Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sweetlou

SabreSpace Trade Proposal: Cozens and 8th for Cirelli

Recommended Posts

On 7/21/2020 at 10:27 AM, LGR4GM said:

Risto straight for Cirelli would robbery on the Sabres part. Cirelli just got nominated for the Selke at age 22 and went from .476 to .647 ppg all while getting almost no powerplay time, in fact only 5 of his 44 points in 68 games came with the man advantage. Risto is so far below Cirelli that a 1v1 trade is laughable from Tampa's standpoint... or they have a worse GM than Botts

I'm sorry the more I read this the more I shake my head. The thought that Ristolainen is more valuable than Anthony Cirelli is just false. 

Tampa is likely going to lose Cirelli anyway and they could use someone like Risto.  Sometimes value has to be put in perspective and for Tampa maybe they like Risto more than you think?  
 

  • Skeptical 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Tampa is likely going to lose Cirelli anyway and they could use someone like Risto.  Sometimes value has to be put in perspective and for Tampa maybe they like Risto more than you think?  
 

It doesn’t make sense though.  From TBs perspective, why make that trade?  Because they are going to lose Cirelli anyway, and they like Risto?  Ok, so they make that trade.  Cirelli who needs a new contract that they won’t be able to afford for Risto.........who has a $5.4M contract that they also won’t be able to afford. It doesn’t help their cap situation at all, which is the whole point of trading Cirelli in the first place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

He's a 2nd line center already for one of the best teams in the league. His 5v5 game is so good already that he was a Selke nominee. 

Look not really looking for an argument, it is debatable at the very least as is whether he is the number 2 center on one of the best teams. Tampa has alot of C/W types and Stamkos is listed as a C and takes as many  faceoffs as Point and Cirelli. 

Not a Cirelli expert, nor looking to argue, but the guy has never scored more than 21 goals at any level, including midgets and juniors, and only did it one time. I Like my second line Cs to more productive .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Torpedo Forecheck said:

Look not really looking for an argument, it is debatable at the very least as is whether he is the number 2 center on one of the best teams. Tampa has alot of C/W types and Stamkos is listed as a C and takes as many  faceoffs as Point and Cirelli. 

Not a Cirelli expert, nor looking to argue, but the guy has never scored more than 21 goals at any level, including midgets and juniors, and only did it one time. I Like my second line Cs to more productive .

He scored 25 goals in his D2 year in the OHL in 51 games if I did math right. 

That said he also produced almost all of his points in the NHL at even strength. If anyone has a site for primary points I would be curious to see what Cirelli did there as well as goals are not the only measure to use here. 

Stamkos took roughly 670 faceoffs compared to Cirelli's roughly 910. 

To the production comment, he is 5th on TB in production for forwards. He's almost the perfect definition of a 2nd line center.

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Tampa is likely going to lose Cirelli anyway and they could use someone like Risto.  Sometimes value has to be put in perspective and for Tampa maybe they like Risto more than you think?  
 

Risto does nothing to assist TB with their cap issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2020 at 3:44 PM, dudacek said:

No. I love Cirelli and would give up 8 for him, but he’s not proven enough to command 8th overall and a prospect worth more than that.

Agree. 8 I’d trade to get him easily, reluctantly have to say the same with Cozens straight up (without 8), but both would be too much. 

On 7/20/2020 at 3:32 PM, dejeanneret said:

Way to much.  Cozens is a stud in the making.  And then throw an 8th in an extremely deep draft?  

You can't make trades based on fear of failure.  Cirelli could come to Buffalo and turn into a Vessey.  Then what?

Keep Cozens.  Draft a stud at 8. 

 Minor point but I don’t believe the draft is seen as “extremely” deep. I think @LGR4GM said average. 

If we can move the pick, only (plus add ins or w/e) to get Cirelli, we’d have a much better chance of getting that stud you mention, and in a more timely jack-approved fashion, too.

On 7/20/2020 at 5:21 PM, LGR4GM said:

No. Please stop. We did this. We literally executed this plan in 2015 and I remember I had the same thought then, it is a rush job that is short sighted. You need the cozens and 8th overalls to be good players so you have 3 years of entry level salary cap help. You need them to replenish the system and considering Buffalo doesn't have a system they are even more needed now. I want Cirelli but trading our 2 best young assets for him is short sighted. 

These sentences oppose each other. That said there is no chance Cirelli comes to Buffalo and is Vesey, 0. 

Well, no, we literally did not. We never traded a pick as high as 8 or a prospect close to as good as Cozens. The ROR trade, or move for Cirelli (for the equivalent we paid the first time) would be a home run. NOW is the time. 

Point being Cirelli address a long term need not a short one. If you can get him for a pick and change, it’s exceptionally sound strategically. 

We didn’t get where we are today by trading too many quality assets (ROR notwithstanding),  it was the failure to acquire enough good assets.

