Speculation: Roster Speculation 2014-2015, Part III

[joshjull]

continued from here http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1690801&page=40

Click to read more...

 

[1972]

I have to say I am pretty happy to see Matt Moulson back in the mix. I like the way he plays, just shows up and does his job and is a no maintenance player. Most importantly he wants to be here, very pleased to have him back and think he will be a good veteran presence for our young centers. Have to think he instantly becomes an assistant captain. In a short period of time I felt he embraced being a Sabre more then longtime players, something that goes a long way in team building.


It feels like for the first time in a long time we are actually building a "TEAM" and not just a make up of individuals. Guys who actually want to play for each other, want to compete and win. I still think we are going to have a bad year and pick 1/2/3/4 but I think it's going to have a different feel to it. It's not about having the best individual talents, it's about having guys who can maximize the talents of those around them. It seems like we have brought in alot of those guys lately.



Another thing, Tyler Ennis really grew on me this past year after being someone I was probably ready to see move on. I thought he really embraced a leadership role and really started to play well once Nolan came aboard. Hopefully he can continue to build on that or at the very least not take a step back, he can be an important player down the road here.

It's also kinda interesting how so many players want to play for Ted Nolan and love playing for Ted Nolan. Guys like Myers, Ennis, Moulson, Gorges and others always mention how they want to play for Ted Nolan. Yet so many want him gone the minute we get good because X's and O's, as long as he has the right assistants in place it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[joshjull]

Nobody should think he's shopping them but if he's talking to a team like Ottawa then Hodgson makes the most sense for what they would want. If we're under the assumption that any trade is also a way to open up a spot for Ott

But a few do and thats what I was responding to.


As for the rest, thats quite a chain of assumptions to make an argument

#1) That Murray is talking to Ottawa
#2) If he is talking to Ottawa then Hodgson makes the most sense in a trade
#3) That trading Hodgson would be to free up space for Ott
#4) That Ott would be signing for at least 4 years


Not going to comment on all of them. But the idea that Murray thinking of moving Hodgson to free up a spot for Ott makes little to no sense.

If we're under the assumption that any trade is also a way to open up a spot for Ott then I'm not sure trading Stafford or Stewart really accomplish that since they're gone anyways. I can't see Ott signing for less than 4 years and that starts to create a log jam of too many guys signed long term on a bad team which creates unappealing situations (Calgary). If you look at the landscape of our contracts it's also specifically against what Murray is trying to do. Hodgson, Moulson, Ennis (when signed), and presumably Ott would all be locked up for over 4 years.

This team currently has 7 vet forwards; Moulson, Gionta, Stewart, Stafford, Mitchell, McCormick and I think you could throw Kaleta in there. Only 3 are signed beyond next season (Mouslon, Gionta and McCormick). Trading out a vet with 1 year left on a deal and replacing them with Ott gives them 4 vets signed past this season. I fail to see how that would cause a log jam going forward.

You also have to look at how many GMs have come out and said they want a young player on a long term deal. Bryan Murray said just last week they're working out a trade for such a player.

That's just my belief. Tim Murray isn't shopping Hodgson but he would be the 2nd most appealing player on the team after Myers that Murray would move for an overpayment.

Those GMs can want those players all they want. Murray knows this and has already commented on it. Barring an overpayment he isn't moving those guys. We're also not the only teams with players in that category. Murray has called around himself.

 

[Jacob582]

I have to say I am pretty happy to see Matt Moulson back in the mix. I like the way he plays, just shows up and does his job and is a no maintenance player. Most importantly he wants to be here, very pleased to have him back .

I like the fact that players want to be here, especially after last season.

I like the fact that TM was able to get a personal look at DR acquired players (Moulson, McCormick, Ott and the rest of the UFA's) and decide that some of them are a good fit for the TEAM.

 

[Moskau]

Another thing, Tyler Ennis really grew on me this past year after being someone I was probably ready to see move on. I thought he really embraced a leadership role and really started to play well once Nolan came aboard. Hopefully he can continue to build on that or at the very least not take a step back, he can be an important player down the road here.

I just want him to play that way for more than half a season. He's shown up big in the 2nd half of the season a few times already. Actually his 2nd half emergence in 2012 is one of the reasons we didn't draft top 3 that season. He was the main cog on the league's hottest lines to close out that year. If he finds consistency he will be a 60 pt player rather easily. Hodgson has the opposite problem where he starts off great and ends the season poorly.

 

[TehDoak]

Re: Ott and Buffalo:

I don't think it makes sense for Buffalo to move a long term contract like Hodgson to sign an older player, less offensively skilled player to a long term contract

I move Hodgson to

A) Sign a more older, transition center to a short term contract(like Legwand, but he's now off the market)
B) As part of a package to get a a building block for the future (such as Evander Kane)

I'm not interested in more picks, more prospects at this point. I only move Hodgson if it brings back something that enables growth down the line. Adding more smaller assets doesn't do that.

