Kaberle for Stafford?

by sween on Jul 29, 2009 12:24 PM EDT Comment 17 comments

Recently I've been hearing there are rumors of Toronto seeking to trade Tomas Kaberle to Buffalo for a winger and maybe more.

At first it sounded great, a four time all star defensemen who could quarterback the power play and add experience to the blue line. Kaberle, Rivet, Butler, Montador, Sekerja and Lydman or maybe Tallinder would be a pretty decent six and the Sabres would have a good chance to contend for the playoffs, if everyone played to their potential.

The rumored deals however scare me. People have said Myers and Kassian have been offered, which bothered me a little but what really scared me was one player who showed up on a few proposed deals, Drew Stafford. Does anybody know if there is any truth to these rumors? And do you think it's worth letting Stafford go to get Kaberle?

This is a fanpost written by a member of the community, it doesn't necessarily express the views or opinions of Die by the Blade

0 recs | Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

As sad as I would be to see Stafford go, and I would, I think it would be an acceptable price to pay to get a true goal scorer on the blue line.

by The Burl 8 on Jul 29, 2009 12:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If I was GM...

I’d trade Stafford yesterday for Kaberle. I think the delay with any deal is probably agreeing on what other players/prospects Burke would want for Kaberle as well.
As far as Stafford goes, I’ve said this before, good riddance. If you’re 6-2, 200lbs, you should play like it. Gerbe hits more and plays tougher in the corners than Staff. Trade Stafford now before he becomes another over-paid top-line unproducing player on this team.
However, I do agree it’s troubling to hear any rumors of Myers or Kassian. Kind of seems like a waste to draft a guy in the first round and ship him off before we see what he’s made of at this level…

"Potential just means you haven’t done sh## yet"

by willgarr15 on Jul 29, 2009 12:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

With all the defenders we already have on our roster I don’t see how this deal would make any sense unless we were pretty confident another trade was in the works. With Rivet, Montador, Butler, Sekera, Lydman, Tallinder, and Paetsch already we have 7 solid defenders. Add to that Myers and Weber who will be itching to get some NHL ice time and I don’t see where he have the room. I know people have their complaints about Hank (and even Lydman to an extent) but realistically it looks like we’ll be stuck with them until their contracts expire.

I’m skeptical of this rumor.

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Jul 29, 2009 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Good point about the lack of physicality on Stafford’s part. Actually sounding like a good idea now but hopefully they could get an offensive prospect in return since Stafford usually brings in about 20 goals a season, and last season half those were the Sabres first goals. Plus he’s 23. Tough call but either way the Sabres end up with something good. Maybe if Burke has a few too many the Sabres can unload Tallinder for Kaberle….only if the hockey gods really want to make up for No Goal though.

by sween on Jul 29, 2009 1:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Trading for Kaberle without someone coming back offensively in a some sort of trade would be pretty ridiculous. Replacing a twenty goal scorer with a puck moving defenseman and nothing else coming back in return would spell suicide for this offense.

The other question is whether Kaberle is worth Stafford and others. If Burke is sending him to a division rival, then that should be a signal of what his value is and whether we should be taking a flyer on him. See Moore trade.

Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by Zachary Zielonka on Jul 29, 2009 3:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I vote no on Kaberle. Not impressed with him at all. What has he really done for the Leafs? He’d come with a fairly hefty contract too.

I think this rumor came from hockeybuzz. That site is a joke.

by krytime on Jul 29, 2009 3:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

where did you hear this?

nowhere credible I assume….

this trade would be a bad one for buffalo…because even with kaberle, we are not a championship contender, and to get rid of stafford, a guy who has upside over the next 3-5 years would mortgage the future

by tiimbitz4786 on Jul 29, 2009 7:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn’t put much stock in this rumor. It doesn’t make sense financially or otherwise for the Sabres to give up so much for a player that they can’t pay anyway.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Jul 30, 2009 10:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hell to the NO..Stafford is still very young and hes just about ready to take off..he will be a force this year if signed.. mark my words

by Derek9Roy on Aug 1, 2009 7:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I strongly disagree. I expect much of the same from this guy

"Potential just means you haven’t done sh## yet"

by willgarr15 on Aug 2, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Funny Fans...

The Sabres deal away Campbell and we all complain about how we need a QB-type to run our power play. The offseason rolls around and how quickly we all forget the frustrations that came when the Sabres would have 5, 6 or 7 PPs and maybe a couple shots on goal total. Kaberle had a season (I think 2 years ago) with 40+ points on the Power Play alone! The Sabres can’t find a guy to eat 20+ minutes a game on the blueline and score 40+ points all season long… our only offensive presence from the blueline at all is now gone (Spacek). Drew Stafford is young with potential, but so are a ton of other Sabres prospects. Stafford is due for a ridiculous raise and the Sabres were burned a bit by the Pominville deal the last time they played that game. I’d give up Stafford for Kaberle in a heartbeat, but I’d insist on them taking Tallinder’s contract with him to make the deal happen. Hank seems like a great guy, but sometimes a person simply needs a change of scenery. Once you’re in Ruff’s doghouse you have to do something truly special to get out of it. He’s simply not capable of that anymore.

DC Chocolate City!

by djc1877 on Aug 6, 2009 1:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The Sabres deal away Campbell and we all complain …

If I remember correctly, we didn’t trade Campbell because he didn’t fit/wasn’t the player we wanted, but because Darcy was slacking on re-signing him. When trade day came along there was still no deal, so there was no point in keeping a star player that was going to be a UFA in just a couple months. So we basically rented Bernier for a season. Woo. Darcy just needs to get on his game not only to sign/trade for star players, but also to keep them signed when the heat is on (see also: Drury, Briere)

by The Burl 8 on Aug 6, 2009 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not even close

Brian Campbell wanted way too much money for a defenseman that was a defensive liability. Trading Campbell was the only thing that Regier could do because this team would be in worse shape than it is now if Campbell was still around. The Drury and Briere situations were completely different than the Campbell situation.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Aug 6, 2009 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True, but....

Campbell was paid a ridiculous contract in Chicago (one that I would never want the Sabres to pay), but I wonder had serious negotiations taken place before the season (or earlier) if they would have been able to lock him up for a little longer at a reasonable price. The Sabres always point to the contract the player signs with the new team to discuss why the Sabres couldn’t sign them, but if you target the RIGHT players for a contract extension and aggressively get it done, you don’t pay Campbell 8 million a year like Chicago did b/c they aren’t on the open market. Darcy’s tendency to wait and be overly patient often comes back to bite him when it comes to trades and signing draft picks/young Sabres whose contracts are up makes me skeptical that any major play was made to sign Campbell before the season and once the season starts, the player has almost no reason to sign an extension without testing the waters..

by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 9, 2009 8:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The way it went down publicly

If the reports we heard at the time were correct, Campbell was looking for $6 million/season and the Sabres were offering $4 million/season. I’m sure that both sides may have compromised a little but those number are far apart and the $4 million seems more realistic to me.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Aug 9, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s still a far cry from the 8 million they point to that they can’t afford. Also, would you say your best/most versatile defenseman is worth 5 million? If not, you’ve done a bad job collecting defensemen.

by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 10, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

(Drury, Briere)We should have kept one and offer them a contract not both and for thinking they could was neglegence. If Campbell wanted to stay he could have took a little pay cut but he wanted big bucks and Buffalo already has big contracts! I agree we would be in a bigger hole now, especially with myers and all the dmen we have now!

Got some work to do before being a playoff team let alone a contender again!

by thenewhockeytown on Aug 7, 2009 1:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs