LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Are you projecting Reinhart to be a star? I think that may be stretching what he'll become just a bit. I expect he'll be a good center in this league, a first liner on many teams, but I'm not sure he's got "star" potential in him, whatever that is. Not at all. I am projecting that it would take a Star for Tim Murray to move Reinhart. There is some sentimental attachment there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Remember that Reinhart is and will forever be the 1st pick of Murray's gm. Every time I hear GMTM discuss him I get the impression he puts a lot of faith in Sam. Are you projecting Reinhart to be a star? I think that may be stretching what he'll become just a bit. I expect he'll be a good center in this league, a first liner on many teams, but I'm not sure he's got "star" potential in him, whatever that is. There is some sentimental attachment there. My impression of Tim Murray is there is no sentiment in hockey. It's all about maximizing assets to build the best possible team. If Reinhart warrants a spot on the team due to his abilities, Murray will keep him. If he can upgrade the team with a move, he'll trade him. Sentiment is not a factor. A bigger factor will be Sam's development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I too was quite happy to see the ROR discussion. (More here, btw: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/GARTHS-CORNER/Murray-Hot-On-OReillys-Trail/6/66542) He would be a terrific addition. Suddenly, we'd be looking at a real top 6 forward group after years in the wilderness. One item from Garth's article that I found interesting was the possibility of GMTM making the deal at the deadline, instead of over the summer. I have been thinking that it would need to be over the summer, because that is the only way that the trade can be linked to a contract extension -- but a deadline trade would be a true ZFG move, and it's now crystal clear that GMTM gives ZF. I still think it makes more sense from Colorado's perspective to trade him over the summer, on the theory that the non-playoff teams will get in on the bidding at that point -- but Colorado also might decide that the yield will be highest at the deadline, due to deadline frenzy plus the fact that the bidders won't need to commit to fitting a big contract for ROR into their salary structures long-term. Bottom line: I think Colorado will definitely entertain offers for ROR at the deadline, and I wouldn't be shocked if GMTM swooped in and made the best offer due to (likely irrational) confidence that he'll be able to get ROR to sign an extension. IF that happens -- let's remember what the price for Kane was just now, and let's not pretend that the Sabres can get ROR for Griggy and a #2. It's going to cost more than we want to pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I'm not sending a 2016 first for O'Reilly unless it's essentially straight up and we won the Carrion league. I wouldn't trade our 2016 first under just about any circumstance. Next year's lottery is supposed to take your finish for the last 3 years into account so assuming we miss the playoffs, we'd still have about as good of a chance as anyone to get a top 3 pick because of our 30th place finish 2 years ago and our likely 30th place finish this year. Even if we finished 17th next season and had the best record of any team to miss the playoffs you'd still have to figure we're in the top 5 for a chance to get a top 3 pick and the odds only get higher with every spot we drop below 17th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I wouldn't trade our 2016 first under just about any circumstance. Next year's lottery is supposed to take your finish for the last 3 years into account so assuming we miss the playoffs, we'd still have about as good of a chance as anyone to get a top 3 pick because of our 30th place finish 2 years ago and our likely 30th place finish this year. Even if we finished 17th next season and had the best record of any team to miss the playoffs you'd still have to figure we're in the top 5 for a chance to get a top 3 pick and the odds only get higher with every spot we drop below 17th. This is a fantastic point that I didn't even think about until now. GMTM can make this team really good next year and they will still have a strong chance of having a high pick. The timing of our suckitude and the corresponding "go for it" year that I think is coming next year seems like perfect timing. Do we still get this benefit (eligible for next year's lottery) if we make the playoffs next year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I too was quite happy to see the ROR discussion. (More here, btw: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/GARTHS-CORNER/Murray-Hot-On-OReillys-Trail/6/66542) He would be a terrific addition. Suddenly, we'd be looking at a real top 6 forward group after years in the wilderness. One item from Garth's article that I found interesting was the possibility of GMTM making the deal at the deadline, instead of over the summer. I have been thinking that it would need to be over the summer, because that is the only way that the trade can be linked to a contract extension -- but a deadline trade would be a true ZFG move, and it's now crystal clear that GMTM gives ZF. I still think it