Sabres Trade Taylor Hall (50% of His Salary Retained)and Curtis Lazar to Boston for a 2021 2nd and Anders Bjork

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

Bro, given the way you are bouncing around as new information comes out, just to find the safe new square from which you can trash Adams without reservation, if this had happened, you'd just be pissed off and find a way to paint THAT as incompetence 

I'm not bouncing anywhere.  I've said KA had no business being a GM in the first place and everything he has done has proven me correct.  I said this was a trash trade last night and now the facts are coming in that verify it was a trash trade.  We got fleeced.  Why did we get fleeced because KA doesn't know what he is doing.

1) He gave Hall a full NMC

2) He failed to get a list from Hall to whom he'd accept a trade.  The list is a waiver of the NMC to the teams on the list.  Once a waiver is done, Hall doesn't keep a right to refuse a trade to the teams on the list.  

3) He got other offers for Hall, but Hall wanted to go to Boston.  KA had to accept this offer because he failed on steps 1 and 2.  

How exactly is that bouncing around?

 

[Randall Flagg]

5 minutes ago, Mingler55 said:

So in summary.......and SO far.......

Our illustrious leader (Kevyn Adams) has traded Eric Staal, Taylor Hall, Curtis Lazar and Brandon Montour for the following.....

Second Round Pick, 2 x Thirds, a Fifth and Anders Bjork.

 

LET THAT SINK IN!!!!

If I brought this information to any Sabre fan at game 16 of the losing streak, the response would be exasperated relief 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

The return for Hall is probably one of the least important and interesting things about the Hall acquisition in general. It reveals so much less about what kind of GM he is than analysis of his talent evaluation, in terms of this move, does. Less too about bringing him in and more so how much KA bet his entire offseason on that add, and how the roster reflected that move. 

 

4 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Was wondering when the conversation would veer in this direction. It's an interesting point, but I don't think there's a hockey fan or person in the world that didn't understand us doing this at the time. "Holy crap, we've actually got a shot at Hall? Okay, one year, that's reasonable enough. An NMC? Okay, so if we DID have to move him at the deadline, it might hamper our return, but hey, it was found money anyway, so it's essentially just free assets. Whatever, just get it done and let's try it out"

The big picture sucks because hall sucked way worse than anyone expected, but the logic still applies and using THIS hindsight maneuver is just finding something to be mad about, IMO 

good timing 

all that really matters here is that the add failed spectacularly. In the end that has to fall on the GM. You are judged on results. 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Thorny

[#freejame]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Isn't worthwhile if there's a clear option and we screw it up. Especially if the clear choice succeeds, just more wasted assets. 

The opportunity to draft x player is worth the asset. Should x player develop, it’s indicative of our poor drafting and not our poor deadline management. 

1 minute ago, ExWNYer said:

Nick Kypreos just said on 'The Instigators' that Chicago is interested in Bjork. Will the Sabres flip him today?

Lol he’s trash why would anyone trade for him?

[GASabresIUFAN]

8 minutes ago, SDS said:

NMC. The N and the M stand for no movement. In your scenario, Adams and the team come out like ***** ***** in this scenario.

Adams and the team come out like crap regardless of which ever course they took.  I was just pointing out that they had some leverage on Hall. Not alot mind you, but some.  

[Drag0nDan]

4 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

OK, Mr. Smarty-Pants, but the question remains:  do you think Lazar-for-Bjork was something the Bruins made the Sabres do, or vice-versa?

Probably both.  There really isn't tons of room for lazar next season to be a center.  Bjork isn't expensive, and is a bottom 6 left winger.  They have Eichel, Reinhart, Cozens, Eakin (shudder), and Ruots that can play center.  The left wing has skinner, asplund, rieder, olof and now Bjork.  Rieder wont be back.  Hedging your bets at bottom 6 winger that he can contribute there after sheahan, rieder, departures. 

I wonder how it fits with the overall scheme moving forward but the bottom 6 for next season would include - Mitts, Asplund, Thompson, Okposo, Bjork, Girgensons, Olofsson, Ruotsalainen.  Then cozens, reinhart, jack, skinner as your top 6ers.  I think there will be more trades in the offseason, reinhart/olofsson being the 2 likely to be dealt from the forward group.  I think there will be players available that teams can't protect, and buffalo should be aggressive in trying to acquire them.  I'm curious how it shakes out with the expansion draft for buffalo honestly, but right now it's tough to project. 

