The ROR trade sucked thread

[...]

18 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I think there's considerable value in understanding the processes that led to making, and subsequently losing, the trade. That can inform evaluations and discussion of other moves, both actual and potential.

I don't see the validity of these evaluations without first knowing the actual reasons for the ROR trade.  Without facts, it's all speculation, and these "evaluations" are built on gossamer wings, worth nothing, watering down...nay...destroying...the quality of the subsequent discussions.  This is why we're stuck in this circle of ROR nonsense, because everyone knows no one knows a thing other than what happened superficially, and some are happy to exclude facts and context for the sake of discussion, while others know a fundamentally worthless discussion is made even more worthless by the exclusion of the facts and context.

Edited June 13, 2019 by ...
The Ghost of Dwight Drane

[That Aud Smell]

22 minutes ago, Weave said:

This is my take. And it’s also my take as to why there was a disconnect with Brian Gionta as well.  And I said as much 2 offseasons ago.

I missed that. Interesting. 

Of course, Gionta would have been coasting for a different set of reasons at that point, yeah?

15 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think there may also have been a streak of jealousy and frustration in there with the insecurity.

”Why is Sam practicing/hanging/following that douche and not me?”

My sense with ROR is that he is, in the football coaches' terms, all about ball. If he was miffed at Sam preferring to hang with Eichel, I infer that would have been more from a place of "that guy can't/won't show you the way; I can."

[jad1]

8 minutes ago, ... said:

I don't see the validity of these evaluations without first knowing the actual reasons for the ROR trade.  Without facts, it's all speculation, and these "evaluations" are built on gossamer wings, worth nothing, watering down...nay...destroying...the quality of the subsequent discussions.  This is why we're stuck in this circle of ROR nonsense, because everyone knows no one knows a thing other than what happened superficially, and some are happy to exclude facts and context for the sake of discussion, while others know a fundamentally worthless discussion is made even more worthless by the exclusion of the facts and context.

In other words, standard message-board fodder. 

[...]

15 minutes ago, jad1 said:

In other words, standard message-board fodder. 

The text equivalent to Angry Birds.

[jad1]

1 minute ago, ... said:

The text equivalent to Angry Birds.

The response equivalent to an old man yelling at the neighborhood kids to get off his lawn.

[GoPuckYourself]

I'm still fine with the trade, he clearly didn't want to be here after the comments and we granted him his wish. It was no secret to other GM's that O'Reilly wanted out and hence why there wasn't much in the trade for him. So do we want a player who doesn't want to be here? 

[CallawaySabres]

It was a horrible trade

He was here on a good cap number

He most likely demanded a trade back in March because Buffalo had been talking to the Blues for months. It had nothing to do with O'Reilly saying he lost his passion

He's gone........so go find a 2nd line center and fix your massive mistake, it's time to not SUCK anymore

[jad1]

1 minute ago, GoPuckYourself said:

I'm still fine with the trade, he clearly didn't want to be here after the comments and we granted him his wish. It was no secret to other GM's that O'Reilly wanted out and hence why there wasn't much in the trade for him. So do we want a player who doesn't want to be here? 

Every locker room has issues, but there's a difference between a locker room having issues and it being toxic. O'Reilly wasn't toxic, but the front office treated the situation that way.

It would be interesting to see how Krueger would have handled the situation.  He seems to have a stronger approach to handling the locker room.  Hopefully he can keep the team on the same page as it continues to mature.

[sweetlou]

I believe Jack liked having ROR on the team to take some of the defensive pressure off him.  Jack does not always look to be engaged on the defensive end.  ROR may not have liked the way his role was with the team in that he always started on defensive face offs and Jack was primarily used for offensive zone face offs. ROR knew he could be a #1 center and was brought to Buffalo to do that.  The emergence of Jack after three years changed his role to #2.

So in my opinion both were at fault leading up to the eventual trade.  If Jack put more effort into training and defensive responsibility and ROR excepted his role as #2 center good things could have been done in Buffalo.

[matter2003]

But I hear Doug Armstrong called up JBotts last night and threw in a free private Laura Branigan concert for the entire front office...thats gotta count for something doesnt it??