The best asset we traded away was the one we got by trading a few “futures” pieces. If there was something wrong with the ROR deal it was the timing, not the strategy behind the move. The timing now is ripe

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2020 at 9:01 AM, Pimlach said:

That is what GMTM did.  He gave up too much in his trades and his top acquisitions did not pan out.  He was in a hurry and made mistakes because of it.  

Myth. There were trades where this happened but it wasn’t a Rule with Murray. ROR was GREAT value. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

He's a 2nd line center already for one of the best teams in the league. His 5v5 game is so good already that he was a Selke nominee

Not yet but soon one would think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Risto does nothing to assist TB with their cap issues. 

He doesn't.

He does however, fix a hole in their roster that no one really talks about:

  • They have just two defencemen under the age of 29
  • They have only three defencemen under contract for next season
  • They have no right-handed defencemen under contract for next season.

We know the Lightning like big, strong defencemen and we have been told they have inquired about Risto before.

Your point still stands.

***

For sake of argument: Johnson and Killorn for Risto (flavour with picks and prospects as needed)

  • addresses the Sabres 2nd line issues
  • addresses the Lightning's need for a youngish RHD
  • gives the Bolts an extra $4 million or so under the cap

 

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

He doesn't.

He does however, fix a hole in their roster that no one really talks about:

  • They have two defencemen under the age of 29
  • They have three defencemen under contract for next season
  • They have no right-handed defencemen under contract for next season.

We know the Lightning like big, strong defencemen and we have been told they have inquired about Risto before.

Your point still stands.

***

For sake of argument: Johnson and Killorn for Risto (flavour with picks and prospects as needed)

  • addresses the Sabres 2nd line issues
  • addresses the Lightning's need for a youngish RHD
  • gives the Bolts an extra $4 million or so under the cap

 

 

Johnson's value continues to fall each season.  He's at the age 30 season, and even at 5M, I'd rather go another route entirely.   Just give me draft capital and then move on from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we can get Cirelli for $1. 
 

I have heard that 30-50 goal scorers are on sale for that price once in awhile, and he’s not a 30 goal scorer. 

Edited by Andrew Amerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Agree. 8 I’d trade to get him easily, reluctantly have to say the same with Cozens straight up (without 8), but both would be too much. 

 Minor point but I don’t believe the draft is seen as “extremely” deep. I think @LGR4GM said average. 

If we can move the pick, only (plus add ins or w/e) to get Cirelli, we’d have a much better chance of getting that stud you mention, and in a more timely jack-approved fashion, too.

Well, no, we literally did not. We never traded a pick as high as 8 or a prospect close to as good as Cozens. The ROR trade, or move for Cirelli (for the equivalent we paid the first time) would be a home run. NOW is the time. 

Point being Cirelli address a long term need not a short one. If you can get him for a pick and change, it’s exceptionally sound strategically. 

We didn’t get where we are today by trading too many quality assets (ROR notwithstanding),  it was the failure to acquire enough good assets.

The best asset we traded away was the one we got by trading a few “futures” pieces. If there was something wrong with the ROR deal it was the timing, not the strategy behind the move. The timing now is ripe

I agree with most of this, but as to the bolded, I've read/heard from a number of sources that the top 10 or so in this draft is loaded, so #8 has a better-than-average chance at being a very good player.  I would trade it for the right #2C, and Cirelli might very well be that guy, but it's a plum asset to part with.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I say depth in thinking of how many NHL players will the draft produce. This draft is average in depth but if we're talking depth as in high end talent specifically, the top 10 maybe 11 or 12 is very good and on par with deeper drafts I'm thinking of. My issue and why I say average is I think once you're outside of that grouping, things decline rapidly unlike say 2015 where we knew there would be good guys late in the first or 2019 where there were good players on the 2nd.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, dudacek said:

They’ll have to dump one of them and Killorn, at minimum, and probably either Cernak or Sergachev as well.

Every little bit helps. Our division is filled with juggernauts for the next 3 seasons and any little bit helps. Get Ottawa to take Cernak. Get us to pilch Johnson as a patchwork 2C while Cozens grows. Something will work something along the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Curt said:

It doesn’t make sense though.  From TBs perspective, why make that trade?  Because they are going to lose Cirelli anyway, and they like Risto?  Ok, so they make that trade.  Cirelli who needs a new contract that they won’t be able to afford for Risto.........who has a $5.4M contract that they also won’t be able to afford. It doesn’t help their cap situation at all, which is the whole point of trading Cirelli in the first place!

Unless he is the piece they need to go farther in the playoffs and actually compete for the Cup, then they could try to dump more salary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Unless he is the piece they need to go farther in the playoffs and actually compete for the Cup, then they could try to dump more salary. 

So, in this scenario, TB is trading Cirelli not to help their cap situation, but because they prefer Risto to Cirelli?  Seems outlandishly unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Curt said:

So, in this scenario, TB is trading Cirelli not to help their cap situation, but because they prefer Risto to Cirelli?  Seems outlandishly unlikely.

“It’s so crazy it just might work”

  • Haha (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO THANKS! MAJOR OVERPAYMENT FOR CERILLI   

i honestly think this board majorly over values Cerilli a .64pt per game player.

