Jason Robertson rumored to be on the trade block

[shrader]

Can we come up with some catchy slogan to put the A back in Byram?

[JohnC]

10 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

 

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. 

No.

[LGR4GM]

50 minutes ago, JohnC said:

No.

What about Kulich, 9oa, Quinn, and Östlund?

[Archie Lee]

26 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What about Kulich, 9oa, Quinn, and Östlund?

I like Quinn and still think he can be a player. I don’t see him as anything but a throw in here.

If we trade 9OA, Kulich, and Östlund for Robertson, then we need to be really sure it will get us in the playoffs and that Robertson will extend.  I’m not sure. I think the reason Robertson is available is because Dallas wants to contend for a Cup and they think he is at least a full tier below Rantanen as an overall player. 

What about Benson + 9OA? If we value Benson more than the other assets, then that is what Dallas might want. 

Edited 8 hours ago by Archie Lee

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What about Kulich, 9oa, Quinn, and Östlund?

Hell no! What you're offering is nothing but foolishness that sets this plagued franchise further back. My fear is that our Howdy Doody GM gets desperate just to show that he is doing something and makes a similar deal that thins out this already insufficient roster. 

If you want to make a big splash that will meaningfully upgrade this team, find a capable #1 goalie. That will do more than any of these imaginary fantasy hockey deals that one can concoct. An example to follow is Washington. They added Logan Thompson and Charlie Lindgren with medium deals that resulted in a top tier backstop for them. And it should be noted that they also made a series of medium deals that helped to infuse the roster with vigor for a fading SC team that was starting to age and fade. That's what happens when you have a smart front office that is creative and resourceful. Compare that to our rickety operation led by a dullard GM and an obtuse owner? 

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Hell no! What you're offering is nothing but foolishness that sets this plagued franchise further back. My fear is that our Howdy Doody GM gets desperate just to show that he is doing something and makes a similar deal that thins out this already insufficient roster. 

If you want to make a big splash that will meaningfully upgrade this team, find a capable #1 goalie. That will do more than any of these imaginary fantasy hockey deals that one can concoct. An example to follow is Washington. They added Logan Thompson and Charlie Lindgren with medium deals that resulted in a top tier backstop for them. And it should be noted that they also made a series of medium deals that helped to infuse the roster with vigor for a fading SC team that was starting to age and fade. That's what happens when you have a smart front office that is creative and resourceful. Compare that to our rickety operation led by a dullard GM and an obtuse owner? 

What about Kulich,  9oa, and something else like a B level prospect?

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I like Quinn and still think he can be a player. I don’t see him as anything but a throw in here.

If we trade 9OA, Kulich, and Östlund for Robertson, then we need to be really sure it will get us in the playoffs and that Robertson will extend.  I’m not sure. I think the reason Robertson is available is because Dallas wants to contend for a Cup and they think he is at least a full tier below Rantanen as an overall player. 

What about Benson + 9OA? If we value Benson more than the other assets, then that is what Dallas might want. 

It's a mistake to get fixated on an outside player as if that one acquisition is going to be the answer to our roster problems. When you thin out your roster to harpoon the big what you end up putting yourself in a vulnerable situation in a business that injuries are an expected part of the landscape. What happens if the so-called star player is injured? Then what do you have to show for it? You end up thinning out your roster and have less of an ability to absorb the injuries that will likely happen. 

I'm not automatically against making a bonanza deal but you have to be smart about it. The proposed deal that included 9OA, Kulich and Östlund for Robertson is not necessarily a steadfast no for me but I am very hesitant to make that deal. Kulich is ready to play for us now. And our first pick and Östlund could be used to deal for another quality player. We need to thicken our roster, not thin it out. 

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What about Kulich,  9oa, and something else like a B level prospect?

I really like Kulich a lot and would hate to give him up. If you proposed JJP, our first pick and a B level prospect, I would say yes. 

[Mr. Allen]

25 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I really like Kulich a lot and would hate to give him up. If you proposed JJP, our first pick and a B level prospect, I would say yes. 

I’m curious what the value of some of our young players are.  How would they rank as a trade asset.  Now, I’m not ranking these guys, but curious what other people think.

Peterka

Benson

Kulich

 Quinn

Östlund

Helenius  

Edited 7 hours ago by Mr. Allen

[Pimlach]

19 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. 

