rickshaw Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 I read this on you know who's page, but I thought it would be interesting to see what names may move. I won't speculate too much on which Oiler(s) may move but I will for the Canucks and Sabres. I figure that the Canucks may very well be interested in Briere to play along Naslund. This would obviously mean that Brendan Morrison comes to Buffalo. If not Briere, then certainly Max must be mentioned, but I'm not sure who'd come back to the Sabres under this move. I'd assume the Canucks wouldn't deal a guy to Edmonton. Morrison was injured much of last year but played through it. I believe he'd be a good fit in Buffalo if Briere was moved, and his contract is just around $3 million per. Anyone want to add to this?? What the heck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 I was just down at the local pub. Had to take a leak and saw written on the wall: 'Brier to Los Angeles for two first round picks' I'd provide a link, but....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 I read this on you know who's page, but I thought it would be interesting to see what names may move. I won't speculate too much on which Oiler(s) may move but I will for the Canucks and Sabres. I figure that the Canucks may very well be interested in Briere to play along Naslund. This would obviously mean that Brendan Morrison comes to Buffalo. If not Briere, then certainly Max must be mentioned, but I'm not sure who'd come back to the Sabres under this move. I'd assume the Canucks wouldn't deal a guy to Edmonton. Morrison was injured much of last year but played through it. I believe he'd be a good fit in Buffalo if Briere was moved, and his contract is just around $3 million per. Anyone want to add to this?? What the heck. Given the Sabres likely fiscal constraints, I wouldn't mind seeing the Briere for Morrison deal (he's 2 years older than Briere and locked in for one extra year at $3.2MM/yr) and is a solid #2 center that would complement a healthy Connolly and Drury well. (Yes, I know he was on Vancouver's #1 line, but I still consider him a #2.) The problem is, I don't see how Vancouver can absorb that much salary. They are already expecting to lose Carter over ~0.5MM/yr. I don't see how they can increase the cost of their top center by $1.8MM unless it becomes a multiplayer deal and the Sabres take on additional salary somehow (which is defeating the purpose of the trade from the Sabres standpoint). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Maybe I am reading it wrong, but Eklund's actual senetence is "There is also talk of a big trade involving the Sabres/Canucks and the Oilers." To me that means the Oilers have a big trade in the works with the Canucks OR the Sabres ... like I said maybe that is me but it doesn't read like the Sabres would be doing a deal straight up with the Canucks. Max seems like a guy who would fit in in Edmonton because of his speed ... but that is just me talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Maybe I am reading it wrong, but Eklund's actual senetence is "There is also talk of a big trade involving the Sabres/Canucks and the Oilers." To me that means the Oilers have a big trade in the works with the Canucks OR the Sabres ... like I said maybe that is me but it doesn't read like the Sabres would be doing a deal straight up with the Canucks. Max seems like a guy who would fit in in Edmonton because of his speed ... but that is just me talking. Lots of Possibilities here. Vancouver has proved it likes dealing with Buffalo. Correct me if I am wrong, but Vancouver and Edmonton currently have 3 goaltenders. I even think that Vancouver wanted to put Mika on a 2-way. Somekind of move would probably involve a backup goalie so that the Sabres can eventually deal Biron and unload salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Lots of Possibilities here. Vancouver has proved it likes dealing with Buffalo. Correct me if I am wrong, but Vancouver and Edmonton currently have 3 goaltenders. I even think that Vancouver wanted to put Mika on a 2-way. Somekind of move would probably involve a backup goalie so that the Sabres can eventually deal Biron and unload salary. A 3 way deal could be realistic. Buffalo and Vancouver would want to reduce salary and Edmonton has lost a lot of players: Pronger, Spacek, Peca, Samsonov, Laraque (hey, I didn't say they were all GOOD players ;) ). Edmonton could be very interested in Danny, Max, or JP. Vancouver only has 2 goalies (they traded Auld and Cloutier) but they would be looking to get cheaper. So maybe we'd see a Danny out Morrison in deal that runs through Edmonton. The next thoughts are strictly diarrhea of the brain, so don't hold them to too much scrutiny. (They won't hold up.) Buffalo would still need a goalie unless Edmonton were to pick up Marty to play until Roloson's healthy, Edmonton sent Markkanen to Vancouver, and Mika came back to Buffalo. (Sheesh, I'm