Evander Kane - Out rest of season UBI

[nucci]

No longer being the absolute laughing stock of the NHL isn't enough to make me praise the ground Murray walks on. I'd like to see him make a trade where he doesn't massively overpay because we have 10000 picks and prospects. He improved the team and you can't argue that, but there is most definetly and argument there.

Where has he "massively" overpaid?.....and what would you have done differently.....who praises ground?

[jsb]

No longer being the absolute laughing stock of the NHL isn't enough to make me praise the ground Murray walks on. I'd like to see him make a trade where he doesn't massively overpay because we have 10000 picks and prospects. He improved the team and you can't argue that, but there is most definetly and argument there.

I think we all are a bit surly with wanting to get back into the playoff picture but the facts are we were 44 points out of a playoff spot last year, we are now 13 points out, we were a minus 113 in the GF vs GA last year, we presently are a minus 22. That's a 31 point improvement in the standings and a 91 goal differential improvement.

I'm having a very hard time ripping the management team and coach for that and at the very least the games are much more entertaining this year plus it's also in a weird way nice to listen to all the biotching when we lose again.

 

Last year was horrific, I don't want to live thru that again and I at least am very optimistic that we are on a steep incline in getting even better very soon. My investment portfolio should be doing this well

[ddaryl]

Where has he "massively" overpaid?.....and what would you have done differently.....who praises ground?

 

You want to make an omelet, you got to break a few eggs...

 

I'll praise Murray.. I really like the way the team is shaping up.

[Thwomp!]

Too bad he didn't keep Myers! It's not like HE had his season come to an early end. What a terrible move by Murray! /narrative

Myers had knee surgery already, and now has serious surgery to deal with a chronic hip issue. Just seems relevant here.

Yes, Murray could have traded for the mythical "someone else" - that guy with no flaws. Maybe next time!

A-freaking-men.

Right there with you.

Talk about narrative. You've got a good one going for a long time.

 

Thanks for pointing out that the injury factor is another way that Murray overpaid in the trade. The players we gave up are far more durable than the ones we got. Add that to us giving up far more assets and taking on far more salary for players that aren't worth it.

[Thwomp!]

No longer being the absolute laughing stock of the NHL isn't enough to make me praise the ground Murray walks on. I'd like to see him make a trade where he doesn't massively overpay because we have 10000 picks and prospects. He improved the team and you can't argue that, but there is most definetly and argument there.

Good post. The assets won't always be there, especially at the rate Murray blows through them. I'd like to see a hockey trade that works for us rather than a sell the whole farm for someone else's headache trade which is at a 33% success rate so far. The Fasching trade is a good example of this but the only example thus far.

[nucci]

Good post. The assets won't always be there, especially at the rate Murray blows through them. I'd like to see a hockey trade that works for us rather than a sell the whole farm for someone else's headache trade which is at a 33% success rate so far. The Fasching trade is a good example of this but the only example thus far.

You would prefer Myers and Stafford back instead of having Kane and Bogo?

[LGR4GM]

ROR's ppg went from 0.67 last year to 0.82 this year.  That was a good trade.

[Thwomp!]

You would prefer Myers and Stafford back instead of having Kane and Bogo?

Nope. I would prefer doing what a rebuilding team usually does and stock young prospects and picks rather than trade those prospects and picks along with tradeable assets for someone else's headaches because you're in love with the "concepts".

 

Myers and Stafford wouldn't be here this year regardless. I just don't like what we got for them.

ROR's ppg went from 0.67 last year to 0.82 this year.  That was a good trade.

That's the 33% success rate I'm referring to.

[LGR4GM]

Nope. I would prefer doing what a rebuilding team usually does and stock young prospects and picks rather than trade those prospects and picks along with tradeable assets for someone else's headaches because you're in love with the "concepts".

 

Myers and Stafford wouldn't be here this year regardless. I just don't like what we got for them.

 

That's the 33% success rate I'm referring to.

Fasching and Deslauriers trade looks pretty good as well. Really the only trade that I would say is meh is the Kane/Bogo deal.

[Thwomp!]

Fasching and Deslauriers trade looks pretty good as well. Really the only trade that I would say is meh is the Kane/Bogo deal.

Lehner?

 

Holding on to players too long at the deadline and likely selling for less? Ala Stewart, McGinn, neuvirth?

 

I'd call the LA deal neutral. McNabb has played a major role for them. A hockey trade if you will.

[LGR4GM]

Lehner?

 

Holding on to players too long at the deadline and likely selling for less? Ala Stewart, McGinn, neuvirth?

 

I'd call the LA deal neutral. McNabb has played a major role for them. A hockey trade if you will.

Stewart is about the only one he may have held onto to long. The rest were traded for market value.

 

I dislike the Lehner trade but not because I think we highly overpaid necessarily but because I don't think we needed him. This goes to my belief in Ullmark and other GT prospect already in the system.  I would urge patience with GMTM. While not every move has been a stroke of greatness, no move so far has been a stroke of stupidity.

