What would it take to trade up from the 8-9 draft spot we're at now. To get to 2-3 not 1.
- bluengold12

1st; a good, young, cheap roster player (that fills their need); and probably a blue chip prospect.

Plus, you'd have to do it with a team that thinks that they can win sooner rather than go through a full rebuild. Maybe and Edmonton or a Calgary or an Arizona.

I'd list Eichel 5th

Like it or not, Panarin should win
And Larkin's stats are very close & he's contributing on a playoff team.
I know in some respects it's much more impressive what Eichel has been able to do on a team that was in the bottom 5 for most of the year...
But winning is valued more in this league, even when considering individual awards

Also...
This is the DUMBEST award the NHL gives out
I really could care less

More importantly...
Just one more thing for Jack to use as motivation
- jdfitz77

You speak of the Stastny with 8 or 9 goals for STL? Looks like his signing in STL hurt both teams??
- turbo044

I'm so glad we didn't get Stastney
I remember quite a few on here wanting him
Good player...
But not a #1 center worth that contract
No way
Prob would've kept us from trading for O'Reilly too

1st; a good, young, cheap roster player (that fills their need); and probably a blue chip prospect.

Plus, you'd have to do it with a team that thinks that they can win sooner rather than go through a full rebuild. Maybe and Edmonton or a Calgary or an Arizona.
- Zschalberg

I'd do our 2016 and 2017 first (lottery protected), Bogosian and their choice of Bailey, Fasching, Guhle or Girgensons. To Edmonton

You speak of the Stastny with 8 or 9 goals for STL? Looks like his signing in STL hurt both teams??
- turbo044

I'm so glad we didn't get Stastney
I remember quite a few on here wanting him
Good player...
But not a #1 center worth that contract
No way
Prob would've kept us from trading for O'Reilly too

Patrik Laine is best goal scoring from Finland, since teemu selänne...

Okay but Moulson was here right before that and was Darcy's acquisition and he did okay. None of us expected him to plummet so far. Not to mention he did well last year. Murray's biggest problem was giving him 5 years and a NTC.

I'm good with Kane. If he's your go to guy you're in trouble but here he's second fiddle and when he gets chemistry he's played well. Needs to show that for more games next year but I like what I've seen.

Bogo I'm also okay with and Lehner we've discussed next year is key.

Really tl;dr, next year s the year where Murray and all of his pieces are going to be under the microscope
- Zschalberg

Moulson was on another team at the end of the year. We had no allegiance to him. That deal is 100% on Murray

And as much as I loved Kane's game for most of the year, he is one personal incident away from losing his 2nd locker room.

Next few moves Murray makes he needs to hit on.

I'd list Eichel 5th

Like it or not, Panarin should win
And Larkin's stats are very close & he's contributing on a playoff team.
I know in some respects it's much more impressive what Eichel has been able to do on a team that was in the bottom 5 for most of the year...
But winning is valued more in this league, even when considering individual awards

Also...
This is the DUMBEST award the NHL gives out
I really could care less

More importantly...
Just one more thing for Jack to use as motivation
- jdfitz77

I'll say I still disagree and leave it at that. Panarin, McDavid, Ghost, Eichel, Domi, Larkin imo. The fact that Larkin has players around him to help him means he should have stats more comparable to Panarin's than Jack's. He's 5th in rookie scoring and has been passed by McDavid who has played 44 games. If winning is the difference then I look at the 14-15 Sabres v the 15-16 Sabres.

I know the next thing that will be said is "Yeah but those are completely different teams and it's not just Jack" to which I say "It's not just Larkin in Detroit either".

None of this is meant to be directed at you, btw. More to the collective TSN and NBCSN and such that basically say Larkin's better because he wears red.

What would it take to trade up from the 8-9 draft spot we're at now. To get to 2-3 not 1.

I'd be willing to offer our 1st this year our 1st next year anyone of Bailey, Guhle, Fasching, McCabe or Kane. Not sure if that would be enough but could be a start
- bluengold12

The real question would be, who are the guys that should be available at 8-9, and is passing up on one of them plus ditching next years first, and adding one of our best prospects worth what one of the Finns brings back?

The real question would be, who are the guys that should be available at 8-9, and is passing up on one of them plus ditching next years first, and adding one of our best prospects worth what one of the Finns brings back?
- sskkoo1

thats the burning question. and a lot depends on how good we are next season.

i would be reluctant to give up a d though

- bluengold12

thats the burning question. and a lot depends on how good we are next season.

i would be reluctant to give up a d though
- IndianaSabresFan

This moving up trade is reminding me a lot of the Sammy Watkin's trade. An awful lot of assets given up and then there ended up being another great player out there that we could have just selected at our own spot.

The real question would be, who are the guys that should be available at 8-9, and is passing up on one of them plus ditching next years first, and adding one of our best prospects worth what one of the Finns brings back?
- sskkoo1

For me, yes. It'd be worth it. I expect next year to be playoffs or at least close to it. So in my mind I'm giving up pick 8-9, pick 12-14, and a good prospect for one of the Finns. I'd do that deal in a heartbeat which tells me they likely wouldn't. Pick 8-9 will be a good player and pick 12-14 should be too, but I'd rather get the last piece of the top 6 and have him for peanuts as far as salary goes.

This moving up trade is reminding me a lot of the Sammy Watkin's trade. An awful lot of assets given up and then there ended up being another great player out there that we could have just selected at our own spot.
- sskkoo1

I look at it like the past NHL drafts. Higher confidence that pick 2-3 is going to be a great player than pick 8-9.

