Trade: Myers, Stafford, Armia, Lemieux, + Low 1st for Kane, Bogosian, and Kasdorf

[Ducky]

This.

 

 

I know the trades are separate, and my original point wasn't saying a "bad" trade makes a "good" one better. My point, which I think has at least a bit of merit, is that there is a fair chance (without being inside his head) that Murray is the "type of guy" that would make trades like those 2, the idea being that some GMs, (Darcy?) would not. It could potentially reason to follow that if Murray wasn't the type to "take a stab" at the Kane deal, that could preclude the idea that he therefore may also not have been a guy to make the O'Reilly trade. I'm not saying that the O'Reilly trade makes the Kane trade good, necessarily, I'm saying that Murray being the type of GM that would make the Kane trade, also means he was the type of GM to make the O'Reilly trade. Point being - good with the not so good, there may be some misses in order to get the hits.

 

 

 

Armia has decent potential still, but a lot of his original potential as a first rounder has been diminshed, it would seem, through lack of development. He may still develop into a 2nd or 3rd line winger, but there is equal chance he doesn't. I agree he has higher upside than Lemieux. I don't care if someone wants to sing his praises, he'll never be more than a third line player. Fair chance he never makes the show.

 

I'm not trying to sh*t on Armia or your hopes for him. He may develop into a solid winger. But even odds that he doesn't last in the league. He's got 1 point in 10 games. Yes it is a small sample size. But you can't really be ecstatic about his performance thus far, can you?

 

 

Armia could potentially be a second line player. Don't see it as likely, but that's his max upside. Lemieux's max is third liner.

 

 

Double True.

 

Yes, most likely. There are only, what, two years after this one? Hopefully he pans out. If he doesn't, they will probably trade him when his contract is up. Although I suppose they could potentially trade him at the deadline in his final contract year, if they were to decide to trade him. But that would be to attempt to maximize his value. Still think that would count as Kane being here for the terms of his contract.

If he doesn't, they will probably trade him when his contract is up. Although I suppose they could potentially trade him at the deadline in his final contract year, if they were to decide to trade him. ...not sure I understand this...

 

AM I ecstatic about Armia's play? Nope, I'm ecstatic they are coming to put in my kitchen cabinets Monday though! I am happy that he isn't taking shifts off like most analysts said he does and more than happy he is defensively responsible which is more than I can say for  Ehlers. Armia will stay in the big league.... book it. If he plays RW for us he won't make the 2nd line unless someone is traded or hurt. LW on the other hand......

[Thorny]

If he doesn't, they will probably trade him when his contract is up. Although I suppose they could potentially trade him at the deadline in his final contract year, if they were to decide to trade him. ...not sure I understand this...

 

AM I ecstatic about Armia's play? Nope, I'm ecstatic they are coming to put in my kitchen cabinets Monday though! I am happy that he isn't taking shifts off like most analysts said he does and more than happy he is defensively responsible which is more than I can say for  Ehlers. Armia will stay in the big league.... book it. If he plays RW for us he won't make the 2nd line unless someone is traded or hurt. LW on the other hand......

 

Poor wording on my part. What I meant to say was, if he isn't living up to expectations, they could potentially trade Kane at the deadline in his final current contract year, rather than looking to sign him or letting him walk for nothing, in order to maximize the asset. It's still early days in regards to his time here, I'm sure Murray and co. are still planning on Kane working out here (as am I). If he doesn't, I'm sure a trade is possible, but I'd say it likely wouldn't come until the final year of his contract, at the deadline, as I mentioned above. Not sure if that answers your question of "will he be here" in the affirmative.

 

Speaking of Ehlers, there's a good talent. First line winger in the making. Needs to work on his defense, as you said. Also, his diving. He tends to dive a lot, notice it a lot when I'm watching the Jets play. Got fined for it today.

Edited January 8, 2016 by Thorny

[beerme1]

Still think Kaner will be there until his contract expires?

 

 

Unless he's in jail, yes.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Still think Kaner will be there until his contract expires?

 

Yes.

 

I also think it's a very good possibility that his contract will be extended.

 

He is experiencing some on ice adjustments and off ice stuff (for lack of a better word), but I believe everyone with the Sabres consider Kane a key part of the *new and improved core*.