starting to sound like Eklund.) Definitely not expecting to see that goalie trade, but depending on Rolie's health and the $'s being bandied about, maybe that would become part of something far bigger. Markkanen played very well in the playoffs, but with his age and Edmonton's past lack of faith in him maybe they would prefer a healthy Marty battling with Rolie for the starting job. So another possibility would be someone and Markkanen from Edmonton to Buffalo for Marty and Danny (and possibly a lower priced young forward to get Edmonton to bite on taking on the added salary), with Buffalo turning around and sending the other piece(s) they got from Edmonton to Vancouver for Morrison (or maybe Buffalo sends the young guy I thought they'd send to Edmonton off to Vancouver along with the skater(s) they got from Edmonton). It would give Edmonton a very solid set of centers: Horcoff, Stoll, Danny, and Reasoner and a very competent goaltending tandem. It would give Buffalo salary cap relief, a solid center, and an affordable backup goalie. It would give Vancouver salary relief and possibly some young talent. Everybody wins, :huh: right? <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Morrison would be a nice pickup for the Sabres. 400 points in six seasons and a plus 64. He is more of the two way player the Sabres need. McKee and Grier were good but they were one dimensional. Actualy I think McKee had more offensive upside than Grier :lol: It's why Spacek is such a big upgrade from McKee. Spacek can play at both ends. When you're a small market team on a budget you can't spend money on one way players. Team defense and a solid goalie is how the Cup will come to Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Maybe I am reading it wrong, but Eklund's actual senetence is "There is also talk of a big trade involving the Sabres/Canucks and the Oilers." To me that means the Oilers have a big trade in the works with the Canucks OR the Sabres ... like I said maybe that is me but it doesn't read like the Sabres would be doing a deal straight up with the Canucks. Max seems like a guy who would fit in in Edmonton because of his speed ... but that is just me talking. Reading through the thread at Eklund's the rumor was/is: Afinogenov to Vancouver for Morrison and a 4th round pick Buffalo would then trade Briere to Edmonton for Raffi Torres, Matt Greene and a 1st or 2nd round pick. I think overall we benefit with both trades, although I hate losing Danny. To me it makes more sense to keep him and ship off Biron to Detroit and Max to the highest bidder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navybillsfan Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 I love all this trade talk... You guys just dont get it at all. Chemistry wins championships fellas. Just because Mr B got 5 million dont mean we should trade him. You all must be use to losing or just love the drama that comes with losing. Big Tom should just break this team up now, im tired of winning cups..... We should trade everyone for Lonnie Johnson and Rob Johnson. I hear they can skate... Better yet, sign Flutie, he can spread some magic on the Sabres! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 I love all this trade talk... You guys just dont get it at all. Chemistry wins championships fellas. Just because Mr B got 5 million dont mean we should trade him. If you do the math you will see some parts of this have to go. Keeping Briere will mean trading others, keeping others will mean trading Briere. It is that simple and half of the league is watching Buffalo's next move because they know it. If they have to move players, many of us are hoping that the Sabres get fair value in return, and furthermore we hope they are players that fit this team's character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Good post, X. I'm sure there are 20+ teams every year with good chemistry that don't even come close to sniffing the finals, let alone winning the Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chileanseabass Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Reading through the thread at Eklund's the rumor was/is: Afinogenov to Vancouver for Morrison and a 4th round pick Buffalo would then trade Briere to Edmonton for Raffi Torres, Matt Greene and a 1st or 2nd round pick. I think overall we benefit with both trades, although I hate losing Danny. To me it makes more sense to keep him and ship off Biron to Detroit and Max to the highest bidder. i would make both of those deals if i were the sabres. torres would bring even more grit than grier did and greene is a monster. i'd much rather have morrison than max. at least he's more consistant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Reading through the thread at Eklund's the rumor was/is: Afinogenov to Vancouver for Morrison and a 4th round pick Buffalo would then trade Briere to Edmonton for Raffi Torres, Matt Greene and a 1st or 2nd round pick. I think overall we