For me, yes. It'd be worth it. I expect next year to be playoffs or at least close to it. So in my mind I'm giving up pick 8-9, pick 12-14, and a good prospect for one of the Finns. I'd do that deal in a heartbeat which tells me they likely wouldn't. Pick 8-9 will be a good player and pick 12-14 should be too, but I'd rather get the last piece of the top 6 and have him for peanuts as far as salary goes.
- Zschalberg

Wait... earlier you also added a good young roster player. So if your offer is, lets say, Pick 8 2016, pick 11-12 2017, Fashing and Guhle... For the 3rd pick overall 2016. Well, for me I got to bow-out, that's way too much to move up for one of the Finns, I'll make my selection at 8.

I'd do our 2016 and 2017 first (lottery protected), Bogosian and their choice of Bailey, Fasching, Guhle or Girgensons. To Edmonton
- bluengold12

WAY, WAY, WAY TOO MUCH
And yes, I did see that u put an "or" in there

We'll still get a really good talent in the top12
I'm not trading 4 quality assets for that
For Matthews... Absolutely
For one of the Fins... 2 of those 4 should be enough if they're picking & choosing which 2 they want

The real question would be, who are the guys that should be available at 8-9, and is passing up on one of them plus ditching next years first, and adding one of our best prospects worth what one of the Finns brings back?
- sskkoo1

At 8-9?

Matthews, Fin, Fin, Ttachuk, Churchryun, Olujvi, Nylander will all be gone.

That leaves possibly Pierre-Luc Dubois, Mikhail Sergachev or another player. None of which is good enough combined with what you hope would be a mid 20's pick next year and a prospect not on the level as the two Fins

I'll say I still disagree and leave it at that. Panarin, McDavid, Ghost, Eichel, Domi, Larkin imo. The fact that Larkin has players around him to help him means he should have stats more comparable to Panarin's than Jack's. He's 5th in rookie scoring and has been passed by McDavid who has played 44 games. If winning is the difference then I look at the 14-15 Sabres v the 15-16 Sabres.

I know the next thing that will be said is "Yeah but those are completely different teams and it's not just Jack" to which I say "It's not just Larkin in Detroit either".

None of this is meant to be directed at you, btw. More to the collective TSN and NBCSN and such that basically say Larkin's better because he wears red.
- Zschalberg

U make fair points

My major one though is that this award is f-I got stupid to begin with & we should all care less about it

I can't believe we actually keep talking about it
With that said,
I'll move on to something different

Wait... earlier you also added a good young roster player. So if your offer is, lets say, Pick 8 2016, pick 11-12 2017, Fashing and Guhle... For the 3rd pick overall 2016. Well, for me I got to bow-out, that's way too much to move up for one of the Finns, I'll make my selection at 8.
- sskkoo1

Well that was my offer, I was responding to the offer of this year's first, next year's first, and a prospect.

My offer was this year's first, a good young roster player, and a good prospect. I wouldn't add the other first as well

WAY, WAY, WAY TOO MUCH
And yes, I did see that u put an "or" in there

We'll still get a really good talent in the top12
I'm not trading 4 quality assets for that
For Matthews... Absolutely
For one of the Fins... 2 of those 4 should be enough if they're picking & choosing which 2 they want
- jdfitz77

Disagree. To be honest, I'd trade Bogosian if it meant we had to move a spot down the draft not up... But a team like Edmonton might value his bigger body.

Say the deal is not to a team like Edmonton but to Vancouver or Calgary. I'd still offer 2016 1st 2017 1st (Lottery protected) One of Ennis, Girgensons, Bogosian and one of Faching, Bailey or Guhle for an elite top line winger with speed in a heartbeat.

WAY, WAY, WAY TOO MUCH
And yes, I did see that u put an "or" in there

We'll still get a really good talent in the top12
I'm not trading 4 quality assets for that
For Matthews... Absolutely
For one of the Fins... 2 of those 4 should be enough if they're picking & choosing which 2 they want
- jdfitz77

3 of the 4 and I think it works

I agree...they can also tack on an eighth year as well...there's a lot to like about tampa and as pointed out, there's no state tax which boosts his pay another 5-10%...

*shrugs*

it's really a no-brainer, imo
- Michael Pachla

Any time I hear MacKenzie (or whoever) talk about the Stamkos situation though, they bring up other factors.

Seems like he's leaving no matter what they offer

Disagree. To be honest, I'd trade Bogosian if it meant we had to move a spot down the draft not up... But a team like Edmonton might value his bigger body.

Say the deal is not to a team like Edmonton but to Vancouver or Calgary. I'd still offer 2016 1st 2017 1st (Lottery protected) One of Ennis, Girgensons, Bogosian and one of Faching, Bailey or Guhle for an elite top line winger with speed in a heartbeat.
- bluengold12

I see where you're coming from
But that's a ton to give up on a guy who's never played in N.America
I think both Fins will be really good...
But we could get some really good NHLers for all those assets you're throwing around
It's just A LOT to give up

At 8-9?

Matthews, Fin, Fin, Ttachuk, Churchryun, Olujvi, Nylander will all be gone.

That leaves possibly Pierre-Luc Dubois, Mikhail Sergachev or another player. None of which is good enough combined with what you hope would be a mid 20's pick next year and a prospect not on the level as the two Fins
- bluengold12

Could be wrong, but if that's the price I have to pay for a Finn, I'll keep my assets and take Pierre-Luc Dubois. Once he's playing with Eichel and Kane he'll be just fine.

3 of the 4 and I think it works
- Zschalberg

I think the two 1sts should actually do it