[woods-racer]

You never know.  Cal could get hot and score a couple goals or something....  ;)

 

This made me laugh a hearty belly laugh.

 

 I was truly hoping Cal would pot the empty netter at the end of the game for his hat trick. I always wish they do well when their playing.

 

But I would of still liked to see Bailey come up in his place.

[JJFIVEOH]

Nope. I would prefer doing what a rebuilding team usually does and stock young prospects and picks rather than trade those prospects and picks along with tradeable assets for someone else's headaches because you're in love with the "concepts".

 

Myers and Stafford wouldn't be here this year regardless. I just don't like what we got for them.

 

That's the 33% success rate I'm referring to.

How many more draft picks and assets could we have taken? At one point the Sabres had a historical amount of top two round draft picks (20 in 4 years) at some point you need to start filling in the holes with immediate help. You can't build a team with 20 20 year olds.

[Thwomp!]

How many more draft picks and assets could we have taken? At one point the Sabres had a historical amount of top two round draft picks (20 in 4 years) at some point you need to start filling in the holes with immediate help. You can't build a team with 20 20 year olds.

There are plenty enough veterans here without Kane, Bogo, and lehner. Either let the young picks and prospects grow up together and see what you have or make better trades in which you're not giving up way too much for "concepts" that you've valued too highly relative to their real worth and history.

[LTS]

Nope. I would prefer doing what a rebuilding team usually does and stock young prospects and picks rather than trade those prospects and picks along with tradeable assets for someone else's headaches because you're in love with the "concepts".

 

Myers and Stafford wouldn't be here this year regardless. I just don't like what we got for them.

 

That's the 33% success rate I'm referring to.

 

A team built with prospect that are ALL the same age and will hit contract milestones at ALL the same time is not how you build a team.  The benefit of having all of those prospects is the ability to move them in deals that obtain players that are a few years further along in their development and even out the influx of talent with the outflow of talent.

 

Picking up players like Lehner, ROR, Kane, and Bogo rebuilt the 23-26 year old contingent of the roster that was sorely missing.

 

if the Sabres only had their prospects at this point they would have a ton of players that were 19-22.

 

There is such a thing as being TOO young.

 

Kane has served a great role for the Sabres.  Bogo was required because you can't move Myers and Zadarov without getting back a D player to fill the roster.

 

I'd love to hear what you would have done to move the Sabres forward.

[JJFIVEOH]

I fail to see where anybody in that trade was valued too highly. But everybody has different opinions.

[Thorner]

Talk about narrative. You've got a good one going for a long time.

 

Thanks for pointing out that the injury factor is another way that Murray overpaid in the trade. The players we gave up are far more durable than the ones we got. Add that to us giving up far more assets and taking on far more salary for players that aren't worth it.

 

You seem to focus a great deal of your posts lately about one thing. Your criticism of Murray's trades. Specifically the Kane deal. If you think I have a narrative, it's only because you are only reading the posts I direct towards yours. Me liking the players we got in the trade isn't a narrative, when my posts on the matter are a very small minority of what I post about. 

 

If you have read my other posts and think they are sh*te, that's fine too. But that's different than focusing on a single narrative.  :P

 

And for the record, Myers has proven to be quite injury prone himself. Enough that it helps mitigate injury concerns in regards to Kane, in terms of trade analysis. I don't think "far" more durable in regards to Myers is fair, especially in light of his latest surgeries. 

Edited April 1, 2016 by Thorny

[Thwomp!]

You seem to focus a great deal of your posts lately about one thing. Your criticism of Murray's trades. Specifically the Kane deal. If you think I have a narrative, it's only because you are only reading the posts I direct towards yours. Me liking the players we got in the trade isn't a narrative, when my posts on the matter are a very small minority of what I post about. 

 

If you have read my other posts and think they are sh*te, that's fine too. But that's different than focusing on a single narrative.  :P

 

And for the record, Myers has proven to be quite injury prone himself. Enough that it helps mitigate injury concerns in regards to Kane, in terms of trade analysis. I don't think "far" more durable in regards to Myers is fair, especially in light of his latest surgeries.

 

I suggest you look at the games played for Myers, Bogo, and Kane throughout their careers. Even this year Myers will play more games than either of them. If Myers is injury prone, I'd love to know what Kane and Bogo are.

 

As for the rest I see you as an over the top cheerleader for everything Murray does and unable to objectively process any evidence to the contrary. Murray had made a couple good moves and far more bad or meh moves in my opinion. His evaluation is far more in question to me than with the vast majority of the board including you obviously.

[JJFIVEOH]

At least Kane has an excuse for getting hurt, he actually throws hits, Myers doesn't. Kane averages 4X as many hits/game than Myers. 

[TrueBlueGED]

Talk about narrative. You've got a good one going for a long time.