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Yes because their GM got creative. Buffalo seemed to have no interest in such a trade even though we have extra 3rds to make that happen. 

Don't give UFA's full NMC... ever. 

Hall pushed for it because while he wanted to be in buffalo he didn't want to get dumped somewhere without his choice.  

[PromoTheRobot]

21 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Then he sits in the pressbox for the rest of the season while kids who give a crap about playing hard play.  I wonder what the UFA market would be for a diminished sulky player who wasn't even good enough to play for the worst team in the NHL?

And he walks and the Sabres get bupkis. And that's better how?

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

If KA had refused to give Hall the NMC, which had led Hall to sign elsewhere, would you (or anyone else) have called that a good decision by KA at the time?

The question answers itself.

Right, I'm not saying he gets blame for giving him the NMC - just that he doesn't get "let off the hook" for being held over a barrel for the trade. Certainly. We have to look at the transaction in entirety - Hall was a massive fail. The return at the deadline is just the cherry and probably the least relevant aspect to me

Edited April 12, 2021 by Thorny

[ExWNYer]

1 minute ago, #freejame said:

The opportunity to draft x player is worth the asset. Should x player develop, it’s indicative of our poor drafting and not our poor deadline management. 

Lol he’s trash why would anyone trade for him?

Just telling you what he said. He claimed that he "knows for sure" that the Blackhawks were interested in obtaining him from Boston.

[GASabresIUFAN]

11 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

You have zero percent chance of drafting a great player if you don't have a draft pick. 

Given the size of our scouting staff and our drafting history, the 25% historically is drastically reduced making the pick virtually worthless.

[Drag0nDan]

Just now, GASabresIUFAN said:

I'm not bouncing anywhere.  I've said KA had no business being a GM in the first place and everything he has done has proven me correct.  I said this was a trash trade last night and now the facts are coming in that verify it was a trash trade.  We got fleeced.  Why did we get fleeced because KA doesn't know what he is doing.

1) He gave Hall a full NMC

2) He failed to get a list from Hall to whom he'd accept a trade.  The list is a waiver of the NMC to the teams on the list.  Once a waiver is done, Hall doesn't keep a right to refuse a trade to the teams on the list.  

3) He got other offers for Hall, but Hall wanted to go to Boston.  KA had to accept this offer because he failed on steps 1 and 2.  

How exactly is that bouncing around?

 

You don't include that he got the #1 free agent to sign with a bad buffalo team on a low risk 1 year deal though.  

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I'm not bouncing anywhere.  I've said KA had no business being a GM in the first place and everything he has done has proven me correct.  I said this was a trash trade last night and now the facts are coming in that verify it was a trash trade.  We got fleeced.  Why did we get fleeced because KA doesn't know what he is doing.

1) He gave Hall a full NMC

2) He failed to get a list from Hall to whom he'd accept a trade.  The list is a waiver of the NMC to the teams on the list.  Once a waiver is done, Hall doesn't keep a right to refuse a trade to the teams on the list.  

3) He got other offers for Hall, but Hall wanted to go to Boston.  KA had to accept this offer because he failed on steps 1 and 2.  

How exactly is that bouncing around?

 

Every bit of new information that has come out, pertaining to Hall choosing Boston, Sabres holding salary, Bob saying no one wanted to give a first, whatever. Every single bit, you have shifted to a new "yeah but" angle, without actually incorporating that new information, you've just skirted around it.

As to your first point, would you have preferred the news coming out in October that "the Sabs had a shot at Hall actually, had him all lined up for a 1 year prove it deal, but refused to stick a NMC on that deal in the event that they might sell Hall at the deadline, to improve their draft slot by a handful of picks in that scenario. So Hall is actually now a Leaf." Of course you wouldn't, you would have been even more apoplectic than you already were, so your entire first point and everything built off of it is nonsense just to make yourself more angry 

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

And he walks and the Sabres get bupkis. And that's better how?

It's isn't better in the short-term, but it does set a precedent that we don't give our good assets away for nothing.

[Randall Flagg]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

good timing 

all that really matters here is that the add failed spectacularly. In the end that has to fall on the GM. You are judged on results. 

I know you get it, but GA is using that thread as I thought he would hehe

[PromoTheRobot]

Just now, GASabresIUFAN said:

It's isn't better in the short-term, but it does set a precedent that we don't give our good assets away for nothing.

No. It's dumb.

