The Unknown Poster

You've said that and pretty much everything that's possible to say. Heck, you called him expendable after he'd played a good game on D. We get what you're saying, but there's more than one perspective to your argument. For example, it's important to be reasonably competitive while building for the future. I definitely agree with this. I actually argued strongly against trading him a couple years ago on another forum. He's the most unique talent in the NHL. And while I felt pulling the trigger earlier this season was a good idea I was wrong about the jets ability to get back on track. You can't trade him when you're in the picture as they are now. But it's not ludicrous to say a decision will have to be made sooner or later.

Interesting that Quebecor CEO is at the meetings. I wonder if this can be equated to when Chipman addressed the BOG. CHRIS JOHNSTON DECEMBER 7, 2014, 7:23 PM BOCA RATON, Fla. — The titans of the hockey industry have arrived here not with storm clouds to weather, but a direction to course. These are extremely heady times for the NHL’s board of governors. Gone are significant front-burner issues that dominated this annual gathering in recent years — namely, collective bargaining and the national Canadian TV rights negotiations — and here is a league that is on a more solid financial footing than ever before. Now, as the most powerful men in the game sit down together Monday and Tuesday at the Boca Beach Club, this is a time for reflection. And for planning. Without question, the largest issue hanging over the proceedings is expansion. A formal process isn’t expected to be launched this week, according to a source, but commissioner Gary Bettman will provide an update on where things are at. There is a varying level of interest from prospective owners in Las Vegas, Seattle, Quebec and the Greater Toronto Area, among others. It is only a matter of time before the 30 owners welcome one or two new members. The NHL wants to be cautious in how and where it grows, but there are undoubtedly some on the board that are anxious to rake in their share of expansion fees that could be in excess of $400-million per franchise. Publicly, Bettman has tried to downplay discussion about the seeming inevitability of a 32-team league. “Even if we decided tomorrow, it wouldn’t happen for two or three years,” he said last month. “It’s not a formulaic thing,” he added. “There are lots of other things that we’re doing to continue to grow the game. … There’s no effort crying out for immediate expansion but we are getting expressions of interest.” The presence of Quebecor CEO Pierre Dion at the meetings in Boca Raton might fuel some speculation about Quebec City’s hopes to reclaim a team, but his attendance is said to be purely about providing an update on TVA’s French coverage — similar to what Keith Pelley and Scott Moore did on behalf of Rogers at September’s BOG. The new arena being built there is well on its way to completion — Bettman recently admitted to seeing its progress via webcam — but fans in Quebec will probably have to wait for the relocation of an existing team, rather than expansion, according to the commissioner. Las Vegas and Seattle hold considerable appeal because they would help balance out the number of teams in each conference. “Eastern expansion, at this point, would probably have more issues to deal with than a Western expansion simply because we’re already out of balance,” Bettman said in November. “I’m not sure that anybody would want to see that get worse.” Among the other important topics up for discussion by the board is the salary cap. The plunging Canadian dollar has left some GMs fearing that the upper level will drop from its current position of $69-million, but Bettman and deputy commissioner Bill Daly are expected to announce projections for an increase above $70-million in 2015-16. An update will also be provided on the proposed sale of a majority stake in the Arizona Coyotes to Philadelphia hedge-fund manager Andrew Barroway. While participation in the 2018 Olympics isn’t on the formal agenda, it could be touched on as part of a larger discussion on the future of international competition. The final details of the 2016 World Cup are currently being nailed down — expect an official event announcement in January — and will be shared with the governors here. Among those is a plan to field a European all-star team and “Young Guns” team alongside the top six hockey nations, as first reported by Sportsnet last month. That tournament should be a significant revenue generator, with one source saying that profits are being targeted at $100-million. When you couple that with the possibility of massive expansion fees in the near future, the NHL’s financial picture should only improve from here. Full speed ahead.

Why don't you give it a rest and stop being so condescending?

I think the stat is 17 out of 21 past ganes with at least a point. Shows a consistency that was lacking in years past. To play well with the injuries and depth issues is a huge positive. Certainly nice to see the team in the thick of it

In fact they will have hard decisions to make about Andrew Ladd too. Presumably they'd want to keep him long term. But he's also a UFA after next season. He either resigns or he must be traded. I'm not sure where the argument to that is. Buff is the same.

I'm my. Everyone here attacks my suggestion to trade buff. I reply and then I'm told to give it a rest. Don't discuss trading buff and I want reply about it. Lol. I've said repeatedly of the team continues to play well that they should not trade him this season. But they will have to discuss that possibility in the off season. Or are you suggesting they let buff leave as a UFA?

Are you kidding Mike? You often come across condescending when it comes to football talk. At least you're right 99% of the time. If someone makes a post in my direction I'm going to reply. Just as you do. I'm not being condescending at all. I've never quoted the dictionary at a someone who spoke in general terms that everyone clearly understood. If you disagree great. But I'm always in favour of intelligent And reasonable discussion I actually don't have a really strong opinion about trading buff. It's that I made a suggestion and a couple of you bit back so hard you're sort of putting me in the position of defending the point I made. It makes it seem like I'm strongly in favour of it. I'm not. I do however think if the jets feel the need to make a trade that Buff is their best trade asset. He has the highest value right now. His age and physical condition make his value diminishing in the next few years. He's a UFA after next season. He's publicly stated he wants to be D not forward. I think these are all great points to consider when discussion trade potential of Jets players. I'm not making this a hill to die on. I'm not sure which thread but I did reply with potential returns for a buff.