You are not changing your opinion, that's fine.   But the priorities argument is not a good one.   You can package Quinn in a trade to get a goalie or a defenseman.  You bring up team priorities as if you have to trade a winger for a winger, you know better than that.   This teams priorities and needs are the reason Quinn is even in the discussion, he still has some value in the trade market, you typically have to give something to get something. 

On this team Quinn is the a lowest ranked forward held over for last seasons top 9, he cannot play center and his game is not at all suited for the fourth line. His skill set is redundant with several other wingers, including prospects in Rochester.   I would much rather keep Peterka and move Quinn.  

What will likely keep Quinn on the Sabres roster is the fact that Peterka allegedly wants out.  If Quinn has another lackluster season like the past one his trade value becomes very close to zero.  

Edited 6 hours ago by Pimlach

[Archie Lee]

27 minutes ago, Mr. Allen said:

I’m curious what the value of some of our young players are.  How would they rank as a trade asset.  Now, I’m not ranking these guys, but curious what other people think.

Peterka

Benson

Kulich

 Quinn

Östlund

Helenius  

In my view, this is how the rest of the league would see their order (highest to lowest):

1.) Peterka (68 points as a 22/23 year old; he is a potential elite 90 point winger)

2.) Kulich (gets the edge on Benson because he can play centre, is bigger, faster, and has an elite shot)\

3.) Benson

4.) Helenius (potential centre)

5.) Östlund (potential centre)

6.) Quinn (trending down)

7.) Rosen (trending down) 

If I was going to tier them it would be:

1.) Peterka

2.) Kulich, Benson, Helenius

3.) Östlund, Quinn, Rosen

 

[Pimlach]

12 hours ago, shrader said:

Can we come up with some catchy slogan to put the A back in Byram?

Byram is RAM tough!  

Oops, I  just plagiarized that from Dodge pickup trucks.  

[Pimlach]

49 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

In my view, this is how the rest of the league would see their order (highest to lowest):

1.) Peterka (68 points as a 22/23 year old; he is a potential elite 90 point winger)

2.) Kulich (gets the edge on Benson because he can play centre, is bigger, faster, and has an elite shot)\

3.) Benson

4.) Helenius (potential centre)

5.) Östlund (potential centre)

6.) Quinn (trending down)

7.) Rosen (trending down) 

If I was going to tier them it would be:

1.) Peterka

2.) Kulich, Benson, Helenius

3.) Östlund, Quinn, Rosen

 

Agree for the most part.   I have some trouble ranking Helenius over Östlund but he could be.  I also have trouble tiering Helenius with Kulich and Benson since he has never played a game on the NHL and they look like NHL players in the making.  

Quinn and Peterka are from the same draft class, each spent one season in the AHL, and they came up together.  Peterka is trending up, Quinn is trending down.  Was it the injuries that derailed Quinn or is it his game?  I would have to believe that injuries had something to do with it but that is no reason for his current level of play which completely lacks a physical component.  

Just looking at the two play I like Peterka's build and body type much better.   His frame is much sturdier and his lower body is stronger.  Peterka plays faster, while Quinn seems to be thinking (and watching) out there.   Someone please help Peterka with his two way game and he is a top 6 on many teams.  Quinn seems frail to me.  He has some nice hands and skills but really needs to get stronger and play with more resolve and some aggression.  

Rosen has just turned 22.  He has 15 NHL games and has not distinguished himself yet.  Certainly can be a trade piece sweetener.  He still could bloom but we have others in the pipeline too.  

Edited 6 hours ago by Pimlach

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

It's a mistake to get fixated on an outside player as if that one acquisition is going to be the answer to our roster problems. When you thin out your roster to harpoon the big what you end up putting yourself in a vulnerable situation in a business that injuries are an expected part of the landscape. What happens if the so-called star player is injured? Then what do you have to show for it? You end up thinning out your roster and have less of an ability to absorb the injuries that will likely happen. 

I'm not automatically against making a bonanza deal but you have to be smart about it. The proposed deal that included 9OA, Kulich and Östlund for Robertson is not necessarily a steadfast no for me but I am very hesitant to make that deal. Kulich is ready to play for us now. And our first pick and Östlund could be used to deal for another quality player. We need to thicken our roster, not thin it out. 

Stop for a second. This doesn't thin out the roster. Moving out Kulich's potential for Robertson's actual,  is not thinning out the roster. 

I think it's absurd to call a trade of Kulich Östlund and 9 for Robertson "thinning out the roster"

Also injuries as an excuse not to do something is loser talk. You have no control over that and worrying about it means you're making moves based on fear. 