 

Thanks for pointing out that the injury factor is another way that Murray overpaid in the trade. The players we gave up are far more durable than the ones we got. Add that to us giving up far more assets and taking on far more salary for players that aren't worth it.

 

With injuries, it depends on the definition of "far more" that you feel like using. Games missed average for their careers: Stafford-9, Kane-17, Myers-13, Bogosian-16. The 8 game difference between Stafford and Kane I'd consider significant, but the 3 game difference between Myers and Bogosian? Meh, whatever. In Politifact parlance, I'd grade this statement as half true.

 

On the money, you're flat out incorrect. Kane and Bogosian combine for $10.39 million while Myers and Stafford combine for $9.85 million. Dare I say calling this difference "far more" is narrative worthy.

 

Edit: BTW, Joel Armia has battled injury every year of his pro career too. So yea.

 

There are plenty enough veterans here without Kane, Bogo, and lehner. Either let the young picks and prospects grow up together and see what you have or make better trades in which you're not giving up way too much for "concepts" that you've valued too highly relative to their real worth and history.

 

Remarkable irony in complaining about trading for "concepts" while extolling the virtues of letting picks and prospects grow together. Truly.

Edited April 1, 2016 by TrueBlueGED

[LGR4GM]

I suggest you look at the games played for Myers, Bogo, and Kane throughout their careers. Even this year Myers will play more games than either of them. If Myers is injury prone, I'd love to know what Kane and Bogo are.

 

As for the rest I see you as an over the top cheerleader for everything Murray does and unable to objectively process any evidence to the contrary. Murray had made a couple good moves and far more bad or meh moves in my opinion. His evaluation is far more in question to me than with the vast majority of the board including you obviously.

That's a big stawman type argument just because someone disagrees with you.

 

I listed his moves and we came up with 1 that was meh and 1 that might be meh depending on Lehner.

 

As for your last statement, seems the majority of the board is in the middle on Murray and his moves thus far. I will say that one thing to consider with the Kane trade is it effectively dumped 2 starters for 1 during last years tank. That cold calculated move also helped us land Eichel. My opinion on Murray is one of observation for now. I am curious to see what he does when he doesn't have all the assets in the world to throw around.

[Thwomp!]

With injuries, it depends on the definition of "far more" that you feel like using. Games missed average for their careers: Stafford-9, Kane-17, Myers-13, Bogosian-16. The 8 game difference between Stafford and Kane I'd consider significant, but the 3 game difference between Myers and Bogosian? Meh, whatever. In Politifact parlance, I'd grade this statement as half true.

 

On the money, you're flat out incorrect. Kane and Bogosian combine for $10.39 million while Myers and Stafford combine for $9.85 million. Dare I say calling this difference "far more" is narrative worthy.

 

Edit: BTW, Joel Armia has battled injury every year of his pro career too. So yea.

 

 

 

Remarkable irony in complaining about trading for "concepts" while extolling the virtues of letting picks and prospects grow together. Truly.

How is Drew Stafford's new contract applicable? We took way more committed contact in the trade.

 

Myers had missed 78 games over 7 years, including this year, Bogo 108, Kane 114. Stafford far less. Significant to me.

 

It's OK, we can all disagree. Time will tell, much like the Bills' defense this year, right? I obviously don't like the trade more than almost everyone else, but I'm done discussing it. We'll see if it ever works out. I don't think it will.

[TrueBlueGED]

How is Drew Stafford's new contract applicable? We took way more committed contact in the trade.

 

Myers had missed 78 games over 7 years, including this year, Bogo 108, Kane 114. Stafford far less. Significant to me.

 

It's OK, we can all disagree. Time will tell, much like the Bills' defense this year, right? I obviously don't like the trade more than almost everyone else, but I'm done discussing it. We'll see if it ever works out. I don't think it will.

You realize Stafford's old contract was only like $350k less than this one, right? Even using that your statement is still incorrect.

 

As to seeing how it works out, given how you've discussed it thus far, I doubt you'll ever think it was a good trade unless Kane scores 40 and Lemieux retires :p

[Thorner]

I suggest you look at the games played for Myers, Bogo, and Kane throughout their careers. Even this year Myers will play more games than either of them. If Myers is injury prone, I'd love to know what Kane and Bogo are.

 

As for the rest I see you as an over the top cheerleader for everything Murray does and unable to objectively process any evidence to the contrary. Murray had made a couple good moves and far more bad or meh moves in my opinion. His evaluation is far more in question to me than with the vast majority of the board including you obviously.

 

:rolleyes:

 

I just like how Murray has learned to be, aggressive, B - E - aggressive on the trade market. 

[dudacek]

I think there has to be a recognition here that Murray had far more picks and prospects than he could ever sign.

If we didn't make the Fasching/Kane/ROR deals we could potentially be five players over the 50-contract limit right now.

We had to make quantity for quality deals.

 

Now, whether we traded the right prospects and picks for the right players, that's a different debate.

Personally, I've always been in favour of identifying the players you want and paying the price.