Speculation: The Roster Building Thread: Titles May Not Reflect Actual Discussion

[ZZamboni]

I'm with you guys on this one- I wouldn't be surprised if they were trying to move him this past deadline/this off season. Great offensive instincts/skill but just brings nothing defensively and is soft as hell. Not a winning combo.

Oh... NHLers in their early 20's are done developing. I get it now. CoHo will never improve defensively. Neither will Ennis. Oh let's not forget Foligno, he won't improve either. Developing stops as soon as they are putting on the big club jersey full time. Hell, Myers is even a lost cause that will keep getting worse since he's fully developed into what he will ever be. I get it now.

Yea, trade those deficient scrubs. Let some other club suffer with these poor players.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Or a playoff team for that matter.

Number of centers behind Hodgson at the start of the season to play the whole year as an NHL center: 0. He was very little of the reason the Sabres weren't a playoff team.

 

[AmerksPuck]

Oh... NHLers in their early 20's are done developing. I get it now. CoHo will never improve defensively. Neither will Ennis. Oh let's not forget Foligno, he won't improve either. Developing stops as soon as they are putting on the big club jersey full time. Hell, Myers is even a lost cause that will keep getting worse since he's fully developed into what he will ever be. I get it now.

Yea, trade those deficient scrubs. Let some other club suffer with these poor players.

I'm not sure I get your point. They finally realized Ennis should be a winger and moved him back because he was awful defensively and on face offs. I would be shocked if he isn't playing wing next year.

If you think Hodgson is a #1 center or could develop into one, then yes we completely disagree. If he is on a line with Vanek, his #1 priority should be defense, which it just wasn't this year. They finally woke up at the end of the year and took him off the PK. He doesn't block shots, play the body,win face offs, etc. Could he improve, yes but I don't think into what this team needs as a #1 center.

 

[boots electric]

Forgive me if this has been asked/answered before, but if the Sabres were looking to trade Vanek or Miller, when could such a move make place? Are there rules in place prohibiting non-playoff teams from trading players?

 

[stokes84]

Number of centers behind Hodgson at the start of the season to play the whole year as an NHL center: 0. He was very little of the reason the Sabres weren't a playoff team.

Exactly, him being a no. 1 center was a very big reason this team wasn't a playoff team. If there was someone ahead of him on the depth chart, they would've been far better off.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

I'm not sure I get your point. They finally realized Ennis should be a winger and moved him back because he was awful defensively and on face offs. I would be shocked if he isn't playing wing next year.

If you think Hodgson is a #1 center or could develop into one, then yes we completely disagree. If he is on a line with Vanek, his #1 priority should be defense, which it just wasn't this year. They finally woke up at the end of the year and took him off the PK. He doesn't block shots, play the body,win face offs, etc. Could he improve, yes but I don't think into what this team needs as a #1 center.

This was Hodgson's first season ever as a top six center, much less a first line player. While his defense wasn't there this season, he also had to take several steps forward offensively to fill that role, which he did successfully. Given what everyone outside of the Vancouver front office has said about his work ethic and IQ, it's very likely he comes into next season as a much improved player in his own zone.

Also, this team's issues last season had to do with its depth at forward, not its top end.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Exactly, him being a no. 1 center was a very big reason this team wasn't a playoff team. If there was someone ahead of him on the depth chart, they would've been far better off.

Or if they had passable depth forwards behind him. Buffalo started the year with three to four not NHL players in the lineup at any given time (Grigorenko, Ellis, McCormick, Gerbe) with another who should have been a fourth line specialist (Hecht) playing meaningful minutes.

I have absolutely no problem spotting Cody Hodgson on the first line and letting him grow into that role. I'm appalled that given Pegula Bucks, Regier couldn't plug meaningful role players and veterans behind him. The bottom six was an abortion for the first half of the season, and its inability to control possession or play meaningful minutes was the biggest reason this team was so bad.

 

[Paxon]

Exactly, him being a no. 1 center was a very big reason this team wasn't a playoff team. If there was someone ahead of him on the depth chart, they would've been far better off.

So a team would be better off if they magically added a center who's better than all their existing centers, without losing their previously best center. Got it.

 

[Chainshot]

Forgive me if this has been asked/answered before, but if the Sabres were looking to trade Vanek or Miller, when could such a move make place? Are there rules in place prohibiting non-playoff teams from trading players?

They could make the deal with a non-playoff team if they so choose. Typically, teams don't want to steal any playoff thunder, so they wait for announcements until after everything is wrapped up in those rare instances that post-season/pre-draft deals take place.

 

[Chainshot]

Exactly, him being a no. 1 center was a very big reason this team wasn't a playoff team. If there was someone ahead of him on the depth chart, they would've been far better off.

Sounds like the Roy years.