benefit with both trades, although I hate losing Danny. To me it makes more sense to keep him and ship off Biron to Detroit and Max to the highest bidder. Let me be the first to call BS on this deal (not that I have to since its an Eklund rumor). Edmonton's going to lose yet another defensman? I'm not even sure what they've brought in through free agency, but there's no way they've done enough to replace Pronger, Spacek, Tarnstrom and then Greene too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Gotta agree with Shrader - we give up two players, get three plus a high- and mid- draft pick in return - and get a lower payroll to boot? Like The Jokeman, I would hate to lose Briere but I wouldn't have a problem with these deals. I've always liked Morrison, and wouldn't mind having him, especially at 3.2M per, but I just can't see Edmonton trading away another defenseman to get Briere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit151 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 You know guys, I don't know that anyone takes Briere. 5 million a year for a guy who may have just had a career year. Risky. Does he really put up 100+ points in a full year of pounding hockey? I'm still waiting to see what the Sabres philosophy is going to be. Are they going to go for it this year, or not? I'll tell you one thing, future players better start to realize they need to look after themselves better. The elite guys are still getting paid, while mid-range guys (see Mogilny) can't get a job anymore. It's just like what's happened in the NFL. A reliable vet that costs 2.5 mil a year to play on the 2nd or 3rd line, is now cut and replaced with a less than million a year rookie, sophomore or career minor-leaguer. So while the Players Union all held hands and merrily marched on to their new contract singing songs of how they would all be paid more fairly..........oh oh.......now 10% of the players get 90% of the cash, while some guys with more talent will get released and re-signed (or forced to retire) for the same cash as some dude who's unproven and less talented. Awwwwwwww. Even the arbitrator screws them. By giving Briere 5 million, they didn't drive up everyones salaries, maybe a few, but most will now have to worry if they have room for a job at all. Salary cap dictates there is only so much money to go around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 You know guys, I don't know that anyone takes Briere. 5 million a year for a guy who may have just had a career year. Risky. Does he really put up 100+ points in a full year of pounding hockey? Briere's durability will always be a question considering his size. Their are too many GM's who don't have to answer to anyone for blowing 5 million. (you were being serious, right) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Good post, X. I'm sure there are 20+ teams every year with good chemistry that don't even come close to sniffing the finals, let alone winning the Cup. Well, considering team chemistry was what everyone was going on about last season as the reason why Buffalo did so well (and the reason why we should not make a trade at the deadline for any additional help) now people are saying that chemistry is not as important to build a winner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabregoats Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Well, considering team chemistry was what everyone was going on about last season as the reason why Buffalo did so well (and the reason why we should not make a trade at the deadline for any additional help) now people are saying that chemistry is not as important to build a winner? The problem is that keeping the chemistry that they had last year has now become impossible. Everyone would say that idealy the roster stays the same as last year with a couple tweaks. However, b/c of all our FA that wasn't possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Well, considering team chemistry was what everyone was going on about last season as the reason why Buffalo did so well (and the reason why we should not make a trade at the deadline for any additional help) now people are saying that chemistry is not as important to build a winner? Everyone was saying the Sabres shouldn't make trades at the deadline? :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Well, considering team chemistry was what everyone was going on about last season as the reason why Buffalo did so well (and the reason why we should not make a trade at the deadline for any additional help) now people are saying that chemistry is not as important to build a winner? The problem is that keeping the chemistry that they had last year has now become impossible. Everyone would say that idealy the roster stays the same as last year with a couple tweaks. However, b/c of all our FA that wasn't possible. Exactly, sabregoats. Don't get me wrong, I think chemistry is important, and I am sure it was a big factor in our success