Official:Trade Brandon Montour to Buffalo for 1st and Guhle

[Samson's Flow]

Also how is Lemiuex a marginal prospect when he was drafted 33rd overall a year earlier? Talk about revisionist history now that we know he didn't pan out...

[jame]

Just now, Samson's Flow said:

Myers having almost twice as many points than Bogo says otherwise. Also Myers was significantly younger at the time.

It doesn't say anything like that....

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Samson's Flow said:

Also how is Lemiuex a marginal prospect when he was drafted 33rd overall a year earlier? Talk about revisionist history now that we know he didn't pan out...

He was a middle 6 guy when he was drafted and didn't improve on that. 

[jame]

2 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

Also how is Lemiuex a marginal prospect when he was drafted 33rd overall a year earlier? Talk about revisionist history now that we know he didn't pan out...

Not that draft position should matter in this case, but the 2014 draft was garbage, and the 2015 draft was an all time great draft class.

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

He was a middle 6 guy when he was drafted and didn't improve on that. 

In a bad evaluation sure.

Edited February 25, 2019 by jame

[shrader]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Guhle is also a marginal asset or at least on par with what Leamiux was. 

Lemieux was 6 or so months removed from being drafted 31st overall and in the middle of a solid OHL season.  It depends on draft quality obviously, but that's roughly the equivalent of the first round pick sent along with Guhle (since we're loosely equating things here).  So on top of that, Winnipeg also got another first round pick.  So again, if we ignore all the differences in the deals, sure, they're the same.

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, jame said:

Not that draft position should matter in this case, but the 2014 draft was garbage, and the 2015 draft was an all time great draft class.

In a bad evaluation sure.

No he was a middle 6 guy when he was drafted. He had 2nd line potential but being a 3rd liner with some scoring upside was also a reasonable eval of him going into that daft. 

[Samson's Flow]

Just now, shrader said:

Lemieux was 6 or so months removed from being drafted 31st overall and in the middle of a solid OHL season.  It depends on draft quality obviously, but that's roughly the equivalent of the first round pick sent along with Guhle (since we're loosely equating things here).  So on top of that, Winnipeg also got another first round pick.  So again, if we ignore all the differences in the deals, sure, they're the same.

Exactly. 

(Yes 31st overall not 33rd - I knew he was the first pick in the 2nd round but was thinking this was the NFL for some reason lol)

[jame]

7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Phaneuf, Clarkson, &Datsyuk all had "untradeable“ contracts moved. There is no such thing as an immovable contract. Not saying it'll be easy nor that they will get moved, but it IS possible.

Phaneuf being the only relevant one on the list, traded to one of the few teams that was basically like, "***** it, we're screwed in another year anyways". Good luck finding 3 of those partners for Perry, Getzlaf, and Kesler. 

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, shrader said:

Lemieux was 6 or so months removed from being drafted 31st overall and in the middle of a solid OHL season.  It depends on draft quality obviously, but that's roughly the equivalent of the first round pick sent along with Guhle (since we're loosely equating things here).  So on top of that, Winnipeg also got another first round pick.  So again, if we ignore all the differences in the deals, sure, they're the same.

basically

[jame]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

No he was a middle 6 guy when he was drafted. He had 2nd line potential but being a 3rd liner with some scoring upside was also a reasonable eval of him going into that daft. 

Is "middle 6" is what you label a prospect who you know doesn't have the skill to translate to the NHL at anything more than a role player?

[shrader]

2 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

Exactly. 

(Yes 31st overall not 33rd - I knew he was the first pick in the 2nd round but was thinking this was the NFL for some reason lol)

The power of hindsight is strong in this one.

[nfreeman]

7 minutes ago, jame said:

There were major issues with Myers game. Myers/Bogo was a swap. The history of their play since them validates that position. 

Lemiuex was a marginal asset, again validated through the last few years.... 

Historical validation is arguable, especially since Myers is going to get a huge contract this summer while Bogo may or may not get another NHL contract that is more than a "prove it" deal.

More to the point though, historical validation isn't relevant to what the discussion was, which was value given up in trade by TM vs value given up by JB at the time of the trade.  There is no question that Myers was a much more valuable asset than Bogo was, or that Lemieux was a valuable chip at that time.

[jame]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

basically

Good thing we didn't include that 3rd asset... that would've ruined it.

[WildCard]

13 minutes ago, jame said:

It's an interesting take.... team trades 24 year old defensemen, fans read the tea leaves as a tear down.....

That is after signing Henrique long term, and getting Rakell and Kase on bargain contracts through their prime.... and having an elite young netminder... But sure... they've got to tear it all down because of bad contracts. 