 

[Sean McG]

Vanek and #8
for
#4 and Ryan Ellis

?

A trade involving Vanek/4th overall (with more pieces... not suggesting straight up) really makes a lot of sense if Vanek would agree to a contract extension with them immediately. They desperately need some kind of offense, and if they want to keep Shea Weber happy, Poile has to do everything he can to get back in the playoffs next season. I'd probably do this deal.

This was Hodgson's first season ever as a top six center, much less a first line player. While his defense wasn't there this season, he also had to take several steps forward offensively to fill that role, which he did successfully. Given what everyone outside of the Vancouver front office has said about his work ethic and IQ, it's very likely he comes into next season as a much improved player in his own zone.

Also, this team's issues last season had to do with its depth at forward, not its top end.

Exactly. Cody turned 23 in February, and hasn't played a full seasons worth of games for the Sabres (20 games his first year, 48 this year). He still doesn't even have a full training camp under his belt with the team... give the guy a break. The last time a Sabre was 2nd in the team in scoring in their age 22/23 season was Vanek in 06/07.

I'm sure he and the coaching staff recognize that he needs to improve greatly in his own end. He's a guy that is lauded for being a hard worker, and he'll likely do everything he can to get better there. If he doesn't improve over the next couple of years, then it's time to be worried. Otherwise, outside of his poor finish to the year, Hodgson was one of the few guys on this team that we shouldn't be complaining about.

 

[Jame]

I wouldn't consider this unless I knew for sure that Vanek wouldn't re-sign with us. Maybe it's just that I don't think that highly of Ellis, but I'd have to think really highly of someone to give up my franchise goal scorer to move 4 spots in the draft. Even if I knew Vanek wouldn't re-sign, I'd be more inclined to do 16+Vanek for the 4th pick + Ellis. I'm not opposed to making a serious offer (like both firsts and a couple of seconds or Ennis, etc.) to move up in this draft, but I think this would be way too much.

If Vanek is willing to stay for another contract, we'd be really stupid to give up this kind of value to move 4 spots in the draft. For Vanek, I'd be looking for a top ten pick outright + something, or a later 1st rounder + a top prospect. Neither scenario would include us giving up #8 too. That's crazy, IMO.

It's not really about the # of spots... it's about the quality of player available at those spots...

 

[stokes84]

So a team would be better off if they magically added a center who's better than all their existing centers, without losing their previously best center. Got it.

Yes. Or just better than their current no. 1, losing him or not. He's suited to be a 2nd liner, masquerading as a no.1.

 

[Paxon]

Yes. Or just better than their current no. 1, losing him or not. He's suited to be a 2nd liner, masquerading as a no.1.

Whether he's a 1st or 2nd liner or not doesn't really matter, that's an overblown thing. The real problem is that he needs to not suck horribly defensively; at the very least if he does continue to suck defensively, the rest of the team's centers need to be very good two-way guys.

 

[Ron C.]

Forgive me if this has been asked/answered before, but if the Sabres were looking to trade Vanek or Miller, when could such a move make place? Are there rules in place prohibiting non-playoff teams from trading players?

They can trade with any team. Since Vanek and Miller would be ineligible to play until next season, playoff teams would be unlikely to upset or deal from their roster while still alive in the playoffs.

 

[Jacob582]

Whether he's a 1st or 2nd liner or not doesn't really matter, that's an overblown thing. The real problem is that he needs to not suck horribly defensively; at the very least if he does continue to suck defensively, the rest of the team's centers need to be very good two-way guys.

He wasn't even good on the PP.

Just saying maybe we would overlook his suck if he was a PP ace.

 

[Chainshot]

Gordon, Bickell... rinse, repeat.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

It's not really about the # of spots... it's about the quality of player available at those spots...

If we are truly in a rebuild phase, we shouldn't f*&k around with trying to get deals - call me crazy but I'd even support Vanek + #8 for #4 if that was the only way to draft a franchise center this year.

Would everyone freak out if Darcy did that? I say go for it, if that's the only way.

 

[Jame]

If we are truly in a rebuild phase, we shouldn't f*&k around with trying to get deals - call me crazy but I'd even support Vanek + #8 for #4 if that was the only way to draft a franchise center this year.

Would everyone freak out if Darcy did that? I say go for it, if that's the only way.

I'm on board with Vanek and #8 for #4

(I previously proposed Vanek and #8 for #4 and Ryan Ellis)

Getting Barkov would be a franchise changing move... Trading 1 year of Vanek to move up from "very good prospect" to "franchise defining prospect" is a steal in our favor.... regardless of whether the VTVTs comprehend the limited value 1 year of Vanek presents

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

If we are truly in a rebuild phase, we shouldn't f*&k around with trying to get deals - call me crazy but I'd even support Vanek + #8 for #4 if that was the only way to draft a franchise center this year.

