Kane traded to San Jose for a Cond. ‘19 1st, Dan O’ Regan and Conditional 4th

[jahnyc]

None of us know whether GMJB had better offers at different points in time or whether GMJB directly or indirectly inflated expectations, but expectations were certainly higher than what we ended up getting as a return.  One question I have is why we hired another GM with no prior GM experience after GMTM.  GMJB has a very good pedigree and he seems smart, but after the experience with GMTM, I would have thought that hiring a GM with GM experience would have been a priority, or at least adding a person with that type of an experience to our front office.  The reason I am raising this is I wonder about the dynamics with other GMs at the trading deadline.  Did GMJB have significant prior experience with this type of a situation?  Does he have long-standing relationships with the other GMs?  Was he involved with these types of discussions and pressures when he was with the Penguins?  Even if he was heavily involved, it must be much different experiencing it as the final decision maker. 

[Weave]

For over a decade we've been trying to spin every transaction as a positive move for the Sabres. And, we've been neck-and-neck with Arizona for the worst NHL franchise over that time. I'm not going to spin the Kane trade as a good deal because other GMs clearly got far more for lesser rentals. That the GM who made the lousy deal said better deals weren't out there is exactly what he would be expected to say. Maybe he isn't good at working the phones and promoting this tradeable assets? Not a single other guy got traded from this awful roster... and history tells me that I shouldn't give a Sabres GM the benefit of the doubt until they've earned it. And, our new GM thus far hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt.

I’m in agreement with almost all of this. Especially the first and last parts.

[Drunkard]

Regarding requiring evidence to offer a theory.... ugh, more posters setting rules for conversation. Makes me stabby.

 

It should be pretty obvious that none of us here have the connections to offer evidence. That doesn’t mean we should not talk about the smoke we saw/smelled. Fer cripes sake, if we were limited to commentary that had evidence support this site would get 5 posts per day.

 

I heart this post, especially the stabby part.

[dudacek]

For the life of me, I don't understand this line of thinking.  As in, there are positions people take here that I understand, but disagree with. Even vehemently. This one, I just don't understand. Cannot get my head wrapped around it.

Word.

“I’ll let this asset burn before I take the best offer available”

In what world is Botterill going to gain respect from his peers for deciding three assets is worse than none?

 

  

The important thing that everyone is forgetting is that we traded for Eichel's friend.

 

Maybe this really is Eichel's team, and not in the way Pittsburgh is Crosby's, Edmonton is McDavid's or Washington is Ovechkin's

I hear Jack hates O’Flaherty even more than O’Reilly.

Big struggles over the captaincy that year at BU.

[darksabre]

I really just want it to pan out that O'Regan - Eichel - Rodrigues somehow ends up being our top line that absolutely destroys the Bruins in a playoff series. 

[Iron Crotch]

Balls Pouliot and Josh Gorges are so bad that no team in the league would give up a 7th rounder for them?

 

 

 

(probably so, the more I think about it)

 

[dudacek]

And, our new GM thus far hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt.

This is true.

But, as he said, the current group is not working.

[Gramps]

These are the best reporters in the sport, if they're reporting something like this, for months, and it was false, don't you think Botterill would have denied it? Or, don't you think they wouldn't have even reported it? These guys wouldn't have a job if they reported falsities about organizations all the time; nobody would give them any information for disparaging them.

 

I've never known any GM in any sport to come out and say 'we want this for this' publicly. That doesn't mean multiple reports from reputable sources are incorrect

 

TSN Insiders are not the Enquirer

 

Your posts are from around mid-December until mid-January. Take a look at Kane's game logs from 12/23 until 2/8. Guy basically took about 6 weeks off and did nothing. 

[WildCard]

Your posts are from around mid-December until mid-January. Take a look at Kane's game logs from 12/23 until 2/8. Guy basically took about 6 weeks off and did nothing. 

A fair point. I combed that thread though, and don't see any update posts to indicate the asking price ever changed. I don't see anything to indicate Botterill's asking price would have changed, especially as dramatically as the haul he got for Kane. It seems like that's just what he could get; I would bet he would tell you the return is disappointing too

[Iron Crotch]

This is true.

But, as he said, the current group is not working.

 

 

This group isn't working... last year's group wasn't working... the year before that... and the year before that...  :P 

[dudacek]

This group isn't working... last year's group wasn't working... the year before that... and the year before that...  :P

 

So?