 

Edited June 13, 2019 by matter2003

[Drunkard]

7 hours ago, matter2003 said:

But I hear Doug Armstrong called up JBotts last night and threw in a free private Laura Branigan concert for the entire front office...thats gotta count for something doesnt it??

 

He should have thrown in a bottle of ky jelly.

Edited June 14, 2019 by Drunkard

[Brawndo]

2 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

1) There may have been an order from the top to trade him before he got paid the bonus, but that doesn't mean that the order to trade in the first place originated at the top. I think it's likely Botterill decided to trade him (for whatever reason) and at that point was told he had better do it before the bonus. But we'll never know. Anyway, I don't think there's a way to look at the trade that makes either Botterill or Pegula look good--it's bad all 'round. However the trade came to be, it's incumbent upon Botterill to fill the giant hole it created. 

2) Sir, the collapse already happened. The question is whether Botterill can reconstruct fast enough.

I respectfully disagree with the first statement. Botterill announced that he was going to take the first year as GM to evaluate the team. This may have been in response to Pegula suggesting that Kane and ROR be moved ASAP. I have heard some rumblings that would make PA salivate, but I will refrain from sharing. 

The  biggest thing is if both Botterill and Pegula agreed that he needed to go for whatever reason, all restrictions should have been removed to maximize the return. 

The other thing is WTF were  there not conditions on the 2021 2nd, such as if the Blues won the Cup it becomes a 2020 1st? 

In regards to number 2, I will consider it another collapse if the team is not in the playoffs in two years. 

[Thorner]

6 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

This is a good post - for at least a couple of reasons.

The absence of an active market for the eventual Conn Smythe winner reflects horribly on several GMs.

People here have posted to the effect that the Tim Hortons incident and Cal O'Reilly's rough handling of Nylander may have contributed to the Pegulas being done with 90.

If the Pegulas are dictating personnel moves when it comes to our best players, we are in a worse spot than if Botterill wanted to move him.

I'm going to continue to believe it was Botterill's choice in the first place to move him, because it makes the most sense, and because it is also the lesser of two evils. 

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, Brawndo said:

I do believe there was an order from the top to trade him prior to the bonus being paid. 

In terms of Botterill being on the hot seat, I do not believe he is.  Krueger’s Deal is for three seasons and Botterill has three left on his, barring a total collapse in the next 24 Months, they finish their deals. I doubt that Krueger takes the job if he  did not have reassurance that Botterill was safe from the Pegulas.. 

I can buy this, but the initial decision to trade him still came from Botterill, as far as we know.

The second bolded, why? If the Sabres improve maginally this season, miss the playoffs, then miss the playoffs again the following year, why should Botterill keep his job? 4 years without playoffs? Guy shouldn't have a job in that scenario. 

I was close to thinking it was playoffs or bust for him THIS coming season, his 3rd, but I've shifted to thinking playoff bubble and giving him the benefit of the doubt. But if he goes 4 without making it? Come on. 

Edited June 13, 2019 by Thorny

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

1) There may have been an order from the top to trade him before he got paid the bonus, but that doesn't mean that the order to trade in the first place originated at the top. I think it's likely Botterill decided to trade him (for whatever reason) and at that point was told he had better do it before the bonus. But we'll never know. Anyway, I don't think there's a way to look at the trade that makes either Botterill or Pegula look good--it's bad all 'round. However the trade came to be, it's incumbent upon Botterill to fill the giant hole it created. 

2) Sir, the collapse already happened. The question is whether Botterill can reconstruct fast enough.

Beat me to it. How much of a leash are you personally giving Botterill?

[Radar]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Beat me to it. How much of a leash are you personally giving Botterill?

I give him two more seasons. No playoffs he doesn't get that last year.

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, ... said:

I don't see the validity of these evaluations without first knowing the actual reasons for the ROR trade.  Without facts, it's all speculation, and these "evaluations" are built on gossamer wings, worth nothing, watering down...nay...destroying...the quality of the subsequent discussions.  This is why we're stuck in this circle of ROR nonsense, because everyone knows no one knows a thing other than what happened superficially, and some are happy to exclude facts and context for the sake of discussion, while others know a fundamentally worthless discussion is made even more worthless by the exclusion of the facts and context.

 

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

I respectfully disagree with the first statement. Botterill announced that he was going to take the first year as GM to evaluate the team. This may have been in response to Pegula suggesting that Kane and ROR be moved ASAP. I have heard some rumblings that would make PA salivate, but I will refrain from sharing. 