makes more sense from Colorado's perspective to trade him over the summer, on the theory that the non-playoff teams will get in on the bidding at that point -- but Colorado also might decide that the yield will be highest at the deadline, due to deadline frenzy plus the fact that the bidders won't need to commit to fitting a big contract for ROR into their salary structures long-term. Bottom line: I think Colorado will definitely entertain offers for ROR at the deadline, and I wouldn't be shocked if GMTM swooped in and made the best offer due to (likely irrational) confidence that he'll be able to get ROR to sign an extension. IF that happens -- let's remember what the price for Kane was just now, and let's not pretend that the Sabres can get ROR for Griggy and a #2. It's going to cost more than we want to pay. All of this makes sense, I would agree completely. The offseason makes a lot more sense with what Colorado's been dealing with. They still have an outside shot at the playoffs and O'Reilly only helps their cause. However, we'll see what is involved. If he's available at a realistic price that GMTM is interested in, he'll likely swoop. It's go time in the Murray camp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I think the market for an O'Reilly trade was pretty well set by the Jordan Staal deal. He was moved for a decent 3rd line player, a top-10 pick, and a 2nd rounder. Our 1st is obviously off the table and the other one we have won't be top-10 so the player would probably have to be better. Maybe Murray wouldn't move Foligno in the Kane deal because he's a piece the Avs expressed interest in? Foligno, Grigorenko, late 1st, 2nd. It seems light, but I'm pretty sure Murray won't move Zadorov/Risto/Zemgus and we don't have a whole ton of on-roster ammo other than that. I can't see Colorado wanting Moulson and his contract, and same goes for Hodgson. I could easily see them wanting Ennis, but that would have to be close to straight up, and when was the last time a deal like this was straight up? It's seemingly always quantity for quality (another comparable could be the Pommer trade which was a low 1st, 2nd, and a couple alright prospects). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I wouldn't trade our 2016 first under just about any circumstance. Next year's lottery is supposed to take your finish for the last 3 years into account so assuming we miss the playoffs, we'd still have about as good of a chance as anyone to get a top 3 pick because of our 30th place finish 2 years ago and our likely 30th place finish this year. Even if we finished 17th next season and had the best record of any team to miss the playoffs you'd still have to figure we're in the top 5 for a chance to get a top 3 pick and the odds only get higher with every spot we drop below 17th. This is a fantastic point that I didn't even think about until now. GMTM can make this team really good next year and they will still have a strong chance of having a high pick. The timing of our suckitude and the corresponding "go for it" year that I think is coming next year seems like perfect timing. Do we still get this benefit (eligible for next year's lottery) if we make the playoffs next year? Not according to the NHL's Website. Starting in 2016 the top three picks will be determined by lottery based on that seasons finish only. 2016 NHL Draft Lottery Beginning in 2016, the Draft Lottery will be utilized to assign the top three drafting slots in the NHL Draft, an expansion over previous years when the Draft Lottery was used to determine the winner of the first overall selection only. Three draws will be held: the 1st Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting first overall, the 2nd Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting second overall and the 3rd Lottery draw will determine the club selecting third overall. As a result of this change, the team earning the fewest points during the regular season will no longer be guaranteed, at worst, the second overall pick. That club could fall as low as fourth overall. The allocation of odds for the 1st Lottery draw will be the same as outlined above for the 2015 NHL Draft Lottery. The odds for the remaining teams will increase on a proportionate basis for the 2nd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 1st Lottery draw, and again for the 3rd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 2nd Lottery draw. The 11 Clubs not selected in the Draft Lottery will be assigned NHL Draft selections 4 through 14, in inverse order of regular-season points. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=728795 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I think the market for an O'Reilly trade was pretty well set by the Jordan Staal deal. He was moved for a decent 3rd line player, a top-10 pick, and a 2nd rounder. Our 1st is obviously off the table and the other one we have won't be top-10 so the player would probably have to be better. Maybe Murray wouldn't move Foligno in the Kane deal because he's a piece the Avs expressed interest in? Foligno, Grigorenko, late 1st, 2nd. It seems light, but I'm pretty sure Murray won't move Zadorov/Risto/Zemgus and we don't have a whole ton of on-roster ammo other than that. I can't see Colorado wanting Moulson and his contract, and same goes for Hodgson. I could easily see them wanting Ennis, but that would have to be close to straight up, and when was the last time a deal like this was straight up? It's seemingly always quantity for quality (another comparable could be the Pommer trade which was a low 1st, 2nd, and a couple alright prospects). What about Foligno, Griggy, late 1st and Pysyk? I would do that in a heartbeat, but I don't think Colorado would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I WANT O'REILLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 What about Foligno, Griggy, late 1st and Pysyk? I would do that in a heartbeat, but I don't think Colorado would. I'll drive that tanker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) What about Foligno, Griggy, late 1st and Pysyk? I would do that in a heartbeat, but I don't think Colorado would. I think that would get it done for both sides. Edited February 20, 2015 by BRAWNDO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not according to the NHL's Website. Starting in 2016 the top three picks will be determined by lottery based on that seasons finish only. 2016 NHL Draft Lottery Beginning in 2016, the Draft Lottery will be utilized to assign the top three drafting slots in the NHL Draft, an expansion over previous years when the Draft Lottery was used to determine the winner of the first overall selection only. Three draws will be held: the 1st Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting first overall, the 2nd Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting second overall and the 3rd Lottery draw will determine the club selecting third overall. As a result of this change, the team earning the fewest points during the regular season will no longer be guaranteed, at worst, the second overall pick. That club could fall as low as fourth overall. The allocation of odds for the 1st Lottery draw will be the same as outlined above for the 2015 NHL Draft Lottery. The odds for the remaining teams will increase on a proportionate basis for the 2nd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 1st Lottery draw, and again for the 3rd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 2nd Lottery draw. The 11 Clubs not selected in the Draft Lottery will be assigned NHL Draft selections 4 through 14, in inverse order of regular-season points. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=728795 Interesting, but still the Sabres 1st next year will be very valuable with those 3 chances to move up (or down) as a likely bottom five team and a lock for bottom 10 IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) What about Foligno, Griggy, late 1st and Pysyk? I would do that in a heartbeat, but I don't think Colorado would. I think that what get it done for both sides. Yea I agree. I think that is in the ballpark. It is an interesting possibility if that trade were to unfold. I worry about our waning defensive depth, we may want to consider keeping Pysyk and such. Edited February 20, 2015 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 What about Foligno, Griggy, late 1st and Pysyk? I would do that in a heartbeat, but I don't think Colorado would. I'd do it too, I'm just not sure how much interest they have in Pysyk because they already have two right handed shots on their top-4. If they're not overly concerned about defenseman handedness, I think it makes a lot of sense for both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I'd do it too, I'm just not sure how much interest they have in Pysyk because they already have two right handed shots on their top-4. If they're not overly concerned about defenseman handedness, I think it makes a lot of sense for both sides. you think they would be more interested in McCabe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) you think they would be more interested in McCabe? Probably not, Pysyk has a higher upside and top 4 D potential. He would probably be their target Edited February 20, 2015 by BRAWNDO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) Not according to the NHL's Website. Starting in 2016 the top three picks will be determined by lottery based on that seasons finish only. 2016 NHL Draft Lottery Beginning in 2016, the Draft Lottery will be utilized to assign the top three drafting slots in the NHL Draft, an expansion over previous years when the Draft Lottery was used to determine the winner of the first overall selection only. Three draws will be held: the 1st Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting first overall, the 2nd Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting second overall and the 3rd Lottery draw will determine the club selecting third overall. As a result of this change, the team earning the fewest points during the regular season will no longer be guaranteed, at worst, the second overall pick. That club could fall as low as fourth overall. The allocation of odds for the 1st Lottery draw will be the same as outlined above for the 2015 NHL Draft Lottery. The odds for the remaining teams will increase on a proportionate basis for the 2nd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 1st Lottery draw, and again for the 3rd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 2nd Lottery draw. The 11 Clubs not selected in the Draft Lottery will be assigned NHL Draft selections 4 through 14, in inverse order of regular-season points. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=728795 Bummer. I remember them talking about the 3 year thing in order to discourage tanking for a single season. I figured it was going to help us out a ton so I expect to be out of the basement next season even if we don't make the playoffs. Edited February 20, 2015 by Drunkard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherman Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 As much as I like Ryan O'Reilly I don't want to see us give up several assets for what could essentially be a one year rental. If the Sabres do this I think it would be around the draft and expect a contract extension soon after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 As much as I like Ryan O'Reilly I don't want to see us give up several assets for what could essentially be a one year rental. If the Sabres do this I think it would be around the draft and expect a contract extension soon after. if they do it it will be because they have a multi year extension already in place. They wouldn't do the trade unless there was an agreement to a long term deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) Girgensons and Pysyk for O'Reilly and Colorado's first ( a lottery pick)? O'Reilly is an upgrade on Girgs, we take a Killington or Werenski to fill Pysyk's hole in the depth chart. Avs consider themselves fortunate to get Girgs for a player that is going to walk, and they improve their blueline next year. Is Girgensons on the table for anybody, in any kind of deal, or does he still embody all our hopes and dreams? Remember Tim Murray, Zero ###### Given Edited February 20, 2015 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Girgensons and Pysyk for O'Reilly and Colorado's first ( a lottery pick)? O'Reilly is an upgrade on Girgs, we take a Killington or Werenski to fill Pysyk's hole in the depth chart. Avs consider themselves fortunate to get Girgs for a player that is going to walk, and they improve their blueline next year. Is Girgensons on the table for anybody, in any kind of deal, or does he still embody all our hopes and dreams? Remember Tim Murray, Zero ###### Given I wouldn't move Girgensons, Reinhart, Ristolainen, Zadorov, or our 2015 or 2016 1st for O'Reilly. He's a good player and would help our team but I'm concerned he's going to seek (and get from somebody) a contract for more than he's actually worth. He's a center who can play on the wing and he's really good defensively but he doesn't score enough to command the $6 million he's currently earning and I don't think there's any chance his next contract will be a step down in pay or cap hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Girgensons and Pysyk for O'Reilly and Colorado's first ( a lottery pick)? O'Reilly is an upgrade on Girgs, we take a Killington or Werenski to fill Pysyk's hole in the depth chart. Avs consider themselves fortunate to get Girgs for a player that is going to walk, and they improve their blueline next year. Is Girgensons on the table for anybody, in any kind of deal, or does he still embody all our hopes and dreams? Remember Tim Murray, Zero ###### Given Wow. The act of posting the above is itself a ZFG move. You're an animal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I wouldn't trade our 2016 first under just about any circumstance. Next year's lottery is supposed to take your finish for the last 3 years into account so assuming we miss the playoffs, we'd still have about as good of a chance as anyone to get a top 3 pick because of our 30th place finish 2 years ago and our likely 30th place finish this year. Even if we finished 17th next season and had the best record of any team to miss the playoffs you'd still have to figure we're in the top 5 for a chance to get a top 3 pick and the odds only get higher with every spot we drop below 17th. No, that's not how next year's lottery will work. It's just the one year's finish with the top three up for grabs. Girgensons and Pysyk for O'Reilly and Colorado's first ( a lottery pick)? O'Reilly is an upgrade on Girgs, we take a Killington or Werenski to fill Pysyk's hole in the depth chart. Avs consider themselves fortunate to get Girgs for a player that is going to walk, and they improve their blueline next year. Is Girgensons on the table for anybody, in any kind of deal, or does he still embody all our hopes and dreams? Remember Tim Murray, Zero ###### Given I'm glad somebody else said it. I don't think this is a deal you include Girgensons in but O'Reilly is better. He's basically Girgensons ceiling in my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Girgensons and Pysyk for O'Reilly and Colorado's first ( a lottery pick)? O'Reilly is an upgrade on Girgs, we take a Killington or Werenski to fill Pysyk's hole in the depth chart. Avs consider themselves fortunate to get Girgs for a player that is going to walk, and they improve their blueline next year. Is Girgensons on the table for anybody, in any kind of deal, or does he still embody all our hopes and dreams? Remember Tim Murray, Zero ###### Given Not out of the question as far as I'm concerned, in fact I almost expect that at least one of the young untouchables (Gus, Risto, Zad or even Reinhart) is moved as GMTM moves from tanking into gathering proven NHL assets mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.