a 31 yr. old player who is likely to have a few more years of top tier production. The Chicago Blackhawks have won two or three Stanley Cups with their core players built with high draft picks such as Kane and Toews. So what you are suggesting is not to follow the standard model for long term success and instead go for the expedient short term gain. That's not a path that I want to follow. As far as I am concerned Cozens is an untouchable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Cozens is 18 or 19 yrs old who is expected to be our 2C in a year or two. It would make no sense to deal this player with expected high end potential for a 31 yr. old player who is likely to have a few more years of top tier production. The Chicago Blackhawks have won two or three Stanley Cups with their core players built with high draft picks such as Kane and Toews. So what you are suggesting is not to follow the standard model for long term success and instead go for the expedient short term gain. That's not a path that I want to follow. As far as I am concerned Cozens is an untouchable. 

You speak as if our early first round prospect is a slam dunk future top six center. History doesn’t support that calculation, odds wise. Obviously I hope he will be though. 
 

I’m sorry but your assertion that you wouldn’t trade a top prospect (who could still be a bust in theory) for a 31 Patrick Kane WITH partial salary retained is by far more over the top than anything in the article. No offense but you’re over correcting IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

You speak as if our early first round prospect is a slam dunk future top six center. History doesn’t support that calculation, odds wise. Obviously I hope he will be though. 
 

I’m sorry but your assertion that you wouldn’t trade a top prospect (who could still be a bust in theory) for a 31 Patrick Kane WITH partial salary retained is by far more over the top than anything in the article. No offense but you’re over correcting IMO.

I'm not over-correcting. What history doesn't support is dealing away a high draftee who in his first year as a pro in the juniors demonstrated that he is one of the best players/prospects with players in his age group. It would be impossible to say for sure how good he will be but to make the argument that theoretically he can be a bust is a stretch especially after what you have seen of him in his first year after being drafted. I'm very confident that Cozens will not be dealt in a deal for Kane or in any other imagined proposed deal. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'm not over-correcting. What history doesn't support is dealing away a high draftee who in his first year as a pro in the juniors demonstrated that he is one of the best players/prospects with players in his age group. It would be impossible to say for sure how good he will be but to make the argument that theoretically he can be a bust is a stretch especially after what you have seen of him in his first year after being drafted. I'm very confident that Cozens will not be dealt in a deal for Kane or in any other imagined proposed deal. 

 

He’s been absolutely crushing it in the WHL, admittedly. But beware of over valuing our prospects. As Sabres fans we tend to be notorious for that. He is our top prospect, but still a prospect. 

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

Everyone has a tendency to over value their prospects but Cozens is as good as gold. If not for Eichel, Cozens would probably be your 1C in 3 years. Having him behind Eichel will be envious in a few years. You don't trade him for Kane because Kane only has 3 years on his contract and you don't want to lose one of your best players when you are hoping to consistently contend for the cup. Cozens, on the other hand, should be developing into one of the best 2Cs in the game at the right time. If  you want to trade Cozens, trade him to the Jets.

If Kane is traded, it will be to a team that is ready to win the cup right now like the Caps or Vegas or someone of that ilk. Maybe even Pitt if the numbers worked, but I doubt very much that Kane and Toews will be traded even if it is the right thing to do.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JohnC said:

Cozens is 18 or 19 yrs old who is expected to be our 2C in a year or two. It would make no sense to deal this player with expected high end potential for a 31 yr. old player who is likely to have a few more years of top tier production. The Chicago Blackhawks have won two or three Stanley Cups with their core players built with high draft picks such as Kane and Toews. So what you are suggesting is not to follow the standard model for long term success and instead go for the expedient short term gain. That's not a path that I want to follow. As far as I am concerned Cozens is an untouchable. 

 

Could you explain exactly what "expected high end potential" is?

The reason this trade would never take place is just Cozens isn't nearly enough.

I'd be thinking about the possibility of losing Hall after a year.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

 

Could you explain exactly what "expected high end potential" is?

The reason this trade would never take place is just Cozens isn't nearly enough.

I'd be thinking about the possibility of losing Hall after a year.  

 

I'm not sure what you are getting at. When I say high end I'm saying that he is capable of becoming a legitimate second line center. Whether Cozens is enough or not in a proposed deal isn't an issue for me. As I said before it doesn't make sense to me to deal away your best prospect in the system for a 31 year old player. It's not going to happen. 

As far as losing Hall after next year I'm not worried about that this year. I'm just hope that he regains his elite form for us, and then deal with the retention issue the following year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Patty Kane for his age 32, 33, 34 seasons is not the guy that I want to trade premium long term assets and $9.5M in cap space to acquire.

Yes he is good and yes he helped Chicago win 3 Cups, but please note that Chicago has not been able to get out of the 1st round since they started paying Kane and Toews $10.5M each, 5 years ago.

Edited by Curt
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Curt said:

Patty Kane for his age 32, 33, 34 seasons is not the guy that I want to trade premium long term assets and $9.5M in cap space to acquire.

Yes he is good and yes he helped Chicago win 3 Cups, but please note that Chicago has not been able to get out of the 1st round since they started paying Kane and Toews $10.5M each, 5 years ago.

You make a good point about how their contracts would weigh down a team willing to deal for either one of those players. The Sabres are starting to get a core of younger players who will get elevated contracts with their next contracts. It would be a boondoggle mistake to make a high cost short term acquisition at the expense of losing financial flexibility to keep your own talent in place. If Hall has a prolific year after signing a one year deal then it would foreclose any opportunity to secure him when he becomes a free agent if we add a high cost veteran to this roster now. And if Reinhart continues his steady climb as a player the Sabres would be in a difficult cap situation to sign him. The reality is because of their bountiful contracts both Toews and Kane would be difficult for the Blackhawks to move if they wanted to do so. Those who advocate for a Kane deal are being very short sighted without recognizing the longer term implications. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Skeptical 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2020 at 2:47 PM, I-90 W said:

He’s been absolutely crushing it in the WHL, admittedly. But beware of over valuing our prospects. As Sabres fans we tend to be notorious for that. He is our top prospect, but still a prospect. 

You have the pulse of things just fine. 

We are really, really quite protective in here of a potential future, the same potential future we've been hearing about for a decade. It reads a little funny. And I love Cozens. 

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

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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...