 

[NEcoli]

I want no part of Ott unless it's on a one year deal. The Sabres already have plenty of mediocre veterans. I'd rather that spot go to one of the younger forwards.

 

[Jacob582]

I think that TM wanted to upgrade leadership. And if he could (Gionta, Gorges), then he didn't need to bring Ott back.

 

[Bps21*]

Also here's an article in today's Detroit Free Press about how the Red Wings should think about trading for Myers:

http://www.freep.com/article/20140706/SPORTS05/307060063/tyler-myers-sabres-detroit-red-wings

 

[SundherDome]

Helen St.James is right on with that article. I just don't think I trade him. If they offer something like Nyquist and Mantha then I have to pull the trigger but if it's Jurco and a 2015 first likely to be in the late teens early 20's I'd pass.

 

[TehDoak]

From the Free Press/Myers Article linked earlier

The downside of having to trade instead of signing a free agent is the internal cost. Myers is Buffalo’s top defenseman and the asking price is going to start with one of Gustav Nyquist, Tomas Tatar or Tomas Jurco. Buffalo might well ask for Anthony Mantha, but the Wings aren’t relinquishing him. One player alone wouldn’t do it, though — there would likely be a high draft pick involved, too, maybe even a second player, someone in his mid-20s.

Again, this really seems like pure speculation on the writer's, simply stating that the red wings need a RH'd shot D-man, Buffalo has a RH'd shot d-man! No real notes if any actual discussion has taken place recently, etc.

IMHO, seems like some slow off season summer filler for a hockey writer, but interesting none the less. I don't see Murray trading Myers in the division, it has a high potential to come back and bite Buffalo right in the bum.

 

[Blitz]

But a few do and thats what I was responding to.


As for the rest, thats quite a chain of assumptions to make an argument

#1) That Murray is talking to Ottawa
#2) If he is talking to Ottawa then Hodgson makes the most sense in a trade
#3) That trading Hodgson would be to free up space for Ott
#4) That Ott would be signing for at least 4 years


Not going to comment on all of them. But the idea that Murray thinking of moving Hodgson to free up a spot for Ott makes little to no sense.

IMO the Ott window is closed barring a deal involving Stewart (to MTL, OTT, EDM???) for futures. The only way I am even considering shopping Hodgson to Ottawa is in a package w/ Zibanejad (or Lazar ) coming back this way.

 

[ZeroPT*]

so Nyquist+1st+Kindl?

 

[Jacob582]

Helene St. James will be on WGR at 7 AM.

 

[Beerz]

Helene St. James will be on WGR at 7 AM.

Of course she will... undoubtedly White will be pushing Myers and a 2nd for Frazen or some ****.

 

[TehDoak]

so Nyquist+1st+Kindl?

If Murray got Nyquist, a 1st, and Kindl IMHO that would be an overpayment.

My thought was Tatar, Smith, and a 1st would be enough. I would MUCH rather have smith than kindl. But, getting Nyquist++ would be near robbery. All that being said, the Sabres would have to have a 2nd deal in their pocket to even out of the forwards if that deal was done and Reinhart stayed up.

 

[Zip15]

so Nyquist+1st+Kindl?

You could stop after Nyquist and I'd say yes.

 

[ZeroPT*]

You could stop after Nyquist and I'd say yes.

I wouldn't.

 

[ZeroPT*]

If Murray got Nyquist, a 1st, and Kindl IMHO that would be an overpayment.

My thought was Tatar, Smith, and a 1st would be enough. I would MUCH rather have smith than kindl. But, getting Nyquist++ would be near robbery. All that being said, the Sabres would have to have a 2nd deal in their pocket to even out of the forwards if that deal was done and Reinhart stayed up.

I like Tatar but I don't see him as a potential top line forward. Smith is dumb, much rather have Kindl.

 

[Jame]

You could stop after Nyquist and I'd say yes.

As usual, with all Myers deals I am reluctant to make a deal, but I agree... From a value perspective Nyquist should be considered more than fair value.

 

[Zip15]

I wouldn't.

And I'm sure Detroit would happily keep their young 1st line player who averaged 2.90 pts/60 mins at ES (!!!) last year.

Gustav Nyquist is better at hockey than Tyler Myers. By a lot.

 

[Jame]

I wouldn't.

That's a very homer/trade board perspective

 

[gallagt01]

I'm fairly certain you'd have to add something relatively significant to Myers to get Nyquist.

 

[ZeroPT*]

That's a very homer/trade board perspective

Because I wouldn't make a trade?

Nyquist is real nice, but I don't want to make that trade because
A)it's to a divisional rival
and
B)I think Myers at full potential is more valuable than Nyquist at full potential.

I'd rather have a guy like Hjalmarsson than a guy like Voracek.

 

[ZeroPT*]

And I'm sure Detroit would happily keep their young 1st line player who averaged 2.90 pts/60 mins at ES (!!!) last year.

Gustav Nyquist is better at hockey than Tyler Myers. By a lot.

sample size. Plus I'm pretty sure he was protected and got easy match ups.