That explains the negativity and skepticism of the fan base, but it has nothing to do with Botterill, or whether or not Kane should have been signed, assuming he could have been signed.

[Gramps]

A fair point. I combed that thread though, and don't see any update posts to indicate the asking price ever changed. I don't see anything to indicate Botterill's asking price would have changed, especially as dramatically as the haul he got for Kane. It seems like that's just what he could get; I would bet he would tell you the return is disappointing too

 

I'm disappointed as well, but if there was only one offer for whatever reason, so be it. Trade talks go on all year, not just at the deadline. If Kane is so valuable, why didn't a team make a play for him back when he was hot and we were essentially out of it ? 

Edited February 27, 2018 by Gramps

[Stoner]

It's a sports message board, boss. Everything's an opinion. Or, in more modern parlance, a take. I don't think things would be improved if we were to add "IMO" to every assertion made.

Thank you, sir.

 

Because you can't ever lose. Winners win, gosh darnit. And if you can't win, then don't even play. But if you don't play, you're also a loser. Got it?

Have you and Smell had enough fun with this? When you're done, answer me this: does this trade make it more or less likely that Botterill will get full value back in future trades?

 

Everyone agrees it's disappointing.  Even those who expected very little return are disappointed because they hoped they might be wrong, which would have been good for the franchise.  Nobody is saying, "Wow!  This is an awesome haul!"

 

We may never know whether it was GMJB's failure or just an overestimation of how much GMs would value his services, given his past.  We will need more data before we can evaluate GMJB (hard to detect patterns with so few data points.)  This certainly isn't something that paints him in a good light, but there is at least a reasonable alternative explanation for what happened.

One draft, one offseason, most of one season and one trade deadline. 31st in the league. We're getting there with Botterill. Unless you like five-year plans and want to wait until year 3, which just isn't the way sports works anymore (if they ever did).

 

The important thing that everyone is forgetting is that we traded for Eichel's friend.

 

Maybe this really is Eichel's team, and not in the way Pittsburgh is Crosby's, Edmonton is McDavid's or Washington is Ovechkin's

I hadn't heard they are friends. Just on the basis of playing one college season together?

 

Those are all pretty much the working definition of an opinion. Are you new at this? :P

I will have to resign myself to accepting that, uh, opinion.

[WildCard]

I'm disappointed as well, but if there was only one offer for whatever reason, so be it. Trade talks go on all year, not just at the deadline. If Kane is so valuable, why didn't a team make a play for him back when he was hot and we were essentially out of it ? 

Personally, I think Botterill asked for far too much. I think if he scaled it down a bit and traded him earlier, we could have gotten a package somewhere between what was reported he first asked, and what we actually got

[darksabre]

 

 

Have you and Smell had enough fun with this? When you're done, answer me this: does this trade make it more or less likely that Botterill will get full value back in future trades?

 

 

I suspect it has no effect on future trade returns, given that his previous trade with Minnesota didn't seem to have any effect on this one. 

 

How's that?

 

I swear, some people here just want to use Occam's Razor to slit their wrists. 

 

Down the road, not across the street. 

[That Aud Smell]

Have you and Smell had enough fun with this? When you're done, answer me this: does this trade make it more or less likely that Botterill will get full value back in future trades?

Neither more nor less likely.

 

The real answer to this one: A sum equal to the number of dogs that live in London.

[Georgia Blizzard]

The more I think of this the situation, the more I'm convinced Kane's reputation tanked (pun intended) his value.  I am really curious what type of FA contract he ends up with, especially as it relates to TERM.  I can see him getting a 1 year deal.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Georgia Blizzard

[Taro T]

The deal is this:  We were sellers.  Again.  And didn't even sell much.

 

At some in the (near or distant) future, the Sabres will again be buyers.  Then we'll all be happier, simply because instead of investing in the future the Sabres will be building on the present.  And then we'll be all happy when we get a Brad Boyes who scores a goal in his first game as a Sabre, before settling into the customary disappointment.

True. But other than Kane, Pouliot, & Gorges was there anything that was legitimately expected to be available on the Sabres Store shelves that was available for prospects &/or picks? MAYBE Beaulieu &/or Josefson?

 

IMHO, if Larsson &/or Girgensons gets traded they'll be additional pieces in a true hockey trade.

 

Eichel, O'Reilly, Okposo, Reinhart, Ristolainen, & Scandella have real value and none are on the block unless a real knock you socks off offer is there & those aren't there at the trade deadline.