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Given the size of our scouting staff and our drafting history, the 25% historically is drastically reduced making the pick virtually worthless.

Worthless? Did you know you can sometimes trade 2nd-rounders for players as good as Taylor Hall?

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Right, I'm not saying he gets blame for giving him the NMC - just that he doesn't get "let off the hook" for being held over a barrel for the trade. Certainly. We have to look at the transaction in entirety - Hall was a massive fail. The return at the deadline is just the cherry and probably the least relevant aspect to me

To further elaborate, and why I keep mentioning Adams has zero "good" moves, is because the Hall deal (and Staal) were the things most being used as evidence to the positive re: Adams' first year as GM. It's not just about a deadline return - it was the entirety of the capital we invested into him - he WAS our offseason. What we got for devoting all that roster, and financial capital to Hall has to be viewed through the prism of what the goal was - just like the goal of the tank is to WIN, not just get a good player. 

Adams based his offseason around the move to a large degree, and got 2 goals, and a 2nd round pick. THAT'S what's important 

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

It's isn't better in the short-term, but it does set a precedent that we don't give our good assets away for nothing.

Or for 2nd-round picks either.

Edited April 12, 2021 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

Every bit of new information that has come out, pertaining to Hall choosing Boston, Sabres holding salary, Bob saying no one wanted to give a first, whatever. Every single bit, you have shifted to a new "yeah but" angle, without actually incorporating that new information, you've just skirted around it.

As to your first point, would you have preferred the news coming out in October that "the Sabs had a shot at Hall actually, had him all lined up for a 1 year prove it deal, but refused to stick a NMC on that deal in the event that they might sell Hall at the deadline, to improve their draft slot by a handful of picks in that scenario. So Hall is actually now a Leaf." Of course you wouldn't, you would have been even more apoplectic than you already were, so your entire first point and everything built off of it is nonsense just to make yourself more angry 

Yes, I wasn't for the deal in the first place.  I thought we needed help at RW as we already had two scoring LWs.  So I wouldn't have signed Hall at all much less given him a NMC.  We talked then about if the Sabres failed then we could move him at the deadline for value to re-coop the team's investment.  The NMC made that impossible. 

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Worthless? Did you know you can sometimes trade 2nd-rounders for players as good as Taylor Hall?

Only if your a Cup contender and have a competent GM.  

[Thorner]

Just keep Ullmark. I'm done thinking about the skidmark Taylor Hall

For the record this is why I always say "I don't care about potential return at the next deadline and it shouldn't factor in"

Because if it ever gets to that point we know it's symptomatic of a larger issue. The thought doesn't provide any mental reprieve. 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Thorny

[Drag0nDan]

Just now, Thorny said:

Just keep Ullmark. I'm done thinking about the skidmark Taylor Hall

For the record this is why I always say "I don't care about potential return at the next deadline and it shouldn't factor in"

Because if it ever gets to that point we know it's symptomatic of a larger issue. The thought doesn't provide any mental reprieve. 

There's a lot of factors - but at the end of the day... his play this season is the reason the return is as low as it was.  

[#freejame]

15 minutes ago, ExWNYer said:

Just telling you what he said. He claimed that he "knows for sure" that the Blackhawks were interested in obtaining him from Boston.

That was a joke based on the board reaction to acquiring him. Sarcasm doesn’t translate well. 

[Marvin]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Worthless? Did you know you can sometimes trade 2nd-rounders for players as good as Taylor Hall?

Alternatively, can you believe we got a 2nd round pick for Taylor Hall given the way he played this year?  And a NMC with it to boot.

After his stint here, I now agree with a friend who said that Hall is a great secondary piece for a good team but a bad primary piece for anyone.  Hence, I think Boston will love Hall.  He will be a secondary scorer on a team with a lot of talent, albeit a bit old.

[Weave]

KAs hands were at least partially tied so sez the Twitters.

“Hall didn't go into details, but said his no-move clause "definitely helped make me a Bruin."

Boston is where he wanted to go.”

 

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

There's a lot of factors - but at the end of the day... his play this season is the reason the return is as low as it was.  

And GM's must be judged on results.

1 minute ago, Weave said:

KAs hands were at least partially tied so sez the Twitters.

“Hall didn't go into details, but said his no-move clause "definitely helped make me a Bruin."

Boston is where he wanted to go.”

 

Hey everyone, pretty good preview of how the return might be hampered when Eichel wants to go to the Bruins, after his NMC kicks in.

Have to win next season. Have to.