Jason Robertson rumored to be on the trade block

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, CallawaySabres said:

Why is this even being talked about as an idea if he has a 10 team list on no trade. If Buffalo is not #1 on that list, it's pretty close. ZERO chance people like him will choose to ruin their career by coming to Buffalo.

Robertson doesn't. 

[Brawndo]

Marty suggested it would take a first and Kulich to get Robertson 

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Marty suggested it would take a first and Kulich to get Robertson 

Hmm. Is it just 9 and Kulich? 

[kas23]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

Our fundamental disagreement that can't be breached is in our views on Quinn as a player. I believe that his upside is higher than you do, thus his value. There is no circumstance that I see him as a lower line player or merely as a shootout specialist. If the issue is reduced between Marchment and Quinn, I'm still siding with keeping Quinn and eschewing Marchment. I'm not dispatching a player with more upside to tap. We disagree, that's okay. 

Bonus points for using dispatching, breached, and eschewing all in one post. 

[ponokasabre]

20 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Hmm. Is it just 9 and Kulich? 

If that is all it takes you make that deal today and you don’t even blink

 

[Mr. Allen]

55 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Marty suggested it would take a first and Kulich to get Robertson 

Someone on Sabre Noise suggested trading Peterka, Kulich and the 9 for Robertson.  That’s a lot to offer. 

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, Mr. Allen said:

Someone on Sabre Noise suggested trading Peterka, Kulich and the 9 for Robertson.  That’s a lot to offer. 

Is it?

[Weave]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Why not have Tage and Tuch on the top line together? Tage can play either on the wing or center with Tuch on the other side. Norris can play center on the top line or second line. Where I separate myself with people taking the same position as you are regarding Quinn is that I see more upside from him than many others do. And I see that potential coming to fruition sooner than others see it. Again, with respect to this particular player I steadfastly say no. The priorities this offseason  is in net and on the blueline. The blueline needs to be reconfigured with a better mix. 

Are you proposing that we essentially stand pat with the forward group?  No change in the mix of tools/talents at all?

 

I have to say, if we upgrade goalie, and upgrade a D man or two, my prediction is, if you don’t change the mix in the forward group as well, if the team makes the playoffs at all, it will be by the skin of their teeth.  For all the goals this team scored, defensive support from the forwards was pretty weak.  And they finished 12pts behind a playoff spot in a year that saw uncharacteristically low point levels to get in.  You can’t fiddle around the edges with the forwards group and expect to make the playoffs, even if we upgrade D and G.

 

And the forwards group is still too young.  Moving a young ROSTER player or two for a vet with a more complimentary, but not matching, skillset is imperative.

Edited 20 hours ago by Weave
Math is hard

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Weave said:

Are you proposing that we essentially stand pat with the forward group?  No change in the mix of tools/talents at all?

 

I have to say, if we upgrade goalie, and upgrade a D man or two, my prediction is, if you don’t change the mix in the forward group as well, if the team makes the playoffs at all, it will be by the skin of their teeth.  For all the goals this team scored, defensive support from the forwards was pretty weak.  And they finished 22pts behind a playoff spot in a year that saw uncharacteristically low point levels to get in.  You can’t fiddle around the edges with the forwards group and expect to make the playoffs, even if we upgrade D and G.

Your response is well reasoned. However, don’t underestimate the challenge it will be to upgrade the goalie position and reconfiguring the blueline unit. And don’t underestimate how much it will improve this team. These are the priorities that need to be addressed.

Where I diverge with a lot of the responders is that I strongly believe that young players such as Power, JJP and Kulich are ready to produce at a higher level a lot sooner than they think.

[LGR4GM]

Just now, JohnC said:

Your response is well reasoned. However, don’t underestimate the challenge it will be to upgrade the goalie position and reconfiguring the blueline unit. And don’t underestimate how much it will improve this team. These are the priorities that need to be addressed.

Where I diverge with a lot of the responders is that I strongly believe that young players such as Power, JJP and Kulich are ready to produce at a higher level a lot sooner than they think.

Or I can trade Peterka and don't have to think, it's just Robertson is better. 

[Weave]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Your response is well reasoned. However, don’t underestimate the challenge it will be to upgrade the goalie position and reconfiguring the blueline unit. And don’t underestimate how much it will improve this team. These are the priorities that need to be addressed.

Where I diverge with a lot of the responders is that I strongly believe that young players such as Power, JJP and Kulich are ready to produce at a higher level a lot sooner than they think.

You are betting on hope.  Or maybe faith is a better word.  Neither are data based.  Are not a good substitute for a plan.  And I don’t believe in hope or faith anyway.  You go ahead and estimate, and hope that it isn’t an over estimate.  
 

I hope you are right, but I’ll not expect it to happen at any point.

