Samson's Flow Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 The willingness/expectation that any player can be traded is a huge departure from the old days. GMTM's trade possibilities are on a whole nother planet compared to the Darcy days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED 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 You sir, make a lot of sense here. Maybe too much sense... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ 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 Love that if it can swindle them into giving up a lottery pick. However, I don't see them trading the pick. I secondly would hate moving Girgensons, but you have to do what you have to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I think a trade for ROR happening at the deadline could work. Murray already knows what it would take to sign ROR. He also has a player on his team he can speak to regarding what he would like to do in the future and that player just happens to have an agent who also represents a player that fits the mold of what Murray wants. Murray talking directly to the agent, even given their relationship, might be too obvious. But talk to Kane who then just happens to talk to his agent about the kind of money it might take to get a guy that fits the mold of ROR into Buffalo to play with Kane is a bit harder to trace. I wouldn't give up Ennis. The Sabres don't have anyone like him on the roster. I'm not sure they have anyone like him in the system. He's starting to prove that he can be creative and control the puck. He's playing with an edge to boot. For me he and Girgensons are the soul of the forward ranks right now. Both are hustling, attacking puck carriers, creating space and opportunity. They are what the Sabres need. The move by Girgensons to go to the net in the first period last night is indicative of the kind of player he will become. He's sneaky. He comes away from puck battles with the puck far more often than not. That move last night didn't look to be anything and then all of a sudden he was around the defense. Boom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 O'Reilly is a very good player, but there is something about him that I'm just not a huge fan of. Unless it was a bargain, and an REAL bargain, I'd rather the Sabres just stay the course with where they are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre 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 hate you but this is a good proposal. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I have trouble getting upset at somebody wanting the most money they can get. Especially when guys are cut loose and tossed aside all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) I wouldn't give up Ennis. I like the player a lot, but he does not come close to cracking my list of untouchables. 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 Like others, I would be ambivalent about this trade, but, looking at it: We'd apparently be getting an arguably better player in the Girgs-ROR swap (I have no idea; that's just what I read here), and then we'd be getting a lottery pick for Pysyk? Seems like we'd need to throw in our non-lottery 1st as well. EDIT: I think I get it: ROR is an expiring contract and pending UFA? That obviously affects his value. Even so, I can't see GM TM making the trade without having a deal in place to have the incoming player signed to a new deal. SECOND EDIT: Wait. So, ROR *is* signed through next season? Well, I guess the same reasoning applies. Girgs is on his entry-level deal, and is an RFA in 2016. Edited February 20, 2015 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Except if ROR walks and we get neither girgs or ROR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM 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 Reasons this would never happen are bolded. First, I don't think O'Reilly is a better player than Zemgus. Right now on the surface and looking at some advanced stats it may seem that way, however Zemgus is a sophmore NHL player, on the worst team in the league. He plays against top competition and he does reasonably well. He is 3 years younger than O'Reilly and compared to the beginning of the year he has just gotten better where as O'Reilly appears to have dropped off slightly. I would rather keep the younger player who is trending up. Second part, so if O'Reilly is going to walk from the Avs why wouldn't he walk from Buffalo? He clearly wants top dollar for his services even though he doesn't really deserve that so what keeps him here past next year? He walks and we end up with jack. Zemgus on the other hand loves Buffalo and is going to remain a RFA for much longer. All in all that trade would make little to no sense for Buffalo. Actually the more I think about O'Reilly I think we already have him on the team in Zemgus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) SECOND EDIT: Wait. So, ROR *is* signed through next season? Well, I guess the same reasoning applies. Girgs is on his entry-level deal, and is an RFA in 2016. O'Reilly will be a UFA at the end of next season and is highly unlikely to re-sign in Denver. And how can you be ambivalent about Zemgus? Which goes back to my post that no trade will happen if the Avs don't grant permission for a team to negotiate an extension in advance of the trade. If no agreement is reached no trade will be made. Hence, RoR has a no-trade clause. If he doesn't want to be traded somewhere all he has to do is not agree to an extension. The trade will never happen. For all we know this has happened already. A trade definitely will happen whether permission to negotiate happens or not because the Avs cannot let O'Reilly walk for free. The question is at what point can they maximize their assets. Roy and Sakic are in a tough spot. Edited February 20, 2015 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not that this is the only metric but: Zemgus: 0.383ppg, 0.172gpg O'Reilly: 0.345ppg, 0.206gpg So who do you want? The potential flight risk you are going to have to overpay just to have for 1 year or the kid who's rights you own for another 4 years and is currently producing offense at a higher rate as a younger player. Just some thoughts to mull over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 When Liger believes something he'll die before his mind changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) When Liger believes something he'll die before his mind changes. Thank god for reincarnation right? Since I am sure someone will use this... in the season O'Reilly scored 28 goals, his sh% was .39 above average. I do understand his defensive usefulness just shedding some light on his offensive game. 