Would have rather lost any of the others exposed to the draft...and Enis should have been in Carrier's spot.
Would have rather lost any of the others exposed to the draft...and Enis should have been in Carrier's spot.
I would argue that Carrier is much easier to replace and we have decent depth at forward in the pipeline.
Now, if we had lost Ullmark after penning him to that extension...THEN I'd join you in the gnashing and wailing.
"We've got a lot to cover. The good news is...I've got the time and I ain't going anywhere." -CM Punk, AEW Rampage, 8/20/21
"I see things in black and white and I have a zero tolerance policy for ****ty people." -Jon Moxley, AEW Dynamite, 1/6/21
It was going to either be Carrier or Ullmark. The Sabres wanted to keep Ullmark. I agree. It wasn't going to be Ennis.
http://www.wgr550.com/articles/news/...xpansion-draftAs expected the Sabres have lost Will Carrier to Vegas in the Expansion Draft. It became evident that Jason Botterill didn't want to lose goalie Linus Ullmark and the Golden Knights wanted Carrier. To help Ullmark stay, it cost Buffalo a 6th round pick in Saturday's draft. Vegas GM George McPhee, "There were two players in the end that we really liked and Buffalo had an interest in influencing us to go in one direction to protect their roster, so we got the sixth round pick."
coastal (06-23-2017)
JATMtheJATM (06-26-2017)
What the ****? Where did my phone get Kiwanis out of is?
But if Vegas only had interest in 2 players ( Carrier and Ullmark ) off our roster, it's a moot point. We then paid a small bribe to protect the goalie, who we valued more. ( the correct move )
We can't force crap on them, no matter how we spin it. Vegas had the power in this situation.
Anonymity is an abused privilege, abused most by people who mistake vitriol for wisdom and cynicism for wit