Who Are Your Buffalo Sabres "Untouchables"?

[NEcoli]

I wonder if some of you understand what "untouchable" means?

The only thing I wouldn't trade under any circumstances is the Sabres 2015 1st.

 

[Heraldic]

I wonder if some of you understand what "untouchable" means?

The only thing I wouldn't trade under any circumstances is the Sabres 2015 1st.

Of course no piece is absolutely "untouchable". If for some reason Crosby were availabe, would I trade one or more of my "untouchables"? Sure.

Untouchables are players that are or have the potential to be cornerstone pieces of a winning franchise. Practically you're not able to acquire those pieces by trading or signing (at least that is a rare, rare exception). That's why even the pieces that have a (legitimate) potential to be that kind of players, are untouchables.

If you view only a generational talent "untouchable", I think it implies a bit of lack of perspective.

 

[SabreBlood]

Reinhart
Girgensons
Ristolainen
Zadorov
2015 1st (BUF)
2015 1st (NYI)

 

[Ethan Edwards]

Buf, NYI, and STL 2015 1st's

why..? It's going to be a late 1st.

I'm not arguing the "untouchable" aspect, but here's why:

All 3 1sts for '15 *(Unless we package them to move up in the draft)

People keep arguing for the NYI 1st to remain, but are pretty open to trading the STL 1st, as they're assuming one team's position is hard to peg and the other's will likely be in the 20s (I agree with the assumption, BTW). But the power of the STL 1st comes in combo with our other two 1sts, not in isolation as a stand-alone pick. Each pick has its own value, with each TBD, but the combination is greater than each part individually. It gives us tremendous flexibility once a very stacked 2015 draft rolls around (especially if you expand it to include two more Top 50 picks). That is a huge, huge asset for this organization, regardless of how we use those three picks (even if we end up using all three). Again, not saying it can't be had before next April, but I would be VERY reluctant to trade it away before then, even with the likelihood it's a late 1st.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

I'm not arguing the "untouchable" aspect, but here's why:

People keep arguing for the NYI 1st to remain, but are pretty open to trading the STL 1st, as they're assuming one team's position is hard to peg and the other's will likely be in the 20s (I agree with the assumption, BTW). But the power of the STL 1st comes in combo with our other two 1sts, not in isolation as a stand-alone pick. Each pick has its own value, with each TBD, but the combination is greater than each part individually. It gives us tremendous flexibility once a very stacked 2015 draft rolls around (especially if you expand it to include two more Top 50 picks). That is a huge, huge asset for this organization, regardless of how we use those three picks (even if we end up using all three). Again, not saying it can't be had before next April, but I would be VERY reluctant to trade it away before then, even with the likelihood it's a late 1st.

Buf drafts 3rd, Edm drafts 1st, 3+14+24 for 1

 

[Jim Bob]

I wouldn't even consider trading if a call came in today:

2015 BUF 1st
Samson Reinhart

I wouldn't hang up the phone if you called, but it would have to be an offer I couldn't refuse:

Zemgus Girgensons
Rasmus Ristolainen
Nikita Zadorov
2015 NYI 1st

I would rather not move these guys and it would have to be a heck of an offer:

Mark Pysyk
Jake McCabe
2015 StL 1st
Nick Baptiste
Any of the kids that haven't hit the show yet and are 1st or 2nd rounders + kids TM traded for (Compher, Fasching, Lemieux, Cornel, Bailey, Carrier, etc)

 

[Jim Bob]

Buf drafts 3rd, Edm drafts 1st, 3+14+24 for 1

I don't see any team offering up a package that anyone takes for the McPick.

 

[Ethan Edwards]

Buf drafts 3rd, Edm drafts 1st, 3+14+24 for 1

I don't see any team offering up a package that anyone takes for the McPick.

Maybe, but specific scenarios aside, his overall point is exactly right. There are all sorts of scenarios I can dream up in light of how deep this draft is and how much projected talent is strewn throughout, even into the 2nd round. So many possibilities, all made possible by our having three 1sts in a loaded draft.

 

[krt88]

Reinhart, Girgensons, Risto, Zads, 2015 1st.

I agree with this list.

Reinhart is new face of franchise
Girgensons has too much upside and intangibles
Ristolainen and Zadarov look like the cornerstone pieces of our backend
the Sabres and Islanders 1st round picks for next year are also not available

everyone else can be had if the price is right

 

[haseoke39]

No such thing as untouchables. Just really-hard-to-touchables.

 

[B U F F A L O]

2015 NYI and BUF 1st - obvious reasons
Reinhart - Piece #1 to what we're trying to build. So happy FLA went with Ekblad, and Murray wasted no time in announcing him as our pick.
Myers - With Ehrhoff gone now, and Myers entering his prime by the time we enter our window, I just dont see a reason to trade him. I still believe in him that he will be an annual Norris contender once he turns 26.
Risto - Will be a key member of the rebuild on the back end with Myers. Loved watching him play in Rochester. Would love for him to become the best D that came out of the 13 draft.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Assets Required for the current game plan:

BUF 1st 2015
Reinhart
Girgs
Risto
Z

Valuable Assets which slot into the current game plan:
NYI 1st 2015
Myers
Ullmark
Grig
Pysyk
Hogdson

That accounts for a projected top 6 and top 4. If I'm GMTM the deals I make keep that in mind.