The  biggest thing is if both Botterill and Pegula agreed that he needed to go for whatever reason, all restrictions should have been removed to maximize the return. 

The other thing is WTF were  there not conditions on the 2021 2nd, such as if the Blues won the Cup it becomes a 2020 1st? 

In regards to number 2, I will consider it another collapse if the team is not in the playoffs in two years. 

 

[TrueBlueGED]

12 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Beat me to it. How much of a leash are you personally giving Botterill?

This season. I need to see real, sustainable improvement to the tune of either making the playoffs or being so close I want to cry that we missed. He arrived to a team that was quite flawed, yes, but possessed a nice collection of talent and assets plus a foundational piece. It shouldn't take 4 years to move 20 points up the standings. It probably shouldn't even take 3, but I don't begrudge a GM a second coach. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

@Drunkard,

I think that you should delete your post a few up the page.  That way I won't have to report it.

[Brawndo]

47 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I can buy this, but the initial decision to trade him still came from Botterill, as far as we know.

The second bolded, why? If the Sabres improve maginally this season, miss the playoffs, then miss the playoffs again the following year, why should Botterill keep his job? 4 years without playoffs? Guy shouldn't have a job in that scenario. 

I was close to thinking it was playoffs or bust for him THIS coming season, his 3rd, but I've shifted to thinking playoff bubble and giving him the benefit of the doubt. But if he goes 4 without making it? Come on. 

To me, total collapse is not making the playoffs in year 4. 

[darksabre]

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

This season. I need to see real, sustainable improvement to the tune of either making the playoffs or being so close I want to cry that we missed. He arrived to a team that was quite flawed, yes, but possessed a nice collection of talent and assets plus a foundational piece. It shouldn't take 4 years to move 20 points up the standings. It probably shouldn't even take 3, but I don't begrudge a GM a second coach. 

And honestly, GMTM probably would have gotten more time if he had been better at the actual day to day management part of the job. He was focused on talent evaluation and probably was doing okay at it. But having no idea what was going on with Bylsma and his team was what got him fired.

Botterill will get more time than GMTM simply by actually doing every part of his job and doing it professionally.

[dudacek]

From Lebrun in the Athletic:

It was mom and dad that a year ago reminded their son he was not the problem in Buffalo. That he would rebound in St. Louis. Just stick with it, son.

“He was disappointed,” his mother, Bonnie O’Reilly, said of how it ended in Buffalo. “He kind of felt, ‘They think I’m the problem.’ We said to him, ‘We know you’re not.’ Wherever you go, just keep doing what you’re doing. He got over it and was thrilled to go to St. Louis. And look where we are now. It’s tremendous. … I’m so proud of him.’’

Brian O’Reilly said his son is “pretty tough mentally,” which helped shepherd him through the end-of-season drama in Buffalo in which the player’s rather candid comments about losing the joy for the game with all the losing the Sabres had done certainly raised eyebrows.

That’s his son, dad says.

“There was a picture of him in Colorado when they lost and he just takes it all on,” said Brian O’Reilly. “It’s the same thing in Buffalo, if the team was losing, he would take it personally. Give me a group of athletes that completely hate losing. I’d rather those athletes than athletes that kind of expect to win because they’re more talented. At this level, if you don’t do the hard work, it doesn’t matter how much talent you have. You have to do the hard work.”

 

[Weave]

3 hours ago, Brawndo said:

 

The other thing is WTF were  there not conditions on the 2021 2nd, such as if the Blues won the Cup it becomes a 2020 1st?

Had this very thought last night.

[Weave]

5 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

I missed that. Interesting. 

Of course, Gionta would have been coasting for a different set of reasons at that point, yeah?

My sense with ROR is that he is, in the football coaches' terms, all about ball. If he was miffed at Sam preferring to hang with Eichel, I infer that would have been more from a place of "that guy can't/won't show you the way; I can."

 

Maybe you misunderstood?  Gio and Jack didn't get along because Gio didn't like Jack's approach to the game, just like ROR didn't like Jack's approach to the game.

Frankly, I don't much like Jack's approach to the game.

[pi2000]

STL should give Botterill a ring.