Would everyone freak out if Darcy did that? I say go for it, if that's the only way.

This assumes that Barkov is that guy and I'm not ready to act like I know for sure how these players will turn out. If you're saying we should trade 8 and vanek for Getzlaf, i'm all for it. If barkov turns out to be just a good two way center and so does hodgson, larsson, and girgensons (we also have Grigorenko in the incubator) then you've given up way more than we're getting, to the point that it may require another rebuild.

We have a known elite goal scoring winger and a chance at a really good player at 8. If we can swing a reasonable trade to move up or even give up a bunch of other unknown assets like 1sts, seconds, prospects, great. But why sell all your assets at .50 on the dollar just to take on more risk?

 

[joshjull]

This assumes that Barkov is that guy and I'm not ready to act like I know for sure how these players will turn out. If you're saying we should trade 8 and vanek for Getzlaf, i'm all for it. If barkov turns out to be just a good two way center and so does hodgson, larsson, and girgensons (we also have Grigorenko in the incubator) then you've given up way more than we're getting, to the point that it may require another rebuild.

We have a known elite goal scoring winger and a chance at a really good player at 8. If we can swing a reasonable trade to move up or even give up a bunch of other unknown assets like 1sts, seconds, prospects, great. But why sell all your assets at .50 on the dollar just to take on more risk?

Vanek and #8 isn't getting you Geztlaf. Its getting you a player that might be that.

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

Vanek and #8 isn't getting you Geztlaf. Its getting you a player that might be that.

Well fine, I wasn't making a proposal I was making a point. #8 gets you a shot a player that might be a Getzlaf too. When was Getzlaf picked? 19.

 

[Jame]

This assumes that Barkov is that guy and I'm not ready to act like I know for sure how these players will turn out. If you're saying we should trade 8 and vanek for Getzlaf, i'm all for it. If barkov turns out to be just a good two way center and so does hodgson, larsson, and girgensons (we also have Grigorenko in the incubator) then you've given up way more than we're getting, to the point that it may require another rebuild.

We have a known elite goal scoring winger and a chance at a really good player at 8. If we can swing a reasonable trade to move up or even give up a bunch of other unknown assets like 1sts, seconds, prospects, great. But why sell all your assets at .50 on the dollar just to take on more risk?

Vanek is gone in 13 months. He's not re-signing here. He's never tested Free Agency in his career.

Vanek is GONE.... people need to get on with looking at things through that reality.

In 13 months, they will get 0.00 cents on the Dollar when Vanek walks, like Miro, Zhitnik, Briere, Drury, etc

Anyone want to point to a high end player re-signing in Buffalo when they had the chance to leave? Sure, there are financial / ownership excuses for those guys leaving, but the Sabres are rebuilding, and that'll be the excuse this time.

Trading Vanek to upgrade our draft slot is a smart move... Unless, you prefer just continuing to fill the cupboard with good prospects, instead of putting ourselves into a position to land a superstar

 

[EichHart]

Vanek is gone in 13 months. He's not re-signing here. He's never tested Free Agency in his career.

Vanek is GONE.... people need to get on with looking at things through that reality.

In 13 months, they will get 0.00 cents on the Dollar when Vanek walks, like Miro, Zhitnik, Briere, Drury, etc

Anyone want to point to a high end player re-signing in Buffalo when they had the chance to leave? Sure, there are financial / ownership excuses for those guys leaving, but the Sabres are rebuilding, and that'll be the excuse this time.

Trading Vanek to upgrade our draft slot is a smart move... Unless, you prefer just continuing to fill the cupboard with good prospects, instead of putting ourselves into a position to land a superstar

Except this new ownership has money and the previous did not. They can give Vanek as much as he wants (We have cap space) If they truly think he will be valuable in a playoff run in 2-3 years. Which he would be.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

This assumes that Barkov is that guy and I'm not ready to act like I know for sure how these players will turn out. If you're saying we should trade 8 and vanek for Getzlaf, i'm all for it. If barkov turns out to be just a good two way center and so does hodgson, larsson, and girgensons (we also have Grigorenko in the incubator) then you've given up way more than we're getting, to the point that it may require another rebuild.

We have a known elite goal scoring winger and a chance at a really good player at 8. If we can swing a reasonable trade to move up or even give up a bunch of other unknown assets like 1sts, seconds, prospects, great. But why sell all your assets at .50 on the dollar just to take on more risk?

Barkov has a very high ceiling - higher than Getzlaf, some say. No one knows for sure, of course, but the worst that he'd be is still very likely to be better than guys like Larsson and Girgs et al.

And as far as .50 on the dollar, I'd say that Vanek's one year is worth less giving up one of our prospects or young guys. I'd rather give up Vanek than Ennis, for instance, considering his age.