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 When Liger believes something he'll die before his mind changes. Nah, he's just got a lil' Darcy in him with our current group of young players and prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I'm NOT letting Gergs go. No way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Nah, he's just got a lil' Darcy in him with our current group of young players and prospects. I disagree, I was on the "trade the old core" wagon before the wagon even existed. Also I came around on the Kane/Bogo trade. I am willing to say it was a good move and I like Murray's ballz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherman Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Using the Staal trade as a barometer (#8, Sutter, Dumoulin) I think we can construct something here. Sutter is essentially a 26 year old, 30 point player, Dumoulin is a former 2nd round pick - decent prospect not a world beater and the #1 was a top 10 in a weak draft. Looking at what we have on board to move Ennis, Pysyk or McCabe and our remaining low one is pretty darned close to that value and Staal didn't have nearly as many complicating factors as RoR. Those factors could push the price down a bit. Before the trade didn't Staal say he wanted to play in Carolina with his brother? That price paid would essentially be the price to get him a year early. I remember thinking it was crazy since they knew they would get him in a year anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not trading Girgs for RoR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) It's not that the Avs won't deal him, it's that nobody else will give up big value for what amounts to a rental. For the Avs to get Staal or better value the extension will need to be in place with the trade partner. Otherwise? Send them a 2nd round pick because that what a rental's worth. There's no need to move Zemgus to get RoR. None. The Avs have 0 leverage. Which is why Hodgson, Grigs and the late first might work. The Avs are unlikely to get a better offer without a commitment and I'm willing to bet O'Reilly is willing to commit to very few teams, if any. He has the Avs over a barrel Pegula/Murray may roll the dice because: 1) they can afford his extravagant demands. 2) they can offer him the leadership role he craves 3) they will have a good young core he can be part of that includes a McEichel 4) they have a sneaking "suspicion" he is open to signing here. Edited February 20, 2015 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Reasons this would never happen are bolded. First, I don't think O'Reilly is a better player than Zemgus. Right now on the surface and looking at some advanced stats it may seem that way, however Zemgus is a sophmore NHL player, on the worst team in the league. He plays against top competition and he does reasonably well. He is 3 years younger than O'Reilly and compared to the beginning of the year he has just gotten better where as O'Reilly appears to have dropped off slightly. I would rather keep the younger player who is trending up. Second part, so if O'Reilly is going to walk from the Avs why wouldn't he walk from Buffalo? He clearly wants top dollar for his services even though he doesn't really deserve that so what keeps him here past next year? He walks and we end up with jack. Zemgus on the other hand loves Buffalo and is going to remain a RFA for much longer. All in all that trade would make little to no sense for Buffalo. Actually the more I think about O'Reilly I think we already have him on the team in Zemgus. BINGO!! Girgs is going nowhere. He is the kind of player this team has needed for years. You will see one of Risto or Zadarov go before Girgs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I disagree, I was on the "trade the old core" wagon before the wagon even existed. Also I came around on the Kane/Bogo trade. I am willing to say it was a good move and I like Murray's ballz. Hey, I said "a 'lil" for a reason. After all, you've alluded like a dozen times recently to Bailey/Baptiste maybe making the team when there's somewhere around a 005% chance of that happening :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Hey, I said "a 'lil" for a reason. After all, you've alluded like a dozen times recently to Bailey/Baptiste maybe making the team when there's somewhere around a 005% chance of that happening :) Well that's true. At least we will see Bailey and Baptiste in Rochester next year, provided they aren't traded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 And how can you be ambivalent about Zemgus? No, no: I was ambivalent about the trade as proposed. I love ZG. There's no need to move Zemgus to get RoR. None. The Avs have 0 leverage. This is a fair point. It's the Avs that are in a tough spot. Why should they get a prize like ZG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 And to those down with going after ROR now, you're willing to lose the chance of McEichel as well? Way too much. 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.