Bostonbruins

Member Since
Nov 23, 2018
Favourite Team
Boston Bruins
2nd Favourite Team
Buffalo Sabres
Location
buffalo new york
Forum Posts
167
Posts per Day
0.39
Forum Threads
52
Forum: Armchair-GMOct 10, 2019 at 12:28
Forum: Armchair-GMOct 9, 2019 at 1:02
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jack_</b></div><div>yea you right. giving up kapanen who is a good 3rd line right wing for a player who will split time on the 4th line on the AHL team. Thompson isnt better then bracco, he isnt better then petan, he isnt better then korshkov but hes probably better then wilson. they have wilson in the lineup to help the younger players with their development so he will still play games. I guess giving up a good middle six forward for a 4th line ahler who has a small chance at making the leafs next year is a great idea. asset management 101. :squinty</div></div>

This is an unfortunate food fight that I started, for that I apologize.
I can see how my reply could be misunderstood that I thought this was a good trade for the Leafs. That was not my intention. If you read my comment, it was not directed to the value of the trade but rather to your comment about Thompson that he would not be a full time Marlie. I thought that was just a bit hyperbolic and over reacted.
I really like Kapanen and would love to see him in a Sabre, but IMO this trade does not work for either team. Sheary does not PK and even though his goals may be close to Kapanen, his value to the team is not the same. While I think Thompson will develop into a good mid six forward, he is at least a year away and does not help the Leafs this year.
The Sabres pass because even though Kapanen can PK, they have players who fill that role.
Again, I should have been more specific when I responded to your initial post. Both teams would pass on this trade for different reasons.
Forum: Armchair-GMOct 3, 2019 at 11:19
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 12, 2019 at 1:40
Thread: Risty
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 4, 2019 at 10:09
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 4, 2019 at 7:35
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 3, 2019 at 3:11
Thread: Scandella
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>Who are you talking about with $11 million for a #7 dman and bottom 6 RW? Okposo and Scandella?
And what does Hall being UFA have to do with anything?

K so you're talking out of both sides of your mouth, in one paragraph you're saying maybe Gagner could get back to his 50 point season like he had in Columbus but then you're saying 30 points is probably too much for him cause he's too unpredictable? So which is it cause if you look at his first season in Vancouver he hit the 30 point mark and his two stints of NHL time last season average out to a 33 point season if he plays a full 82 games in the NHL. Buffalo has plenty of guys who will hit the 30 point mark whereas Edmonton doesn't and they have enough defensemen who can do what Scandella does, seriously Edmonton needs Gagner more then they need Scandella plus I'm not sure if Gagner is really an option at center anymore, probably better suited to the wing at this point.</div></div>

"Who are you talking about with $11 million for a #7 dman and bottom 6 RW? Okposo and Scandella?" No Okposo and Bogosian. Right now Scandella would be the 2nd or 3rd pairing LHD.
"And what does Hall being UFA have to do with anything?" He will be a free agent next year and without Okposo and Bogosian, the Sabres would have the cap space to try to sign him, that is what he has to do with the conversation.
I am referring to Sam's trade history, or maybe you over looked that. In the last 5 years he was picked off of waivers twice , traded for a 6th then later for 2 cap dumps.
One has to question why Edmonton cannot find wingers to score with McDavid, Draisaitl and Nugent-Hopkins at center.
On the other hand, only Nurse had more goals than Scandella so I hold my ground Scandella would fit in very nicely as an Oiler LHD, while it is a gamble that Gagner may get back to 50 pts because he only reached that once in his entire career.
So I am not talking out of both sides of my mouth, but rather "IF" Sam could do as well next year as he did 2 years ago it would be a great trade for Buffalo. "IF" Marco could return to his performance of the previous year, it is a great trade for Edmonton.
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 3, 2019 at 1:56
Thread: Scandella
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sabres89</b></div><div>Sabres probably would prefer to just get a late pick back, but they might take gagner as he is a million cheaper and would help the middle 6 if no other moves are made. Its frustrating having a not good team and being at the cap to boot.</div></div>
Check out Gagner from 2 years ago when he was with Columbus. He had a team high of 2.7 pt/60, 54.18% corsi, 4th with 18 goals and 5th with 50 pts. If he could find that mojo in Buffalo, well who knows. I think it is a trade that works for both teams.
As for the cap, $11,000,000 for our 7th defenseman and bottom 6 RW, ouch! It will be better next year when Hall is a UFA!
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>As much as the Oilers could use some help on defense I think they're going to need Gagner's 30 or so points more.
Maybe if it was a Sheary,Scandella for Gagner,? It'd work but then it's basically just a swap of the same stuff, no significant improvement of cap savings for either team.</div></div>
That is just a little too much for Sam. He is too unpredictable.
2014-Jun-29 Traded with B.J. Crombeen to Phoenix Coyotes for round 6 pick in the 2015 draft
2015-Jun-27 Traded from Arizona Coyotes with conditional round 4 pick in the 2016 draft (Otto Koivula) to Philadelphia Flyers for Chris Pronger and Nicklas Grossmann
2016-Aug-01 Signed by Columbus Blue Jackets
2017-Jul-01 Signed by Vancouver Canucks
2019-Feb-16 Traded from Vancouver Canucks to Edmonton Oilers for Ryan Spooner
Traded for a 6th, traded with a 4th for cap dumps, UFA signed, UFA signed, and a player who is in Europe now.
Scandella for Gagner is just about right, Buffalo needs a help at center, Edmonton needs help on defense.