That should be the minimum that Cozens will be putting up in 2 seasons (I'm an optimist,  i admit).

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

NO THANKS! MAJOR OVERPAYMENT FOR CERILLI   

i honestly think this board majorly over values Cerilli a .64pt per game player.

That should be the minimum that Cozens will be putting up in 2 seasons (I'm an optimist,  i admit).

you think Cozens will put up .64 points in his rookie season??  dreams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2020 at 1:51 PM, LGR4GM said:

Well kinda. Samson was better in his draft year than Cozens but Cozens was better in his D1 year than Sam. Sam needed to and did work on his 2-way game a bunch during his D1 year (as well as skating and gaining strength).

Cozens is a very different style than Sam. Sam is very much about being cerebral and setting up teammates and sliding into spots while making sure he is defensive sound. Cozens is more about driving the net and being a shot guy although he can pass as well. Cozens skating is faster/quicker than Sams which helps with this. 

His ceiling is a #1 center but he could certainly only turn into a #3 center. 

#1 centers are like #1 pitchers in Baseball.  There are maybe 10 true #1 ace type pitchers in Baseball.  Same with #1 centers.  Mackinon, Macdavid, Mathews, Eichel, Crosby blanking on the maybe 3 or 4 others.  Barkov is close.  Definition is you can play them against any other lines or dman and they still dominate, and they make others around them into very good players.  Crosby makes guys who are average millions every year.  Toews is no longer a #1 as he has lost speed and cannot keep up with the above and never was a power guy.  Bergeron is not #1. very good but not at the above's level.  Stamkos is not as he needs good wingers, and if he does not score he does nothing else to help.

Cozens has zero chance of reaching that level.  None at all.  Wish i was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, dudacek said:

He doesn't.

He does however, fix a hole in their roster that no one really talks about:

  • They have just two defencemen under the age of 29
  • They have only three defencemen under contract for next season
  • They have no right-handed defencemen under contract for next season.

We know the Lightning like big, strong defencemen and we have been told they have inquired about Risto before.

Your point still stands.

***

For sake of argument: Johnson and Killorn for Risto (flavour with picks and prospects as needed)

  • addresses the Sabres 2nd line issues
  • addresses the Lightning's need for a youngish RHD
  • gives the Bolts an extra $4 million or so under the cap

 

What is Johnson contract?  I think this is the biggest issue.  we have enough crap contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Xzy89c said:

#1 centers are like #1 pitchers in Baseball.  There are maybe 10 true #1 ace type pitchers in Baseball.  Same with #1 centers.  Mackinon, Macdavid, Mathews, Eichel, Crosby blanking on the maybe 3 or 4 others.  Barkov is close.  Definition is you can play them against any other lines or dman and they still dominate, and they make others around them into very good players.  Crosby makes guys who are average millions every year.  Toews is no longer a #1 as he has lost speed and cannot keep up with the above and never was a power guy.  Bergeron is not #1. very good but not at the above's level.  Stamkos is not as he needs good wingers, and if he does not score he does nothing else to help.

Cozens has zero chance of reaching that level.  None at all.  Wish i was wrong.

Disagree on your definition of #1 center. What you are describing are elite centers or top tier #1s. There are a bunch of centers that are definitely not #2 centers, and are not a #1 by your definition. I would say there is probably somewhere around 25-28 #1 centers in the league- enough so that not all teams have one,  but enough that the majority do. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Xzy89c said:

you think Cozens will put up .64 points in his rookie season??  dreams

sorry, meant in his second season. I'm hopeful he will have an immediate impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

sorry, meant in his second season. I'm hopeful he will have an immediate impact.

You did say in his second season.  Our friend is being selective in what he hits on in his ramblings.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

Disagree on your definition of #1 center. What you are describing are elite centers or top tier #1s. There are a bunch of centers that are definitely not #2 centers, and are not a #1 by your definition. I would say there is probably somewhere around 25-28 #1 centers in the league- enough so that not all teams have one,  but enough that the majority do. 

1) Pretty sure this guy is trolling.

2) There need to be 31 #1 centers.  It doesn’t make any logical sense otherwise.  If there are only 25 #1 C’s, are there then 37 #2 C’s, or are there also only 25 of those too?

Don’t get me wrong, quite a few of the leagues 31 #1 C’s are probably the #2  C on good teams.  I just think that the 31 best C’s In the NHL should be considered #1 C’s for the delineation to make sense.

Edited by Curt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Curt said:

1) Pretty sure this guy is trolling.

2) There need to be 31 #1 centers.  It doesn’t make any logical sense otherwise.  If there are only 25 #1 C’s, are there then 37 #2 C’s, or are there also only 25 of those too?

Don’t get me wrong, quite a few of the leagues 31 #1 C’s are probably the #2  C on good teams.  I just think that the 31 best C’s In the NHL should be considered #1 C’s for the delineation to make sense.

He's not trolling. He's just saying in a round about way that the 31 1st line centers in the league are definitely not the 31 best centers in the league.

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...