[Rasmus_]

29 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Or I can trade Peterka and don't have to think, it's just Robertson is better. 

I definitely agree here, the only thing that Robertson has going against him, is he is NOT a great skater.  Other than that at 25, you're getting an in his prime powerhouse.  Peterka has a lot of upside, but at the same time, it's getting to the point for players to start feel confident playing here is to win.

[7+6=13]

9 hours ago, inkman said:

 

 

 

Quinn is a part of the problem. A defensive liability with no agression.  Nice offensive player but he’s easy to get off the puck and wilts when the going gets tough. Another player running for the bus when things get difficult on the ice.  
 

You don’t want a blockbuster?  This teams needs to make wholesale changes.  The roster is not good enough.  Thatcher Demko isn’t going to turn this into a 100 point team. 
 

I’m moving Peterka, Quinn, Byram, UPL, Samuelsson.  These guys aren’t play drivers like Eichel & Reinhart.  They may have success elsewhere but it’s not because they are burgeoning stars being muffled by Buffalo’s incompetence.  They are the problem.  

I don't consider a single one of those players, if involved in a trade, blockbuster.

[oddoublee]

1 hour ago, Mr. Allen said:

Someone on Sabre Noise suggested trading Peterka, Kulich and the 9 for Robertson.  That’s a lot to offer. 

If Dallas is looking to move Robertson, they most likely will not want peterka in return. Their motive would be cap based, and peterka counters that. 

I could see 9, kulich and a B level prospect/2nd rounder getting it done

[Dr. Who]

24 minutes ago, oddoublee said:

If Dallas is looking to move Robertson, they most likely will not want peterka in return. Their motive would be cap based, and peterka counters that. 

I could see 9, kulich and a B level prospect/2nd rounder getting it done

Well, if that's the price, you do it.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Or I can trade Peterka and don't have to think, it's just Robertson is better. 

If the deal was straight up Peterka for Robertson, I would take the deal. In my opinion, some of your previous proposals were too generous for what we would give up .

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

You are betting on hope.  Or maybe faith is a better word.  Neither are data based.  Are not a good substitute for a plan.  And I don’t believe in hope or faith anyway.  You go ahead and estimate, and hope that it isn’t an over estimate.  
 

I hope you are right, but I’ll not expect it to happen at any point.

You have a keen eye in recognizing that my position is grounded in my having more faith/expectations in our players than many here have. We shall see.

[LGR4GM]

34 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If the deal was straight up Peterka for Robertson, I would take the deal. In my opinion, some of your previous proposals were too generous for what we would give up .

What do you think a 100pt forward in their prime costs? Like for real?

Peterka, 9oa, and a prospect is basically the price. It's always the price give or take a sweetener. 

Eichel: Tuch (Peterka), Krebs (prospect), 1st round pick (which was 16th oa), and a 3rd round pick. 

[JohnC]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

What do you think a 100pt forward in their prime costs? Like for real?

Peterka, 9oa, and a prospect is basically the price. It's always the price give or take a sweetener. 

Eichel: Tuch (Peterka), Krebs (prospect), 1st round pick (which was 16th oa), and a 3rd round pick. 

In a previous post you were willing to throw in Byrum into the deal. That would bring me to an absolute no because I would prefer using him in another deal. 

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

In a previous post you were willing to throw in Byrum into the deal. That would bring me to an absolute no because I would prefer using him in another deal. 

Focus. Peterka,  9oa, prospect 

[LGR4GM]

46 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If the deal was straight up Peterka for Robertson, I would take the deal. In my opinion, some of your previous proposals were too generous for what we would give up .

 

5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

In a previous post you were willing to throw in Byrum into the deal. That would bring me to an absolute no because I would prefer using him in another deal. 

And Dallas would laugh you off the phone for your offer here, which is why I'm not going to refer to it 25 times because ik you know that not a full deal. 

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

And Dallas would laugh you off the phone for your offer here, which is why I'm not going to refer to it 25 times because ik you know that not a full deal. 

I have no problem being laughed off. I would hang up and move on. 

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I have no problem being laughed off. I would hang up and move on. 

You truly believe JJ Peterka for Jason Robertson straight up, is a reasonable trade offer?

[JohnC]

31 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You truly believe JJ Peterka for Jason Robertson straight up, is a reasonable trade offer?

Of course not. I said that if it was the deal, one for one, I would pounce on it. And what I also said is that if Byrum was thrown in the deal I would with no hesitation walk away. 

[LGR4GM]

23 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Of course not. I said that if it was the deal, one for one, I would pounce on it. And what I also said is that if Byrum was thrown in the deal I would with no hesitation walk away. 

 

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Focus. Peterka,  9oa, prospect 

I'm not talking about Byrum. I'm talking about what a real offer would look like. Peterka,  9oa, and a prospect. Do you think that's too much for Robertson.