Around the NHL: 2018-19, Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sabresfansince1980

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
10,829
5,184
from Wheatfield, NY
Do all the “patience” posters see that you can make trades for good players without selling first round picks??

It’s like amnesia in this place every year.

I see a hockey trade where two teams had what the other wanted, and neither is actually that good. Change of scenery deal where one team wanted wing scoring ( a 40 pt winger being paid like he would be a 50-60 pt guy), and the other needed a depth C that is still young with upside having a crap season. Buffalo couldn't make that trade for Nino, because they don't have a C like Rask that is/was expendable (with any value). Why does this trade have to be some sort of referendum on Sabres fans anyway?
 
Last edited:

sabremike

Friend To All Giraffes
Aug 30, 2010
22,532
33,764
Brewster, NY
I see a hockey trade where two teams had what the other wanted, and neither is actually that good. Change of scenery deal where one team wanted wing scoring ( a 40 pt winger being paid like he would be a 50-60 pt guy), and the other needed a depth C that is still young with upside having a crap season. Buffalo couldn't make that trade for Nino, because they don't have a C like Rask that is/was expendable. Why does this trade have to be some sort of referendum on Sabres fans anyway?
You are completely underselling just how hard Rask totally sucks and is complete toilet water. Nino for Cluttersuck is among the worst trades in Islanders history, this one may actually be worse.
 

Sabresfansince1980

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
10,829
5,184
from Wheatfield, NY
You are completely underselling just how hard Rask totally sucks and is complete toilet water. Nino for Cluttersuck is among the worst trades in Islanders history, this one may actually be worse.

No, I said he's having a crap season. Up until this year though, he's been a 40 pt C. Being only 25 yrs old, GMs will still think he has upside. True or not, the bigger point was that Buffalo doesn't have a C with any upside that they can afford to trade, so Nino would never be available in a similar trade to Buffalo. I don't like Nino that much, but for those who do like him and think "why didn't Botts get him"...Buffalo didn't have a C that they could trade that Minny would want.

Edit - I do like the toilet water comparison. It usually looks clean until you get closer and smell it.
Double edit - Nino has the physical ability and talent to be a 65 pt game shifting FW, and he's never reached that level...that's why I don't like him. I don't think he brings 100%.
 
Last edited:

Moskau

Registered User
Jun 30, 2004
19,978
4,743
WNY
You are completely underselling just how hard Rask totally sucks and is complete toilet water. Nino for Cluttersuck is among the worst trades in Islanders history, this one may actually be worse.

Niederreiter has been just as bad lately. Rask does have a couple 20/20 seasons. I think Carolina got the better player but I don't think this is an incredibly lopsided trade because I really am not sure I would want either player at the moment because both of them seem to give 50% effort. Buffalo didn't have any comparable players to Rask that they could have traded for Nino. Berglund 2 seasons ago would have been the closest. People can dream all they want that Sobotka and something would have gotten it done but that wasn't happening.

I think Niederreiter playing with some guys who will do all the heavy lifting could make him a 60 point player. But you're just as likely to get 40 points. The same way Rask has shown he can be a complete passenger and put up 50 points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eichel9

sabrebuild

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
10,517
2,770
Pittsburgh
I see a hockey trade where two teams had what the other wanted, and neither is actually that good. Change of scenery deal where one team wanted wing scoring ( a 40 pt winger being paid like he would be a 50-60 pt guy), and the other needed a depth C that is still young with upside having a crap season. Buffalo couldn't make that trade for Nino, because they don't have a C like Rask that is/was expendable (with any value). Why does this trade have to be some sort of referendum on Sabres fans anyway?


Rask is pretty substandard. His numbers have declined for a couple years now and this year has been an utter tire fire. He’s on pace for 18 points this year. Last year he was on pace for 35 points. He gets paid 4 million a year to be okay defensively and crap at offense.

Nino has scored or been on pace for 20 plus goals for the last 4 years and is like a goal or two off that pace this year. He gets an extra million a year.

It’d be like us trading Berglund with a small plus, cuz of age, for Nino.

It’s a great deal for Carolina. And that’s the point. A twenty goal+ scorer was picked up without trading a first round pick. Which is what many keep saying is impossible without trading the cupboard, firsts or top prospects. It’s not complicated. If the description doesn’t fit you, then it shouldn’t bother you.

Nobody said it was a trade Buffalo was foolish to have not made it. Simple statement that you don’t need to give up big picks for improvements.

Seems like a pretty tame point, for you to feel the need to defend some portions of Sabres fans...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baccus

sabrebuild

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
10,517
2,770
Pittsburgh
But what pieces do we actually have to leverage that would bring in good players? The pieces just aren't there.
When has a "patience poster" ever been against a deal that wasn't mortgaging the teams future for improved playoff odds this season?

Let’s try again. Several posters, have repeatedly said they don’t want to trade for pieces this year because it will cost a first rounder.

So clearly, many people think of themselves as patient posters, and didn’t get the context. My bad.

We have a variety of pieces to move around that are not locks to be solid future pieces. This “type” of move is totally possible.