 

[Woodhouse]

I wouldn't even consider trading if a call came in today:

2015 BUF 1st
Samson Reinhart

I wouldn't hang up the phone if you called, but it would have to be an offer I couldn't refuse:

Zemgus Girgensons
Rasmus Ristolainen
Nikita Zadorov
2015 NYI 1st

I would rather not move these guys and it would have to be a heck of an offer:

Mark Pysyk
Jake McCabe
2015 StL 1st
Nick Baptiste
Any of the kids that haven't hit the show yet and are 1st or 2nd rounders + kids TM traded for (Compher, Fasching, Lemieux, Cornel, Bailey, Carrier, etc)

I agree with the gist of JB's post above. For me, I'd change that top tier to Reinhart and any 2015 picks ... just because Murray failed to trade up this year, doesn't mean we shouldn't leave him assets for that option again in 2015.

 

[Jim Bob]

I agree with the gist of JB's post above. For me, I'd change that top tier to Reinhart and any 2015 picks ... just because Murray failed to trade up this year, doesn't mean we shouldn't leave him assets for that option again in 2015.

I really think that the internet and talk radio have really inflated people's expectations for picks getting moved due to the need to fill air time and get page views.

There was all sorts of chatter heading into the 2013 draft that picks could move and the first pick that got traded was NJ trading 9 for Schneider.

There was all sorts of chatter heading into this year's draft and again, there was no movement among the lottery picks and the first pick that was moved was at #20.

I don't think it will be realistic to trade up on draft day. Especially if people are talking about trading up to #1 or #2.

 

[krt88]

I really think that the internet and talk radio have really inflated people's expectations for picks getting moved due to the need to fill air time and get page views.

There was all sorts of chatter heading into the 2013 draft that picks could move and the first pick that got traded was NJ trading 9 for Schneider.

There was all sorts of chatter heading into this year's draft and again, there was no movement among the lottery picks and the first pick that was moved was at #20.

I don't think it will be realistic to trade up on draft day. Especially if people are talking about trading up to #1 or #2.

Here's a complete hypothetical question for everyone.

Lets say by some miracle the Sabres end up with the first and second picks in the draft. Would you pick your choice of the power twins and trade the other pick for a kings ransom? Or do you pick both?

For myself it all depends on what we have seen this coming season. Perhaps moving back and picking Hanifin or Zacha would be preferable, however, trading that #2 pick and an assett or two for a player who could really move the team forward, might be tempting. Example, what if the Islanders offered JT fr the #2 pick. It would get interesting really fast.

 

[NEcoli]

Of course no piece is absolutely "untouchable". If for some reason Crosby were availabe, would I trade one or more of my "untouchables"? Sure.

Untouchables are players that are or have the potential to be cornerstone pieces of a winning franchise. Practically you're not able to acquire those pieces by trading or signing (at least that is a rare, rare exception). That's why even the pieces that have a (legitimate) potential to be that kind of players, are untouchables.

If you view only a generational talent "untouchable", I think it implies a bit of lack of perspective.

Even by that standard, there were some ridiculous lists. I know this is largely a prospect board, but when you're listing the likes of Gustav Possler and Connor Hurley as "untouchables," you're lapsing into self-satire.

 

[Heraldic]

Even by that standard, there were some ridiculous lists. I know this is largely a prospect board, but when you're listing the likes of Gustav Possler and Connor Hurley as "untouchables," you're lapsing into self-satire.

You're absolutely right that Possler or Hurley should have nothing to do with that list. Sure it's a different question that should we trade them, because the return most likely would not be anything special. But yeah, they really don't belong to that list.

 

[krt88]

Even by that standard, there were some ridiculous lists. I know this is largely a prospect board, but when you're listing the likes of Gustav Possler and Connor Hurley as "untouchables," you're lapsing into self-satire.

Very well said. If Tampa wanted to trade Drouin and they insisted on Connor Hurley, JT Compher and Gustavo Possler all be part of the package, I'm writing their names on the paper work, without hesitation.

 

[Jim Bob]

Here's a complete hypothetical question for everyone.

Lets say by some miracle the Sabres end up with the first and second picks in the draft. Would you pick your choice of the power twins and trade the other pick for a kings ransom? Or do you pick both?

For myself it all depends on what we have seen this coming season. Perhaps moving back and picking Hanifin or Zacha would be preferable, however, trading that #2 pick and an assett or two for a player who could really move the team forward, might be tempting. Example, what if the Islanders offered JT fr the #2 pick. It would get interesting really fast.

It all depends on the offers that come in.

JT is on a short list of guys that I would be intrigued by. Although, a guy like Drouin (young, high end scoring winger) might be the most appealing with the Sabres having McDavid, Reinhart, and Grigensons are their franchise cornerstones up the middle.

But, I would lean towards taking McDavid & Eichel 1/2 and moving forward like that.

 

[Ruckus007]

I wouldn't even consider trading if a call came in today:

2015 BUF 1st
Samson Reinhart

Agreed. Untouchable is a term that gets used too loosely on this board but these are the only two assets that I truly would not include in any deal.

 

[OkimLom]

For me:
"Untouchables"
Girgensens & Reinhart
2015 1st Round picks Individually

"Very Tough to Pry away"
Risto & Zadorov

"Would hate to see them leave due to their potential"
Compher, Fasching, Myers, Pysyk, Mccabe

 

[tehinternet]

When Rip Simonick is all sweaty and greasy after moving equipment around, I'd consider him untouchable.

 

[ZeroPT*]

Kinda OT but I think we should have a Tim Murray thread, where we can track all his moves and grade them, discussion about his tenure and stuff. Probably have it stickied too, like the Buffalo Sabres assets thread.

I think it'd be pretty cool.

 

[Jim Bob]

Kaleta, Bailey, and ZG are untouchable.

 

[Paxon]

Kaleta, Bailey, and ZG are untouchable.

Kaleta is gonna look like Charles Bronson in 20 years