 

Baptiste, Bailey, Antipin, Nylander, Rodrigues, & Smith are the types of guys that go out the door in a deal for a rental. No way they were getting moved for prospects.

 

McCabe & Bogosian are broken. So no value there at the deadline.

 

Moulson & Pominville only go if you're giving away a pick or 2 to facilitate moving them. Nolan isn't the type of guy that gets traded at the deadline.

 

Did either goalie give anyone here any legitimate hope he'd be moved?

 

Leaving us with 3 legit trade pieces. And considering Pouliot played Sunday, either Botterill didn't want to move him for what was being offered or he wasn't getting offers. Gorges was on the block, but mainly as a courtesy to him. He was a 7th rounder at best coming back.

 

And life around here will definitely be better when Buffalo is a buyer. :beer:

[carpandean]

[Brawndo]

Corey Pronman Thoughts on O’Regan

 

Daniel O'Regan, C, Buffalo (from San Jose): The initial reaction to a 24-year-old small forward who has yet to establish himself as an NHL regular will likely be pessimism, but I still have time for O'Regan. He’s a very gifted playmaker who processes the game at a high-level and has good skill with the puck. He's an agile skater but doesn't have a great top gear, which isn't ideal at his size. He works but he'll never be confused for a grinder or a great defensive forward. It's a gamble on a player with talent who hasn't forced his way into a scoring minutes role yet but was dominant in the AHL last season as a rookie. He could easily flame out on the Sabres, but O'Regan also has the skills to be a middle-six forward if he clicks.

[GASabresIUFAN]

The more I think of this the situation, the more I'm convinced Kane's reputation tanked (pun intended) his value.  I am really curious what type of FA contract he ends up with, especially as it relates to TERM.  I can see him getting a 1 year deal.

I think his “reputation” was a great excuse by other GMs to low ball Jbot. The truth is despite some early issues here off the ice, he has played hard and well during his time in Buffalo. We also haven’t heard anything about locker-room issues with him other then he got along well with Jack and Sam. It seems he matured a great deal during his time here and that should have been a positive selling point.

 

I believe Jbot got played pure and simple. At this point it’s water under the bridge. To make lemonade from this deal we have to hope that Kane’s maturity shows in SJ, he plays well and they re-sign him. We also have to hope Danny Boy turns out to be better then Wilson.

 

Ultimately this failure doesn’t change what this team and Jbot need to do to fix the franchise. It just made it a little harder. We need some serious help from internal prospects. Guhle and Ullmark need to step in next season and make an impact. Mittelstadt, Nylander and Asplund, our three most talented prospects, need to take big step forward next season so that they can make an impact in Buffalo in 2019. It would also be great if a couple of lesser draft picks like Olofsson, Pu, Borgen (if he signs), and Fitzgerald come in and make an impact sooner then later. A top 4 pick this season also wouldn’t hurt.

 

So how does Jbot whether this time until the farm really starts producing NHL talent? Good question. It start with using our cap space to try to steal a talent or two from cap strapped teams. It starts with finding a bargain or two in FA.

[Georgia Blizzard]

I think his “reputation” was a great excuse by other GMs to low ball Jbot. The truth is despite some early issues here off the ice, he has played hard and well during his time in Buffalo. We also haven’t heard anything about locker-room issues with him other then he got along well with Jack and Sam. It seems he matured a great deal during his time here and that should have been a positive selling point.

 

I believe Jbot got played pure and simple. At this point it’s water under the bridge. To make lemonade from this deal we have to hope that Kane’s maturity shows in SJ, he plays well and they re-sign him. We also have to hope Danny Boy turns out to be better then Wilson.

 

Ultimately this failure doesn’t change what this team and Jbot need to do to fix the franchise. It just made it a little harder. We need some serious help from internal prospects. Guhle and Ullmark need to step in next season and make an impact. Mittelstadt, Nylander and Asplund, our three most talented prospects, need to take big step forward next season so that they can make an impact in Buffalo in 2019. It would also be great if a couple of lesser draft picks like Olofsson, Pu, Borgen (if he signs), and Fitzgerald come in and make an impact sooner then later. A top 4 pick this season also wouldn’t hurt.

 

So how does Jbot whether this time until the farm really starts producing NHL talent? Good question. It start with using our cap space to try to steal a talent or two from cap strapped teams. It starts with finding a bargain or two in FA.

 

There was that practice a month or so ago when Falk screamed at him saying he was "selfish"

 

I agree, other than that, the rest of so-called issues the past 1 1/2 years have been unsubstantiated rumors --- unless, of course, teams did homework and found out there was something else out there

Edited February 27, 2018 by Georgia Blizzard

[Sabres Fan in NS]

This thread was a very tough read.  Talk of racism and other unpleasant stuff.  I believe that race and racism play a part in every aspect of life, many will not want to admit that.

 

+++++

 

Kane was traded for what was the best offer available.  Of that, I have no doubt.  Therefore, the Sabres received enough in return to make the trade.

 

I agree with We've (and some others) in that, once again, the Sabres traded away a good player for a chance at something in the future.  That is the worst part of this whole thing.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Sabersfläkt i NS

[LTS]

Regarding requiring evidence to offer a theory.... ugh, more posters setting rules for conversation. Makes me stabby.

 

It should be pretty obvious that none of us here have the connections to offer evidence. That doesn’t mean we should not talk about the smoke we saw/smelled. Fer cripes sake, if we were limited to commentary that had evidence support this site would get 5 posts per day.

 

It's not setting a rule, no one has to follow it.  You can make a proclamation and be on your happy way.  I could refute your proclamation and be on my way.  If that happened we would truly have 5 posts per day on here.  Instead, if we want to forge into a deeper conversation I don't think it's out of the realm of reason to ask if there is more information that is helping to shape the aforementioned proclamation.  In theory we can then dive deeper on that information and, assuming we are capable of it, have an actual discussion on the topic where both sides present information, discuss its merits and potentially arrive at a mutually agreeable position.

 

Otherwise what's the point?

 

I think we all realize that we're mostly uninformed peons in the overall information game.  Every once in awhile there is tangible information that gets released to the public but most of the time its a lot of "media speak" and innuendo.  It's so bad that the local sports radio has to deliver information with "I hear reports of" rather than actual information.  Of course knowing all that we probably should all stop proclaiming absolutes about the business of hockey.  It's more realistic to debate the game because that is played out in front of our eyes.

 

But when it comes to the business aspects, we're all just fish in the pet store aquarium chasing every shadow that walks by the tank with the hope that food might be thrown in.

[That Aud Smell]

I think his “reputation” was a great excuse by other GMs to low ball Jbot. The truth is despite some early issues here off the ice, he has played hard and well during his time in Buffalo. We also haven’t heard anything about locker-room issues with him other then he got along well with Jack and Sam. It seems he matured a great deal during his time here and that should have been a positive selling point.

 

I believe Jbot got played pure and simple. At this point it’s water under the bridge. To make lemonade from this deal we have to hope that Kane’s maturity shows in SJ, he plays well and they re-sign him. We also have to hope Danny Boy turns out to be better then Wilson.

 

Ultimately this failure doesn’t change what this team and Jbot need to do to fix the franchise. It just made it a little harder. We need some serious help from internal prospects. Guhle and Ullmark need to step in next season and make an impact. Mittelstadt, Nylander and Asplund, our three most talented prospects, need to take big step forward next season so that they can make an impact in Buffalo in 2019. It would also be great if a couple of lesser draft picks like Olofsson, Pu, Borgen (if he signs), and Fitzgerald come in and make an impact sooner then later. A top 4 pick this season also wouldn’t hurt.

 

So how does Jbot whether this time until the farm really starts producing NHL talent? Good question. It start with using our cap space to try to steal a talent or two from cap strapped teams. It starts with finding a bargain or two in FA.

 

GMs low-balled JBOT? JBOT got played? 

 

Is the idea that there was some sort of conspiracy afoot?

 

I know I said it already, but I literally can't fathom the thought process that ends in these takes. This may be a function of my limited imagination, or just some cognitive road block in my brain. But I just don't get it.

 

There was an "open" market among 30 buyers (I qualify "open" because 30 is a pretty small market.) That market had supply and demand, and yielded a price.

 

There was that practice a month or so ago when Falk screamed at him saying he was "selfish"

 

Forgot about that one.

 

I attended a game in a group of four earlier this season (JESUS, I've been to too many games), and there was a guy with us who I didn't know who's coached at a variety of non-college/non-major-junior levels for going on 25 years. He's a Red Wings fan, but lives just over the border so he has seasons to the Sabres. Anyway - that was the word he used for Kane, and, I think, well before Falk reportedly did. It struck me how he didn't say it with any bitterness -- just very matter of fact.