Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
37 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

Power and a prospect.  If Miller would agree to a 4 year extension at under 6.

I feel like this is a wee bit of an overpayment.  Also not sure they’d have any interest in Power. 

Just now, inkman said:

I feel like this is a wee bit of an overpayment.  Also not sure they’d have any interest in Power. 

How about Samuelsson & Rosen 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, inkman said:

I feel like this is a wee bit of an overpayment.  Also not sure they’d have any interest in Power. 

How about Samuelsson & Rosen 

I'd pay it to get out of Power's contract and add toughness.  The loss in offense can be made up by having a better defender and have 3 more mil to keep adding.

If they don't have interest in Power, I'm not sure how Samuelsson becomes attractive.  He's less bang for the buck, less upside and injury prone.  They'll get much better offers, IMO, but I'd have to purposely fake my excitement if I was the Sabres GM.  Wait, you have to take more than 2 seconds to say yes or you'll scare them off.

I don't think we could trade Samuelsson unless we gave a team more than just him and didn't ask for anything back.

Posted

I'll trade them Samuelsson and Rosen but the idea of using Owen Power and then adding more to get Miller is not something a serious GM would do. 

Miller is a 4/5 defender at best. He's not that interesting especially with the amount he'll command. 

Posted

Not sure the optics of trading Power for a middle 2/3 historical D pairing guy is enough return, I feel like he (Power) would be better used as a chip to get a much more game changing player (like on the other side optically getting a former 1st overall that has been at least offensively reasonably productive) ... so I would look to people like Muel, Quinn, Rosen, picks etc... to get that done... 

Just thinking out loud... guy is a pretty big hitter... is he the guy you look to pair with Power on a 2nd line D pair... I dont know enough about other aspects of his game, but does his toughness elicit more toughness from Power if he is playing with him?  Just a thought.... 

Posted

So Rangers are doing this because of cap reasons, right? So trading any player back that also makes a lot of money makes no sense. Our top pick is a pretty good bargaining chip then, if that is true. Now does it make sense for us to do that? I don't know, but just saying we might have what they want. 

Posted (edited)

Miller is a 3rd line d-man on a good team.   A one to one swap for Muel, and maybe we toss in a grade B prospect or 3rd round pick.  

No way you trade Power or Byram for him and then think he is going cover those minutes.  He is not good enough and the Rangers know that.  

Sabres always working on the fringe - fooling with the 3rd pair defense and 4th line is not going to move the needle.   Improve the top 4 defense and the top 6 forwards and then move some current roster players down.  

The only 4th line player they need is one that will be an enforcer.   Sorry Kevyn, but Malenstyn/Lafferty are not that guy.   

Edited by Pimlach
  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Miller is a 3rd line d-man on a good team.   A one to one swap for Muel, and maybe we toss in a grade B prospect or 3rd round pick.  

No way you trade Power or Byram for him and then think he is going cover those minutes.  He is not good enough and the Rangers know that.  

Sabres always working on the fringe - fooling with the 3rd pair defense and 4th line is not going to move the needle.   Improve the top 4 defense and the top 6 forwards and then move some current roster players down.  

The only 4th line player they need is one that will be an enforcer.   Sorry Kevyn, but Malenstyn/Lafferty are not that guy.   

And not the 9th overall pick either 

13 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

Muel.  Maybe both players just need a change of scenery.

Didn’t Muel’s dad play for the Rangers? 

Posted
12 hours ago, inkman said:

I feel like this is a wee bit of an overpayment.  Also not sure they’d have any interest in Power. 

How about Samuelsson & Rosen 

I like Samuelsson, Rosen and a third to sweeten it.  It gets Samuelsson out the door, moves a player I don't see as a realistic top six option and a draft pick for an upgrade.  Not sure this will be enough, but at least a start.

Posted
27 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

So Rangers are doing this because of cap reasons, right? So trading any player back that also makes a lot of money makes no sense. Our top pick is a pretty good bargaining chip then, if that is true. Now does it make sense for us to do that? I don't know, but just saying we might have what they want. 

I'd need more than Miller for 9th. I can draft better Miller in Mrtka. Sure I gotta wait 2yrs but wth are we doing with yet another lhd anyways? At least mrtka plays the right. 

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...