[Drag0nDan]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Stop for a second. This doesn't thin out the roster. Moving out Kulich's potential for Robertson's actual,  is not thinning out the roster. 

I think it's absurd to call a trade of Kulich Östlund and 9 for Robertson "thinning out the roster"

Also injuries as an excuse not to do something is loser talk. You have no control over that and worrying about it means you're making moves based on fear. 

yeah... I'll worry about the center after i add the 100 point player.  

[Brawndo]

Dallas is firing Peter DeBoer 

[Weave]

43 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

In my view, this is how the rest of the league would see their order (highest to lowest):

1.) Peterka (68 points as a 22/23 year old; he is a potential elite 90 point winger)

2.) Kulich (gets the edge on Benson because he can play centre, is bigger, faster, and has an elite shot)\

3.) Benson

4.) Helenius (potential centre)

5.) Östlund (potential centre)

6.) Quinn (trending down)

7.) Rosen (trending down) 

If I was going to tier them it would be:

1.) Peterka

2.) Kulich, Benson, Helenius

3.) Östlund, Quinn, Rosen

 

This seems about right to me, and reflects how I would prioritize moving young players for roster upgrades.

They all might become good NHL players, but realistically we don’t have enough room for all of those players in their age groups.  So some of them have to go.

Rosen and Quinn top the list in the 22-23 age class for players to move because they simply aren’t performing up to the level of Peterka.  And even if we are forced to move Peterka, I am still looking to move Quinn because of the uncertainty around what player he may become.  We need certainty, and we need players with a more diverse game.

Östlund should be prioritized to move over Kulich because Kulich is performing at a higher level.

[Archie Lee]

I would love to add Robertson, but I actually think we are a year late on such a big addition.  Last year was the year to move two of Benson, Quinn, Peterka, our 1st rd pick for a Robertson or an extended Necas or Ehlers. We had the assets and the cap room to make the move last year. Now we have the assets but we no longer have the cap room. Acquiring such a player now means moving out equivalent or projected-equivalent salary. So adding Robertson would mean moving Peterka or moving two of Tuch, Greenway, Zucker, & McLeod.  Or Samuelsson and Clifton, but replacing them with two very low-level contracts.  It can be done, but it probably means multiple trades instead of one trade. Dallas would probably love to add Peterka in a Robertson deal, but if Peterka wants a $7 million AAV, it won't work for the same reasons that Robertson no longer works. Also, there are multiple teams with just as many good tradeable assets and far more cap flexibility; I think we will be beaten to the punch on players like Robertson by teams like Carolina, Columbus, Anaheim, and San Jose.

We need to add some veterans to change our make-up. The vets that I would target are in the Demko, Nedeljkovic, Ferrero, Ceci, Rust, and Keifer Sherwood category. Peterka and Byram appear to be the big assets moving out.  I think a skilled GM could add the veterans we need to change the make-up and direction of our team while not overly depleting our prospect depth. 

[DarthEbriate]

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Dallas is firing Peter DeBoer 

No surprise there. You don’t throw your goalie under the bus when he’s still entering his prime and has several years left on his contract just because he’s had poor games against McDavid and Draisaitl. 

[Pimlach]

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Dallas is firing Peter DeBoer 

I have heard of him.  

Get it done Kevyn, or Jarmo,  er - uhhh Terry ... 

[Archie Lee]

Just now, Pimlach said:

I have heard of him.  

Get it done Kevyn, or Jarmo,  er - uhhh Terry ... 

Yep.  We would have a better chance of making the playoffs if we rolled back the roster with DeBoer as coach, than with changes and Ruff.   

[Mr. Allen]

19 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Dallas is firing Peter DeBoer 

Woah.  I guess they chose Ottenger over him. 

[French Collection]

Just now, Archie Lee said:

Yep.  We would have a better chance of making the playoffs if we rolled back the roster with DeBoer as coach, than with changes and Ruff.   

Handcuff DeBoer with the existing assistants, goalies and they probably still miss.

[Pimlach]

10 minutes ago, French Collection said:

Handcuff DeBoer with the existing assistants, goalies and they probably still miss.

And DeBoer will publicly blame the assistants and the goalies, much to Terry's chagrin.   

[Archie Lee]

23 minutes ago, French Collection said:

Handcuff DeBoer with the existing assistants, goalies and they probably still miss.

I should clarify that DeBoer would get to change assistants, just like Ruff can but has chosen not to.