Edit: It’s just another variation of how people will say you can’t trade for an impact player without giving up a ton, and then the Skinner trade happens.
 

UnleashRasmus

Rasmus has gone Super Saiyan VI!
Apr 15, 2012
6,473
1,932
Nashville Tennessee
I like Rask. I think he could hit his stride in Minny.

Yeah my through process is, that they had really hoped Eriksson Ek would take a step forward and when he didn't they had to make a change at the center position. Neiderreiter is definitely a boon for Carolina to receive back for sure.
 

SnuggaRUDE

Registered User
Apr 5, 2013
8,946
6,478
Rask is pretty substandard. His numbers have declined for a couple years now and this year has been an utter tire fire. He’s on pace for 18 points this year. Last year he was on pace for 35 points. He gets paid 4 million a year to be okay defensively and crap at offense.

Nino has scored or been on pace for 20 plus goals for the last 4 years and is like a goal or two off that pace this year. He gets an extra million a year.

It’d be like us trading Berglund with a small plus, cuz of age, for Nino.

It’s a great deal for Carolina. And that’s the point. A twenty goal+ scorer was picked up without trading a first round pick. Which is what many keep saying is impossible without trading the cupboard, firsts or top prospects. It’s not complicated. If the description doesn’t fit you, then it shouldn’t bother you.

Nobody said it was a trade Buffalo was foolish to have not made it. Simple statement that you don’t need to give up big picks for improvements.

Seems like a pretty tame point, for you to feel the need to defend some portions of Sabres fans...

Who would have Minnesota bit on? Larsson? He's never performed like Rask has in the past. This is Minn shipping out someone slightly more expensive for someone who they think they can to turn around. Maybe Girg would have been the offer?
 

Sabresfansince1980

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
10,829
5,184
from Wheatfield, NY
Rask is pretty substandard. His numbers have declined for a couple years now and this year has been an utter tire fire. He’s on pace for 18 points this year. Last year he was on pace for 35 points. He gets paid 4 million a year to be okay defensively and crap at offense.

Nino has scored or been on pace for 20 plus goals for the last 4 years and is like a goal or two off that pace this year. He gets an extra million a year.

It’d be like us trading Berglund with a small plus, cuz of age, for Nino.

It’s a great deal for Carolina. And that’s the point. A twenty goal+ scorer was picked up without trading a first round pick. Which is what many keep saying is impossible without trading the cupboard, firsts or top prospects. It’s not complicated. If the description doesn’t fit you, then it shouldn’t bother you.

Nobody said it was a trade Buffalo was foolish to have not made it. Simple statement that you don’t need to give up big picks for improvements.

Seems like a pretty tame point, for you to feel the need to defend some portions of Sabres fans...

It's not like trading Berglund and a small plus at all. Berglund wasn't even playing C anymore, let alone being too old and slow compared to Rask.

Another point that isn't complicated - Nino isn't that great a player to justify another cap sink of 5.25 mil for another 3.5 seasons. He's overpaid and on a downslide going into his late 20s. Buffalo needs less of that player, not more. I reject the idea that Nino is even the type of player Buffalo should acquire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sabreality

itwasaforwardpass

I'll be the hyena
Mar 4, 2017
5,317
5,121
Rask has so little value. How did we not beat that

Every teams fans must be thinking that but I don't think it's necessarily about what we could've offered.

Maybe Fenton just has an irrational interest and belief in this specific young player, Rask, and traded a much better player for him to make a change and save money.

:dunno:

GMs fall in love with specific players and do stupid things.
 

SnuggaRUDE

Registered User
Apr 5, 2013
8,946
6,478
It's not like trading Berglund and a small plus at all. Berglund wasn't even playing C anymore, let alone being too old and slow compared to Rask.

Another point that isn't complicated - Nino isn't that great a player to justify another cap sink of 5.25 mil for another 3.5 seasons. He's overpaid and on a downslide going into his late 20s. Buffalo needs less of that player, not more. I reject the idea that Nino is even the type of player Buffalo should acquire.

And perhaps most importantly, if someone is using a player Buffalo doesn't have on their roster as an example who Buffalo should trade.. i'm not sure they're doing it right...
 

SnuggaRUDE

Registered User
Apr 5, 2013
8,946
6,478
Every teams fans must be thinking that but I don't think it's necessarily about what we could've offered.

Maybe Fenton just has an irrational interest and belief in this specific young player, Rask, and traded a much better player for him to make a change and save money.

:dunno:

GMs fall in love with specific players and do stupid things.

I'm not sure Minn Faschinged for Rask.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
55,614
34,433
Rochester, NY
Let’s try again. Several posters, have repeatedly said they don’t want to trade for pieces this year because it will cost a first rounder.

So clearly, many people think of themselves as patient posters, and didn’t get the context. My bad.

We have a variety of pieces to move around that are not locks to be solid future pieces. This “type” of move is totally possible.

Edit: It’s just another variation of how people will say you can’t trade for an impact player without giving up a ton, and then the Skinner trade happens.

I don't get your point.

I don't think anyone would be against giving up non-premium assets for players that will help this season and beyond.

The "patient" people are against giving up first round picks for rentals.

Those are two completely different sets of moves.

And I don't think there are a lot of people that are down with Botterill doing absolutely nothing the remainder of the season.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
55,614
34,433
Rochester, NY
Every teams fans must be thinking that but I don't think it's necessarily about what we could've offered.

Maybe Fenton just has an irrational interest and belief in this specific young player, Rask, and traded a much better player for him to make a change and save money.

:dunno:

GMs fall in love with specific players and do stupid things.

Cheaper younger center is likely what Fenton wanted for Nino and that's what he got.

NN has a stat line that is very Pominville-esque this season. And so is his cap hit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rowley Birkin

sabrebuild

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
10,517
2,770
Pittsburgh
Who would have Minnesota bit on? Larsson? He's never performed like Rask has in the past. This is Minn shipping out someone slightly more expensive for someone who they think they can to turn around. Maybe Girg would have been the offer?
It's not like trading Berglund and a small plus at all. Berglund wasn't even playing C anymore, let alone being too old and slow compared to Rask.

Another point that isn't complicated - Nino isn't that great a player to justify another cap sink of 5.25 mil for another 3.5 seasons. He's overpaid and on a downslide going into his late 20s. Buffalo needs less of that player, not more. I reject the idea that Nino is even the type of player Buffalo should acquire.

This would be less tiresome for both of you, if you read my post, and saw that at no point did I say that the Sabres should have or could have made this specific trade. It was a simple evaluation of trades made in this league and the cost of them generally.

1980, Berglund was almost as productive this year as Rask, playing both wing and center, a position many here said he was being brought to play, while apparently being distraught enough in his role to walk away from millions. Last year, Berglund out produced Rask. The point is Rask isn’t just having one tough year. He is on crap year 2. But I guess he isn’t slow to you, for whatever that is worth.
 

sabrebuild

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
10,517
2,770
Pittsburgh
I don't get your point.

I don't think anyone would be against giving up non-premium assets for players that will help this season and beyond.

The "patient" people are against giving up first round picks for rentals.

Those are two completely different sets of moves.

And I don't think there are a lot of people that are down with Botterill doing absolutely nothing the remainder of the season.

I’ll try again.

Many posters in the roster speculation thread have said we can’t make any moves because a first rounder or whatever future package will be too costly.

My post was simply highlighting the fact that trades have and are happening that don’t cost huge futures.

If you are patient, and think we should make some long term moves or small deals to improve the club, welcome, we agree. But that comment wasn’t aimed at you.

I’m referring to the posters who think every draft pick is precious gold that needs to be held on to for the draft lottery of hope.

Sidenote, I’ll blame myself for this many people completely missing my point, but some need to actually read people’s posts before responding. It’s pretty ridiculous to have to go thru multiple responses that completely makeup their own arguments out of whole cloth.

Not you jim bob.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baccus

JThorne

Stop accepting failure
Jul 21, 2006
4,803
802
Downtown Buffalo
I’ll try again.

Many posters in the roster speculation thread have said we can’t make any moves because a first rounder or whatever future package will be too costly.

My post was simply highlighting the fact that trades have and are happening that don’t cost huge futures.

If you are patient, and think we should make some long term moves or small deals to improve the club, welcome, we agree. But that comment wasn’t aimed at you.

I’m referring to the posters who think every draft pick is precious gold that needs to be held on to for the draft lottery of hope.

Sidenote, I’ll blame myself for this many people completely missing my point, but some need to actually read people’s posts before responding. It’s pretty ridiculous to have to go thru multiple responses that completely makeup their own arguments out of whole cloth.

Not you jim bob.

You assume that Botterill didn't do anything. Or that he never does anything. Are you really that naive? Do you think he's just playing paddycake with Sabretooth? Get real. It's likely he a) didn't have an asset to give up for NN that Minnesota wanted or b) wouldn't part with said asset because it provides more team control than NN will, in his salary cap scheme in his (big) head.

Saying "BUT BUFFALO CAN MAKE THESE TRADES!" is just hogwash. Of course. Every team can. There were 29 other teams who DIDN'T make this trade for NN. You're incredibly naive if you think Botterill isn't doing anything. Some of us vocal people want him to be true to his word and not mortgage future assets for short term gain. That's all.
 

Sabresfansince1980

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
10,829
5,184
from Wheatfield, NY
This would be less tiresome for both of you, if you read my post, and saw that at no point did I say that the Sabres should have or could have made this specific trade. It was a simple evaluation of trades made in this league and the cost of them generally.

1980, Berglund was almost as productive this year as Rask, playing both wing and center, a position many here said he was being brought to play, while apparently being distraught enough in his role to walk away from millions. Last year, Berglund out produced Rask. The point is Rask isn’t just having one tough year. He is on crap year 2. But I guess he isn’t slow to you, for whatever that is worth.

I read it, and you attributed some line of thinking to posters that don't actually think the way you were arguing against. Then you followed it up with some vague smart remark. THEN you refer to the multiple responses as tiresome. Go figure...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->