dudacek

Good stuff.

I remain on the fence about the ROR trade, but Jame seems to take three premises as gospel: 1) ROR is a core piece (I tend to agree) 2) ROR's supposed issues either didn't exist or were easily fixable (I tend to disagree) 3) ROR could have generated a greater return (I want to agree based on my personal player evaluation, but disagree based on the return) But if you accept 1, 2 and 3 as fact, then Jame's conclusion that Bott's is an idiot is entirely defensible.

The Athletic had a reporter embedded in the Carolina war room who reported the Canes had talked to the Sabres about ROR. It was never specifically spelled out what was on the table and why they went the way they did. It left the impression to me that Carolina chose to take the Hamilton offer rather than ROR offer, but @jame's take is just as feasible. It also left me with the impression that an ROR/Hamilton deal was also being discussed.

I don't think the debate here is what Botterill got for O'Reilly. He shopped him for months to teams like Carolina, Calgary, Montreal and St. Louis among others and took the best offer that was available to him: the market established value. I think it really come down to this: O'Reilly was signed by Murray to be a core piece of the team moving forward; Botterill did not believe in him as a core piece and moved on. It's a trade that consciously created a vacuum on and off the ice with the intent of making the team better over the long term. I think Botterill decided he was adding by subtracting. He should be judged on how that vacuum is filled. And that is a hand that has yet to be fully played out.

Of course I do. Like most people on here, I follow hockey pretty closely. Term can be an asset or a detriment depending on a team's cap situation and the way a team or player is trending. Your arguments speak for themselves. There is no need to be patronizing. Equivalency is reasonable writing shorthand for guys Kapanen and Thompson and Grigorenko being recent first round picks. Quibbling over that is like insisting on using TJ Oshie or Dennis Persson exclusively to debate the value of 24th overall picks. You clearly place a very high value on O'Reilly. But you wouldn't have to go very far to find people who would rather have Panarin, or Hamilton, or Skinner, or virtually anyone on that list over him. It's a reasonable group of his peers. Every one of these trades has extenuating circumstances that can be tied to them. But if you compare assets in versus assets out, the O'Reilly trade is very much in line with the others.

Vast hyperbole. Setting aside the intangible dressing room suppositions, look at some recent trades involving 1st line players: Botterill got the equivalent of two firsts and second for ROR. Waddell got the equivalent of a 2nd and two 3rds for Skinner Dorion got a second for Hoffman Bowman got Saad for Panarin Gorton got the rough equivalent of two 1sts and a 2nd for McDonough and Miller Hextall got two firsts for Brayden Schenn Sweeney for a first and two seconds for Dougie Hamilton Armstrong got Brouwer and a third for TJ Oshie Shanahan got the equivalent of two 1sts for Kessel Sakic got the equivalent of two firsts and a second for O'Reilly If it's one of the worst trades in 25 years, it's got a lot of company.

I'm interested in Puljujaarvi because he can provide some needed power up front and we need that. I also think some of his problems are maturity and cultural — a fish out of water scenario. But I wouldn't pay much because I don't think he reads the game well. He reminds me of Benoit Pouliot and has a similar ceiling. Looking back, a lot of his junior hype was tied to his man-among-boys physical development. It's looking like scouts really blew it when looking at the way he and Aho helped each other's games.

@nfreeman refused to buy into Reinhart's 2nd half last year because the games didn't matter. Has his play during 50 games that have mattered this year changed anything? Will another 30 of similar play make a difference? What has to happen to make Sam worthy of a long-term investment? Sabrespace readers want to know.

A few months back, the Sabres cranked off 10 wins in a row. I see no reason why they can’t win 20 of their last 30. I see a Montreal team that has no more talent than we do and has yet to have a trough I see Islanders and Carolina teams that have no more talent than we do that have been playing above their heads. And I see an aging Pittsburgh team and an about to be purged Columbus very much in striking distance I even see a good Washington team not playing to its potential. We probably aren’t going to make the playoffs but we have a reasonable chance. After what we’ve been through, we would be foolish not to try and enjoy the ride

If Skinner is not interested in Buffalo he’s done a great job faking His recent comments basically acknowledged his career year is a product of his environment and every thing I’ve seen and heard from him radiates that he’s having fun playing here.

Skinner will sign. Just like Reinhart will be fine.

Thank you. Outlier seasons during a contract year might result in contract value spikes or dips, but not trade value so much. Most GMs aren't going to sell low or buy high based on what a player has done over the past 40 games. Scandella is mid-career, middle-pairing NHL defenceman who you don't have to hide against speed or size with a year left on his contract. That will net a 2nd round pick or a middle six forward from a team looking for such a player, whether he is having a season like this year or a season like last.

Which one of you is Wormtongue?

Maybe he doesn't want to be the guy so much any more after how it went here.

Well, Murray and Botterill did try. It's just that Gionta, Moulson, Gorges, Okposo, Berglund and Sobotka have largely sucked.