last season, but a bigger part was the speed, maturity and development of our young players. We've always talked about the promise of guys like Campbell, Miller, Roy, Pominville & Vanek, but they all played bigger parts in the team's regular season than most could have hoped, while guys like Connolly, Tallinder, Max & Lydman really took big steps forward and became the players we had been waiting to see. Even if we were able to bring all of FAs back, there's no guarantee that the chemistry stays the same - guys get a year older, maybe they endure a couple early losing streaks and start tuning Lindy or his assistants out; problems with playing time, salaries, etc have another year to percolate under the surface, etc. I'm not saying throwing the most talented group of a-holes together is the answer to winning the Cup, just that I think sometimes people give a little too much credit to the idea of chemistry. Chemistry will take you so far, but talent is what usually gets you to the prize (Miracle on Ice team excluded.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 I'm not saying throwing the most talented group of a-holes together is the answer to winning the Cup, just that I think sometimes people give a little too much credit to the idea of chemistry. Chemistry will take you so far, but talent is what usually gets you to the prize (Miracle on Ice team excluded.) I agree ... if the leaders like Ruff and Drury are truly leaders they will keep it together. 15 new guys would be a different story, but 5 new guys would not be the end of the world. Winning breeds good chemistry. You also mentioned Vanek, and I think he is being overlooked. he did not deserve to be playing in the playoffs, but he DID score 25 goals . If he takes the next logical step in his development, that is a big addition to the playoff lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 I agree ... if the leaders like Ruff and Drury are truly leaders they will keep it together. 15 new guys would be a different story, but 5 new guys would not be the end of the world. Winning breeds good chemistry. You also mentioned Vanek, and I think he is being overlooked. he did not deserve to be playing in the playoffs, but he DID score 25 goals . If he takes the next logical step in his development, that is a big addition to the playoff lineup. Screw chemistry. Just give me guys like Drury that hate to lose, and care more about winning than lighting up the stats a'la Satan. Vanek needs to step up, he has a world of talent, and he probably needs an off-season conditioning program so he can backcheck with his stick on the ice. I think Ruff handled him well the first year by showing him it was not enough to score 25 goals. When the kid can score 35 and backcheck he'll have a great career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Screw chemistry. Just give me guys like Drury that hate to lose, and care more about winning than lighting up the stats a'la Satan. Vanek needs to step up, he has a world of talent, and he probably needs an off-season conditioning program so he can backcheck with his stick on the ice. I think Ruff handled him well the first year by showing him it was not enough to score 25 goals. When the kid can score 35 and backcheck he'll have a great career. yeah and i would guess with increased ice time 35 could come this season ... backchecking, the light may not come on so fast, it took Max a long time ... And I agree totally about the chemistry thing ... that's basically what I was saying, if you fill the holes with the right guys who hate to lose, they will keep winning and everyone will say they still have chemistry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit151 Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Briere's durability will always be a question considering his size. Their are too many GM's who don't have to answer to anyone for blowing 5 million. (you were being serious, right) I was being serious. I think there are still 5 or 6 teams who risk Briere for the reason you said...they have the budgets and answer to no one. Unfortunately for those teams, they usually still blow their budget (salary cap) as soon as FA hits. I suspect for all the interest there may have been in Briere before his arbitration ruling, that interest has dropped off dramatically. Like I said, 5 million for a guy who may have just had the best year he's ever going to have, may scare away everyone who isn't a Philly, NYR, Dallas, Detroit, Toronto or Colorado. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlecap Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 I'm a bit disillusioned with Briere. When we picked him up from Phoenix, his career was on the downslide. He has a couple of good years hear and professes he's a team player and he wants to do everything in his power to keep the team together. Then he goes about wrecking our salary structure for his own greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.