Comic book movies come to real life.

https://youtu.be/PgaEYyIjykM?t=1m25s
- Der Kaiser

I heard a conditional 2nd would come back if Kane signs an extension with his new team
- homiedclown

If Kane was open to a sign & trade,
we should be able to do the deal without giving up a prospect

Heck...
In that case, the other team should probably be adding while we are subtracting

I’d still like to keep him though

They’re on different teams
And I bet Carlson has more defensive zone starts
It would be one thing of Shattenkirk was getting the tough defensive assignments & playing in his own end more...
but that’s NOT the case

And this is an EVERY YEAR thing for Shattenkirk

He’s terrible at defense
- jdfitz77

His shot attempt suppression numbers are among the best every year. Im not saying hes good, but even in his role hes at the very least competent defensively.

I heard a conditional 2nd would come back if Kane signs an extension with his new team
- homiedclown

Friedman mentioned st louis maybe being a possibility. its why i tossed in the schmaltz deal.

If hes dealt to anaheim its purely as a rental

- homiedclown

And that’s why we were smart to trade him

Friedman mentioned st louis maybe being a possibility. its why i tossed in the schmaltz deal.

If hes dealt to anaheim its purely as a rental
- Sabresfan-365

Ducks wouldn’t wanna re-sign him?
Or the don’t have the Cap room?

I’d love to get Larsson for Kane

Ducks wouldn’t wanna re-sign him?
Or the don’t have the Cap room?

I’d love to get Larsson for Kane
- jdfitz77

They're a budget team. They're not giving Kane a massive deal

They're a budget team. They're not giving Kane a massive deal
- Sabresfan-365

Makes sense
Wasn’t there rumors about the Ducks being interested in Girgensons in previous seasons?

I don’t wanna have to add a “Bailey” into this deal

Makes sense
Wasn’t there rumors about the Ducks being interested in Girgensons in previous seasons?

I don’t wanna have to add a “Bailey” into this deal
- jdfitz77

Not doubting Homie at all, he's usually right. However, it strikes me as odd that we'd trade our best winger and our best wing prospect away unless a top pairing guy was coming back. Given that those two probably won't get it done...I'm surprised.

Makes sense
Wasn’t there rumors about the Ducks being interested in Girgensons in previous seasons?

I don’t wanna have to add a “Bailey” into this deal
- jdfitz77

Even if it helps you get a promising young defender without having to move one of the bigger assets?

Seems ideal to me.

Not doubting Homie at all, he's usually right. However, it strikes me as odd that we'd trade our best winger and our best wing prospect away unless a top pairing guy was coming back. Given that those two probably won't get it done...I'm surprised.
- RhinoFan

Well that’s probably why we haven’t agreed to the deal yet

I agree with you that it’s too much for us to give up...
but young defensemen are just so damn valuable
That’s why I’m always b!tching about us needing to draft them more

Even if it helps you get a promising young defender without having to move one of the bigger assets?

Seems ideal to me.
- Sabresfan-365

What do u mean?

If you’re saying we can trade a “Bailey” & NOT give up Kane,
then hell yes! Do it in a heartbeat

What do u mean?

If you’re saying we can trade a “Bailey” & NOT give up Kane,
then hell yes! Do it in a heartbeat
- jdfitz77

you said you don't want to have to add a bailey into this deal. But if the alternative options involve guys like nylander, reinhart, mittelstadt or our 1st rounder then kane+bailey seems ideal.

You still add a promising young d-man and dont have to give up one of those guys.

His shot attempt suppression numbers are among the best every year. Im not saying hes good, but even in his role hes at the very least competent defensively.
- Sabresfan-365

Isn’t that skewed bc he has so much more offensive zone starts?

And doesn’t he get easier defensive assignments bc he doesn’t get matched up against other teams top lines?

They’re on different teams
And I bet Carlson has more defensive zone starts
It would be one thing of Shattenkirk was getting the tough defensive assignments & playing in his own end more...
but that’s NOT the case

And this is an EVERY YEAR thing for Shattenkirk

He’s terrible at defense
- jdfitz77

So is this entire D corps.

I'd rather have a dman scoring and letting some get by and than just letting them get by.

Isn’t that skewed bc he has so much more offensive zone starts?

And doesn’t he get easier defensive assignments bc he doesn’t get matched up against other teams top lines?
- jdfitz77

even so, the change wouldn't suddenly make someones numbers go to either extreme. we're talking a 5% difference here between carlson and shattenkirk.


last night he saw a lot of Kane, anisimov and schmaltz so not exactly slouches.

you said you don't want to have to add a bailey into this deal. But if the alternative options involve guys like nylander, reinhart, mittelstadt or our 1st rounder then kane+bailey seems ideal.

You still add a promising young d-man and dont have to give up one of those guys.
- Sabresfan-365

Here’s my issue...
We shouldn’t have to “add” to Kane at all to get a good defenseman, especially a young prospect who hasn’t really proven anything yet
But...
I realize the value of young defensemen gets “marked up” so to speak

So to answer your question...
if we’re giving up Kane +, then of course I’d rather have that be Bailey than Mittelstadt
I just don’t like that we have to include Bailey

Also...
are we gonna get a “top pair” guy back

Bc we just traded for a solid “top4” guy for MUCH MUCH less (Scandella)

Not doubting Homie at all, he's usually right. However, it strikes me as odd that we'd trade our best winger and our best wing prospect away unless a top pairing guy was coming back. Given that those two probably won't get it done...I'm surprised.
- RhinoFan

6 words

nylander
mittelstadt
baptiste
pu
asplund
davidsson


I heard they are looking for a 2/3 d man that will make an impact long term

So is this entire D corps.

I'd rather have a dman scoring and letting some get by and than just letting them get by.
- CaptainRivet

Yeah, I guess...
where I’m coming from is that I’d rather not devote that Cap $$$ to Shattenkirk & put it towards a defenseman who’s better at defense

Here’s my issue...
We shouldn’t have to “add” to Kane at all to get a good defenseman, especially a young prospect who hasn’t really proven anything yet
But...
I realize the value of young defensemen gets “marked up” so to speak

So to answer your question...
if we’re giving up Kane +, then of course I’d rather have that be Bailey than Mittelstadt
I just don’t like that we have to include Bailey

Also...
are we gonna get a “top pair” guy back

Bc we just traded for a solid “top4” guy for MUCH MUCH less (Scandella)
- jdfitz77

We would in all likelihood be trading for a guy with more upside than scandella. or at least more defensive or offensive upside than scandella (larsson, schmaltz etc.)

Im guessing when all is said and done it'll probably just be picks

- homiedclown

What the hell is wrong with people?


I don't think I could carry on a conversation with a single person in that photo.

for the 9th time

ducks
kings
devils
islanders


- homiedclown

Blues

even so, the change wouldn't suddenly make someones numbers go to either extreme. we're talking a 5% difference here between carlson and shattenkirk.


last night he saw a lot of Kane, anisimov and schmaltz so not exactly slouches.
- Sabresfan-365

So then how do u explain,
that even though he gets so much more offensive zone starts...
he still gives up more goals every year than the others he plays with?

Shouldn’t it be the other way around?
I’d think the guys with more defensive zone starts should be giving up more goals

Here’s my issue...
We shouldn’t have to “add” to Kane at all to get a good defenseman, especially a young prospect who hasn’t really proven anything yet
But...
I realize the value of young defensemen gets “marked up” so to speak

So to answer your question...
if we’re giving up Kane +, then of course I’d rather have that be Bailey than Mittelstadt
I just don’t like that we have to include Bailey

Also...
are we gonna get a “top pair” guy back

Bc we just traded for a solid “top4” guy for MUCH MUCH less (Scandella)
- jdfitz77

hamilton got the bruins a first and 2 seconds
hamonic got a first and 2 2nds


at most Kane gets a late first and a blah prospect


sabres are not looking to get another scandella, a better player

http://my.hockeybuzz.com/...t_id=17985&user_id=183341