Sabres - Flames, Sabres get their Defensive help

To Flames: Kevin Bieksa + Adam Pardy + Year 3 NYI 2nd + Year 3 CGY 2nd

To Sabres: Brent Seabrook

Sabres Agree and are very happy to welcome Seabrook back to the organization

agree

I would like to place a challange on this trade.

Bieksa is good, but not as good as Seabrook. Pardy is nothing, and lets be honest, in a sim league, picks that arent in the 1st round really dont do much.

Seabrook will be playing for Team Canada this year, and Bieksa has had a few injury plagued seasons over the last couple years (including this season (being out now for like 3 or 4 months) and two years ago with the same injury as this year).

I would like to hear from the Flames on this one

ok guys, you know the deal, or maybe you've forgotten...

i'd like to get input from a few of you. if we cant come to a consensus we'll put it to an official vote.

I think the deal should pass....just my 2 cents

Buffalo Sabres wrote:

I think the deal should pass....just my 2 cents

Good reasoning, Mark

I've been thinking about this for a few hours now since I first saw it up, and I think I agree with Chris. Anyone who knows the Canucks knows that Bieksa is absolutely stinking up the joint this year. He has good ratings in the sim league, sure (Seabrook still has way better ratings), but in 1.5 SDHL seasons, he will have terrible ratings (while Seabrook will still be excellent).

Not only is Seabrook considerably younger, he's also better in basically every facet of the game, and will still improve. He is on Team Canada's defence, has a booming slapshot, he's a wicked hitter, he plays on the top pairing for the best team in the league, and he's rock solid defensively. And his contract is better than Bieksa's too.

As Chris also said, Pardy is virtually useless. If the picks were, say, a 1st-rounder and a couple of 2nd-rounders, it still might not be a great deal, but I'm not so sure it would be challenge-worthy. Two 2nd-rounders will basically amount to nothing, so it's not fair at all.

why are people hating this deal


Let's rewind our minds

To CAL: Frolov + Seabrook

To BUF: Phaneuf


NOW let's look at it

Frolov + Bieska + Pardy + 2 2nds = Phaneuf

yes? ok good. so now let's break down every seperate part

Bieska - the injuries = excellent top 2 dman
bieska = good top 3 dman

Pardy = decent 5/6 guy

2 2nds = 2 fairly good prospects

do I think the Flames win this deal, no sure they could get more in fact if I knew Seabrook was on the block or Kevin talked I would have made a better offer in my opinion but anyway this is iffy but I think it should pass but I understand how people can think it should be challenged

I am going to have to agree with the challange. Bieksa is BADLY overrated due to one very good season where he was playing above his head. Since then he's been either hurt or playing poorly.
Seabrook is one half of the best shut down pair in the NHL, Bieksa was playing behind Salo, Ehrhoff, Mitchell and Edler in Vancouver befor he got hurt.

That being said i'd like to hear from Calgary, if his reasoning for making this deal makes sense, I might change my mind, but at this point it seems like teh deal simply doesn't make sense for him.

Habs15 wrote:

Bieska - the injuries = excellent top 2 dman
bieska = good top 3 dman

Pardy = decent 5/6 guy

2 2nds = 2 fairly good prospects

But Ben, let's look at it a slightly different way:

Bieksa: two good years, and the rest of the time, injured or bad. He's 28 (ie. in his prime), and he's having an absolutely terrible year. More expensive than Seabrook too.

Pardy: #5/6 defenseman who you can basically get from free agency for free.

Two 2nd-rounders: Sure, decent, but they're both probably going to be around #45 overall. If they ever pan out (only 16/60 players drafted in 2nd round of '04-'05 are decent NHLers), it'll take 3-5 years.

The above components are all decent, but now let's look at Seabrook:
24 years old, plays for best young team in the league, plays top-pairing minutes, already good for 30+ pts and +20 or higher rating. Stud defensively, booming slapshot, excellent hitter, Team Canada member.

Frolov + Bieska + Pardy + 2 2nds = Phaneuf

I wouldn't do that trade, except if I needed depth and less cap.

hahahah, anyone else want to challenge?...just wondering.....so if all of you guys dont like this deal then let me kno what i should add

My 1st......nah that'll be top 10 forsure maybe even top 5

Jack Johnson...nah hes my only prospect type player i have

Carter, Perry, Staal, Backes, Clowe, Gagne, Pleks....nah they are all a huge part of my offence

Phaneuf....he will have to add considering Seabrook and Phaneuf are very close in age and Phaneuf is rated higher.....yes i kno he didnt make team Canada, some people say his value has dropped, not me i still think he has tons of value

So my question is what do i add to make all of you happy?

It's not a matter of you having to add something, it's a matter of the deal not making any sense for Calgary (unless he can explain how it does).

what about adding Sekera instead of Pardy...

I say Mark just adds some depth and prospects to sway the deal into a reasonable trade and thats all that matters.

Every trade has a winner and aloser, sometimes its a close call, which are trades I like to see, and sometimes its obvious one is a winner (trades I like to do ) , but nothing to cry about.

I see Mark winning this trade....Bieksa is good, but Seabrook is great, and Mark just added extra stuff that could meet around Seabrooks level.

I think Mark should add in some more....Sekera could be a good start, maybe another prospect and depth guy....cash? If he does that i can see this trade going through....but this is my opinion....basically the ONLY opinion that counts

fine ruin my youthful team...ill add Sekera and Asham...is that better? or are we still not on the same side...but im not happy about this

As I said before, this really had nothing to do with you adding more. I just have a hard time seeing how this trade makes sense for Calgary. (Which is what is Important when a deal is challanged)
We all know why Mark wants to make the deal, I feel we need to know why Calgary wants to, why does he think it Is a good move for his team? Its as simple as that.

i agree with what marc is saying in that we need to hear from calgary. even at that, it will be hard, imo, for him to come up with a convincing reason why he'd want to make this trade. getting seabrook+frolov for phaneuf+1st was a major coup for kevin. why is he in such a hurry to give seabrook back when his value is currently that of phaneuf+.

since we havent been able to get a response from calgary im just going to consider this deal dead. feel free to try and work something else out, mark.