Alright buddy lol I forgot I'm dealing with the fan that's never wrong 

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, jame said:

Is "middle 6" is what you label a prospect who you know doesn't have the skill to translate to the NHL at anything more than a role player?

Middle 6 is the designation given to a middle prospect with the potential to make the NHL but also could miss. 

Bottom role player is a guy who's ceiling is that. Leamieux had some upside to consider. 

1 minute ago, jame said:

Good thing we didn't include that 3rd asset... that would've ruined it.

Then you might have been able to make a comparison. 

[nfreeman]

3 minutes ago, jame said:

Is "middle 6" is what you label a prospect who you know doesn't have the skill to translate to the NHL at anything more than a role player?

 

1 minute ago, jame said:

Good thing we didn't include that 3rd asset... that would've ruined it.

Couple more like this and you're gone again.

[jame]

Just now, nfreeman said:

Historical validation is arguable, especially since Myers is going to get a huge contract this summer while Bogo may or may not get another NHL contract that is more than a "prove it" deal.

More to the point though, historical validation isn't relevant to what the discussion was, which was value given up in trade by TM vs value given up by JB at the time of the trade.  There is no question that Myers was a much more valuable asset than Bogo was, or that Lemieux was a valuable chip at that time.

hmmm define "huge" contract?

Historical validation is important. It removes the hysteria.

There's a lot of question when those takes are not validated going forward.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, nfreeman said:

 

Couple more like this and you're gone again.

He's fine. I think the way I think about players is different. That's the issue. I was thinking about where Lemiuex would fit if he made the NHL and did he have a legit chance of doing that, that's how I got middle 6. 

[jame]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

Alright buddy lol I forgot I'm dealing with the fan that's never wrong 

When confronted with the facts... this is where you always retreat. Maybe continue to refine your position?

I'm giving you evidence that disputes your claim that Anaheim is doing a tear down. What evidence do you have to support the claim, beyond the Montour trade?

1 minute ago, nfreeman said:

 

Couple more like this and you're gone again.

It's been fun guys. 

Go Sabres!

[That Aud Smell]

50 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

I think Sabres fans complained because of the cavalier nature in which XGMTM spent the currency of picks & prospects that the team had worked so hard to build up. multiple picks for Hudson Fashing, 1st rounder for Lehner, multiple assets for Will Carrier - these were all drunk uncle in Vegas spending habits.

I think it is different in the JBott has communicated how much he values the picks and assets we have, and seems more measured in his use of them.

Also a good take.

At the end of the day, it matters greatly (1) how much is being spent and (2) what is being purchased. I think XGMTM had issues with both elements.

[Samson's Flow]

3 minutes ago, jame said:

When confronted with the facts... this is where you always retreat. Maybe continue to refine your position?

I'm giving you evidence that disputes your claim that Anaheim is doing a tear down. What evidence do you have to support the claim, beyond the Montour trade?

Maybe heed your own advice. We have given you plenty of facts and details that you have ignored as well. That's where the "fan who's always right" comments come from.

[...]

14 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Couple more like this and you're gone again.

Not to tell you how to mod, but, he's only challenging the reasoning or logic of a statement.  We all lay on the snark here.

Edited February 25, 2019 by ...

[jame]

9 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

Maybe heed your own advice. We have given you plenty of facts and details that you have ignored as well. That's where the "fan who's always right" comments come from.

I haven't seen a single fact presented that supports the argument that Anaheim is doing a tear down. Maybe a quick recap would put me in my place.

[Drunkard]

I like the trade and agree that it's in a similar vein to the Murray trades (multiple futures for a prime aged asset). Score one for Future Ex GM Jason Botterill (despite the fact that I'm not exactly a fan of his).

There's definitely an inherent bias by many on this board to jump on board with whatever decisions is made by the guy in charge at the moment and view it in the most favorable light.

 

 

[Samson's Flow]

2 minutes ago, jame said:

I haven't seen a single fact presented that supports the argument that Anaheim is doing a tear down.

I was referring to the Kane trade valuation and GMTM points from earlier.

Quote

Maybe a quick recap would put me in my place.

Cool.

1 minute ago, Drunkard said:

I like the trade and agree that it's in a similar vein to the Murray trades (multiple futures for a prime aged asset). Score one for Future Ex GM Jason Botterill (despite the fact that I'm not exactly a fan of his).

There's definitely an inherent bias by many on this board to jump on board with whatever decisions is made by the guy in charge at the moment and view it in the most favorable light.

 

 

This definitely happens. We all have a lot of hope that our team will get better rather than worse, so a reasonable faith in the GM comes along with that as long as he isn't demonstrating Chiarelli level incompetence.

I will re-iterate that I had no problem with either the Kane or ROR acquisition trades.