I think if you trade Buff you get two quality guys in return. That was my point. I'm not sure what one gets you at this point. He plays his ass off but he's getting close to the point where people are going to say he's not living up to his potential or his contract. Again, next off season will be very interesting for this team.

I'll say this about Buff. They might have trouble moving him back forward when guys are healthy.

I'd trade anyone if the return was right. But Enstron would be as close to an untouchable as we have. He gets a bad wrap from people but he's our best D man and plays a ton of minutes. Hate rehashing this again but I ove buff. My point is he's the right player at the wrong time. He brings the most value back right now. In three or four years not so much.

So now are you saying trade a top 6 guy for 4th liners? Up there^^^ You said your not suggesting that.... but this seem to say otherwise. Maybe im reading it wrong. Yes you are reading it wrong.

Big test!

I think you got my point. If not I suppose I could type it out really slowly. But generally to the point Buff as a trade has greater value to the jets future than he has now. Potentially. You can never know for sure. Law of diminishing returns versus value you get back in trading high. Not difficult concept.

The chemistry thing is important too and something I think the jets have actually been missing until this year. I think the coaching change has helped in that regard. As for the other point no one would ever suggest trading buff or any top six guy away fro nothing do the point of needing bodies is moot. You'd kikely get back at least two bodies and be better depth wise. But obviously the way the team is playing they aren't tading a top guy. But there will be some high level decisions to be made in the off season.

Just an FYI, but what you saw for Star Wars was a Teaser. This is a full length trailer. Quite a big difference there.Looks ok. I'll probably wait till this one hits Netflix. Both were teaser trailers. Terminator showed more than a usul teaser does but it's called a teaser nonetheless. Actually Star Wars probably showed more than a usual teaser does. But terminator got it right in showing fans some actual "teases". Watch the original teaser for Star Trek 09. That was a fantastic teaser that showed nothing yet still told you a lot to "tease" you. I actually watched Star Wars trailer again on my big screen and in that format I like it a bit more but it still underwhelms. The plethora of spoilers leaked this past week excite me a lot more.

Given the fact that 29 other front offices agreed with the Jets, I'm going to say you're the one in the wrong here. If Brunner can't crack your top 6, he can't crack your lineup. Period. Seems about right. Its odd to me someone would want to build from a 4th line out.... Trade a top 6 to get a 4th? Weird. Signing Brunner does natta and makes no difference. also weird. This makes no sense. What are you talking about? Trade a top six for a fourth? Who suggested that?

Given the fact that 29 other front offices agreed with the Jets, I'm going to say you're the one in the wrong here. If Brunner can't crack your top 6, he can't crack your lineup. Period. Mike I'm not a GM. I'm not a TSN insider either. If they were wrong so be it. Odd hostility around these parts lately. I guess neither the jets or other teams have ever been wrong. brunner is no magic fix but he's an improvement over Thorburn or Halischuck (and I like Halischuck but I think he's got a two-way deal which makes him financially more attractive).

I don't understand this. Why do you continue to push your agenda re: Byfuglien being traded when you've made it clear that it's not up for discussion? You're not going to change your mind. We get it. You want to see Byfuglien get traded. No matter what. It makes like zero sense. Jets 2.0 started as a 1 line team.... Did what they said theyd do and got a second line.... continued on their path and got a 3rd line. Keep doing what their doing, If and its a huge giant if....something comes across for Buff or Kane that actually gets us a top ill say a top 4 because lines change... then no you dont make that trade.... you continue on the path you set out for. Trading for the sake of trading is a giant bad idea in todays NHL. Exactly correct. And I never said trade for the sake of trade. I agree with you. Please let's not put words in my mouth. Thanks.

I don't understand this. Why do you continue to push your agenda re: Byfuglien being traded when you've made it clear that it's not up for discussion? You're not going to change your mind. We get it. You want to see Byfuglien get traded. No matter what. I find this hilarious. Someone mentions me wanting him traded. I reply and then people like you go on about me pushing this idea. for example, you make a statement that is factually wrong based off the idea that you're always right about everything. I'll give you credit, you're spot on with Bombers opinion. Not so much hockey. I think trading Buff is best for the jets because he is the best asset for getting a high return. He's a phenomenal player. If the jets were a strong playoff team then he'd be worth more to the team here. But if the jets are not going to compete at a high level for 3 more years then I believe the law of diminishing returns forces the jets hand in making the trade. Personally I'd be thrilled if buff was a jet the rest of his career. I'm a huge fan. Now I've explained it once again. Can we please knock it off now? Thanks!

Many experts assumed he'd be picked up. Jets missed out on a free player that is better than four guys they are starting right now.

If the team continues to play well they should not trade him until the off season. But they should trade him. Unless they can resign him for less.

It's not that I think he's great. I do think he has speed and has shown offensive ability. He's worth it to me in the sense his money is easily absorbed and there is no commitment after this season. So for the jets I'd bring him in because I think his speed would be better on the third line then bumping up a guy that can't even be an every day fourth liner for us.

How about giving the Buff trade thing a rest for awhile?Calm down. Someone mentioned trades and I replied. Take a deep breath and relax.

Buff might stay on D. But again it shows he's expendable. I'd still pick up brunner. It will be a different story against the Ducks.

No kidding. Rewarding bad behaviour.