Hypothetical: make a move for 1st overall, 2015

LottoPlease

Registered User
Dec 30, 2013
244
0
Pegulaville
Honestly, this is where I'm at. We have 3 first round picks in the deepest draft (by all accounts) in years, so use them. What we would have to pay to get the #1 pick (if we don't lottery into it) just isn't worth it.

Of course, this is all hypothetical, because I can't see any team trading the #1 overall pick next year.

Yep, taking a look at 2003's draft class, Anaheim picked two of the best players in the game at picks 19 and 28. If that St. Louis pick turns into someone with two-thirds of Corey Perry's talent I'll be happy.
 

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,697
7,928
In the Panderverse
Honestly, this is where I'm at. We have 3 first round picks in the deepest draft (by all accounts) in years, so use them. What we would have to pay to get the #1 pick (if we don't lottery into it) just isn't worth it.

Of course, this is all hypothetical, because I can't see any team trading the #1 overall pick next year.

The vast majority of us agree with both your points.

But, in the spirit of honoring jbuds original post premise, playing along (hey, it's the offseason), some prognosticate what it might take to trade up, assuming it was logical to trade up (ignoring history - e.g., Lindros case, etc.), and assuming there was indeed a willing seller (again ignoring recent and older history).

And so the proposals are made, and the comments / rebuttals state, "I'd rather keep the picks / assets than get McDavid at all costs." and/or "No one will trade the pick anyway."

As so we lather, rinse, repeat.

<sigh> Season can't come soon enough... 2015 draft can't come soon enough...
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
56,427
35,804
Rochester, NY
The vast majority of us agree with both your points.

But, in the spirit of honoring jbuds original post premise, playing along (hey, it's the offseason), some prognosticate what it might take to trade up, assuming it was logical to trade up (ignoring history - e.g., Lindros case, etc.), and assuming there was indeed a willing seller (again ignoring recent and older history).

And so the proposals are made, and the comments / rebuttals state, "I'd rather keep the picks / assets than get McDavid at all costs." and/or "No one will trade the pick anyway."

As so we lather, rinse, repeat.

<sigh> Season can't come soon enough... 2015 draft can't come soon enough...

The OP left it open to saying "Keep the picks and prospects", too.

How far do you go, if you go... Or do you sit right and utilize the existing stable to have a deeper team with Reinhart and 4th overall at the head of the table?
 

haseoke39

Registered User
Mar 29, 2011
13,938
2,491
If you offered Ristolainen, Reinhart, and our three firsts, I think you'd get McDavid. You might have to add, say, Myers or Zadorov.

Two top four defensemen, a lesser franchise forward, a couple potential top line forwards and a later first in a deep draft would probably be enough that they couldn't refuse.

You'd probably end up losing to the team you traded with, though, down the line.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
56,427
35,804
Rochester, NY
If you offered Ristolainen, Reinhart, and our three firsts, I think you'd get McDavid. You might have to add, say, Myers or Zadorov.

Two top four defensemen, a lesser franchise forward, a couple potential top line forwards and a later first in a deep draft would probably be enough that they couldn't refuse.

You'd probably end up losing to the team you traded with, though, down the line.

Reinhart, Ristolainen, Kylington, Zacha, and a guy like Forsberg for McDavid.

That could be a top line and a top D pair all for a #1 center....
 

BowieSabresFan

Registered User
Nov 18, 2010
4,353
1,675
The vast majority of us agree with both your points.

But, in the spirit of honoring jbuds original post premise, playing along (hey, it's the offseason), some prognosticate what it might take to trade up, assuming it was logical to trade up (ignoring history - e.g., Lindros case, etc.), and assuming there was indeed a willing seller (again ignoring recent and older history).

And so the proposals are made, and the comments / rebuttals state, "I'd rather keep the picks / assets than get McDavid at all costs." and/or "No one will trade the pick anyway."

As so we lather, rinse, repeat.

<sigh> Season can't come soon enough... 2015 draft can't come soon enough...

Fair enough:)

I would, if at all possible, not give up Reinhart. The whole point in getting that high pick last year was for a center. If everything goes according to plan, he is probably slotted into our second center slot. So, taking that into account..

I could offer the Sabres' pick next year (probably a requirement), one of the other two first rounders (I'd love to keep one first rounder), a choice of one of the top defensive prospects, and one other item of quality. It would all depend on what the holder of the #1 would want.
 

haseoke39

Registered User
Mar 29, 2011
13,938
2,491
Reinhart, Ristolainen, Kylington, Zacha, and a guy like Forsberg for McDavid.

That could be a top line and a top D pair all for a #1 center....

Yep. That's why you'd probably get him at that point. That's what it means when folks say it'd take an overpayment. I think you might have to add Myers or Zadorov, though.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
56,427
35,804
Rochester, NY
Yep. That's why you'd probably get him at that point. That's what it means when folks say it'd take an overpayment.

And that's why a deal is highly unlikely to happen.

I don't see any GM, regardless of how deep his prospect pool is on paper, giving up that much for one guy.

Can we get back to dreaming about the Sabres finishing DFL again and the Isles pick winning the lottery?

:laugh:
 

BowieSabresFan

Registered User
Nov 18, 2010
4,353
1,675
And that's why a deal is highly unlikely to happen.

I don't see any GM, regardless of how deep his prospect pool is on paper, giving up that much for one guy.

Can we get back to dreaming about the Sabres finishing DFL again and the Isles pick winning the lottery?

:laugh:

You forgot about the Blues getting hit with injuries and missing the playoffs.
 

LottoPlease

Registered User
Dec 30, 2013
244
0
Pegulaville
Yep, taking a look at 2003's draft class, Anaheim picked two of the best players in the game at picks 19 and 28. If that St. Louis pick turns into someone with two-thirds of Corey Perry's talent I'll be happy.
What are the odds of that happening? Almost zero.

Yep, taking a look at 2003's draft class, Tim Murray picked two of the best players in the game at picks 19 and 28. If that St. Louis pick turns into someone with two-thirds of Corey Perry's talent I'll be happy.

fixed.

i think those odds just went up:naughty:
 

haseoke39

Registered User
Mar 29, 2011
13,938
2,491
<--- Just get used to this guy.

4/9 scouts saying they'd pick Eichel first in the last poll of the two gives me zero incentive to trade out of him.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad