Honky Cat Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 Tanev alone is not getting Reinhart.....end of story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 to BUF: Tanev and the #5 to VAN: Reinhart and the #8 BUF drafts another C with the #5, to replace Reinhart, plus upgrade their D. VAN drafts Liljegren/Makar at #8 to replace Tanev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 12 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: to BUF: Tanev and the #5 to VAN: Reinhart and the #8 BUF drafts another C with the #5, to replace Reinhart, plus upgrade their D. VAN drafts Liljegren/Makar at #8 to replace Tanev. This is the most fair trade yet. I hope JB does something like this:) (Reinhart is not playing center) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Or the Sabres keep Reinhart and the pick and take a young left-handed d-man at #8. Their defence is as bad or worse than Vancouver's. Taking the right handed, oft-injured, 27 year old Tanev does them no good in the long run whereas keeping the improving and healthy 21 year old Reinhart does. Tanev is a good team's short term solution, not a bad rebuilding team's long term one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 4 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Or the Sabres keep Reinhart and the pick and take a young left-handed d-man at #8. Their defence is as bad or worse than Vancouver's. Taking the right handed, oft-injured, 27 year old Tanev does them no good in the long run whereas keeping the improving and healthy 21 year old Reinhart does. Tanev is a good team's short term solution, not a bad rebuilding team's long term one. Okay, how 'bout to BUF: Hutton (LHD), the #5 (1st) and the #64 (3rd) to BUF: Reinhart and the #8 (1st) I'd like to get Reinhart, local boy, good young C. This would solve BUF's need for a good young LHD. I'm assuming at #5 Heiskanen will be taken, so who will BUF draft at #8? The next ranked LHD is Valimaki at around #18 or Hague at around #22. With Hutton, they're getting a good young LHD who's NHL ready, and he just turned 24. BUF could draft another C with the #5 and then an additional LHD at #64, if they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Okay, how 'bout to BUF: Hutton (LHD), the #5 (1st) and the #64 (3rd) to BUF: Reinhart and the #8 (1st) I'd like to get Reinhart, local boy, good young C. This would solve BUF's need for a good young LHD. I'm assuming at #5 Heiskanen will be taken, so who will BUF draft at #8? The next ranked LHD is Valimaki at around #18 or Hague at around #22. With Hutton, they're getting a good young LHD who's NHL ready, and he just turned 24. BUF could draft another C with the #5 and then an additional LHD at #64, if they want. I get where you're coming from, but I don't think Hutton, 3 spots up in the first round, and an extra 3rd rounder in a shallow draft year would be enough of an enticement to part with Reinhart. You can't forget that he pairs well with Eichel. There's no guarantee that any guy available at #5 would as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Actually, did a little comparison of some players and the stats are fairly even. Maybe the Canucks should just stick with their #5 and draft the C they'll need down the road. Last playing year in Juniors Landeskog (OHL) 36-30=66 points in 53 games Vilardi (OHL) 29-32=61 points in 49 games Reinhart (WHL) 36-69=105 points in 60 games Glass (WHL) 32-62=94 points in 69 games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Actually, did a little comparison of some players and the stats are fairly even. Maybe the Canucks should just stick with their #5 and draft the C they'll need down the road. Last playing year in Juniors Landeskog (OHL) 36-30=66 points in 53 games Vilardi (OHL) 29-32=61 points in 49 games Reinhart (WHL) 36-69=105 points in 60 games Glass (WHL) 32-62=94 points in 69 games Also, those guys are coming off of playing and practicing at centre whereas Reinhart has been mainly used as and practiced as a wingman for the last 2 years. His winning draw percentage has suffered as a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny in Vancouver Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 1 hour ago, SabreFan1 said: Tanev is a good team's short term solution, not a bad rebuilding team's long term one. Just curious - what's the general view of the Sabres from their fans' perspective - are they a rebuilding team or are they a team that should have been in the playoffs? Given that they fired their GM, they have been trading for non-cheap players (Reilly, Kane, Okposo, Lehner) and they have a bonafide star in Eichel, I would have thought that they are going for it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Just now, vinny_in_vancouver said: Just curious - what's the general view of the Sabres from their fans' perspective - are they a rebuilding team or are they a team that should have been in the playoffs? Given that they fired their GM, they have been trading for non-cheap players (Reilly, Kane, Okposo, Lehner) and they have a bonafide star in Eichel, I would have thought that they are going for it... The fans view is that the Sabres are only a partially rebuilt team. Murray neglected the defence and he built a poor performing bottom 6. A very solid top 6 is the only thing that the Sabres have going for them. The playoffs are still 2-3 years away at best. Being in a position to compete for a cup, 4-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Dizzle Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 6 hours ago, SabreFan1 said: The fans view is that the Sabres are only a partially rebuilt team. Murray neglected the defence and he built a poor performing bottom 6. A very solid top 6 is the only thing that the Sabres have going for them. The playoffs are still 2-3 years away at best. Being in a position to compete for a cup, 4-5. Horvat and Hutton for Reinhart and #8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 On 2017-05-18 at 5:03 PM, canuckledraggin said: Tanev + 5th Reinhart 8th and 37th That's a lot more sane then the original proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 I have neverseen such a vast gap between fans for valueing a player like what we see from cdc on tanev. Could it be that gms also arent sure how to value him. Personally i think we would be lucky to get the 3rd overall and niemi fir him. I would take that right away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted June 4, 2017 Share Posted June 4, 2017 On 2017-05-18 at 5:13 PM, J-Dizzle said: Tanev to Pittsburgh for Crosby, Malkin and Letang. Where are we gonna get the cap for that? Give your head a shake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj vic Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 we need Tanev now more than ever! Yeah I realize his trade value is high, but we need some decent defense to build up some confidence in the younger up and comer players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 Ok, I'll put my own spin on this: To Vancouver: Reinhart Moulson To Buffalo: Tanev Cassels 3rd round pick Why Buffalo does this: First and foremost, it provides them with one of the best shutdown defensemen in the league and god knows they need help on defense. It also alleviates them from a player who is obviously overpaid with two more years left on his contract who apparently Buffalo was toying with buying out anyway. It also provides them with a prospect (albeit one not likely to break into the NHL), plus they also gain a pick. Due to Buffalo’s grooming Eichel as a top-six center, they were forced to play Reinhart on the wing. Therefore, I figure his value to Buffalo is less than it would be to us, with Reinhart not exactly making leaps and bounds last season. Why Vancouver does this: Let’s face it – we are not going to be contenders for at least a couple of years. It looks like we will largely be running with our young players as they develop. Even after signing the players we need to sign, we should have noticeable cap space left over. Then the following year when the Sedins’ contracts are up, we will have tons. So we can take on a bad contract like Moulson’s for a couple of years, no problem. And although he is obviously in decline, he should still be able to put up 25 points a season. Then we trade him to a contender as a rental for a small return as the end of his contract nears, which should get us back an extra we threw in to make the trade happen in the first place. Ultimately, it becomes close to Reinhart for Tanev, straight up. What we don’t have right now is a 1st line center with elite potential. Don’t get me wrong – Bo is great in every way, but I’m not sure if he has high end 1st line center potential that is so challenging to find. (And even if he does, having a Reinhart/Horvat 1-2 punch would be amazing and Bo can focus on being Kesler-like: Shutdown, plus scoring). Of course, there are no guarantees that Reinhart has it himself - but he looks more promising in that regard. Even if we were to draft a solid center prospect this draft, he won’t likely be ready to play in the NHL for at least a year or two, and when he does get in the lineup it seems unrealistic to expect he would play in the top six right away. This deal also allows us to draft whoever we want, as opposed to being stuck picking the best center left in the draft. For example - there are thoughts that the value of Makar is still rising. On TSN they even went so far as to say that one of the 10 scouts they use as a ranking measure believes Makar should be drafted 1st. Yes.... first. If Benning deems him as having the potential to be a Karlsson-type player as some believe, then perhaps we snag him instead. If we plan on grooming a player to be our star defenseman (along with maybe Juolevi) then it would make sense to draft him sooner than later considering the amount of time it takes to develop that position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odjick_fan Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Would you consider a Tanev trade for Bogosian, rights to Cliff Pu and 2018 1st? On many boards, I see Bogo as third pairing D and Cliff Pu put up some decent numbers this year. The 1st pick is for taking Bogos contract off their hands. Or I am way off lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.