[Thwomp!]

FWIW, I kinda agree with you on Lemieux -- on paper he looks like a good prospect.  I expect you agree, though, that he's still just a prospect and could easily not make it in the show?

 

However, on the bolded, I go back to my cross-examination of you on this point yesterday:  are you saying that if you could go back in time and undo the trade, you would do so?

 

Wow. Much to catch up on here.  Yes, if I could go back in time I would undo the trade.  Not knowing what else was out there of course, but since this trade has been horrible (imo) from the Sabres perspective I think we could have done better for what we gave up.  I would have been happy to keep Armia, Lemieux, and the draft pick as well.  What position does Armia play?  RW?  Where is a major hole in the Sabres right now?  RW?  I would have liked to see him grow with the other young guys we have a bit and see what happens.  Why not?  It's a lost season anyway.  I'd rather see young guys develop than see veterans struggle and underperform.

 

 

I am going to start at the top and work my way down...

 

1) Nylander was born in March of 98 and Lemieux March of 96.  They are two years apart and in the junior leagues that is a monumental difference.

 

2) As I demonstrate in my previous post their PPG is not the same. There is a 0.67 PPG difference in their draft years. Nylander score significantly more points at the current time.

 

3) Kane is a skilled agitator. If he was scoring like he should we would be much better off. This leads me to the Murray comment. You can criticize GMTM all you want. I think this trade gave up 1 piece to many and I wasn't a big fan of it from the start. I would like to see how it plays out over the course of the season though.  My issue is that you are using Nylander, I substantially better prospect than Lemiuex was at that age as part of your evidence and it does fly. 

 

4) They are very far for scoring as I have demonstrated twice now. Yup Lemiuex has size and physicality. Nylander has a better shot, hockey iq, skating and on ice vision from what I can tell thus far. Scoring is far enough off that Nylander is clearly the better prospect. If you had a draft today between 20yr old Lemiuex and 18 year old Nylander, Nylander would go first for 29 out of 30 GM's and the 1 who didn't take him would be wrong.

 

Furthermore Lemiuex played 42 OHL games prior to his draft year starting. Nylander played 0 and had to learn to play in NA.  So while doing both of those things, Nylander has produced significantly higher point totals than Lemieux.  Of course you want to use the point totals of a guy who is in his 4th season of OHL action versus a guy with 33 total games played in the league, that isn't even remotely a good way of judging prospects. Lemieux btw has 183 games. So it took him 183 games to get close to Nylanders production but it took Nylander 33... again one of these things is not like the other.

 

I don't really care about the trade or if GMTM screwed the pooch but Alexnader Nylander is a much better prospect than Brendan Lemieux.

 

Wow, Liger.  Thanks for the bio on Nylander, especially since there's a 99% chance he's never a Sabre.  I wasn't saying Lemieux was a better prospect.  I was saying as a snapshot in time and making a comparison to a top-10 or top-5 pick that Lemieux is currently scoring at the same rate in the same league.  Nothing more.  It was a comparison, not a would you rather.  I'm sure I could have found better comparisons with all the other variables in play, but I'm not taking the time to do that.  Nylander's name stuck out at me.

 

And I'm glad so many around here don't care about the trade or how bad it's looking, but we should care.  We likely could have done much better with what we gave up.  Of the 5 big guys (not counting Legwand) that Murray has given up a bunch of assets for, 2 have been great (same trade) and the other 3 have been disappointing for varied reasons.

[Huckleberry]

Yes.

 

I also think it's a very good possibility that his contract will be extended.

 

He is experiencing some on ice adjustments and off ice stuff (for lack of a better word), but I believe everyone with the Sabres consider Kane a key part of the *new and improved core*.

 

Actually I consider him to be excellent trade bait for a #2LHD.   Unless Murray signs one in the offseason UFA class (Yandle ) , I can see him shipping Kane out west for a LHD.

Wow. Much to catch up on here.  Yes, if I could go back in time I would undo the trade.  Not knowing what else was out there of course, but since this trade has been horrible (imo) from the Sabres perspective I think we could have done better for what we gave up.  I would have been happy to keep Armia, Lemieux, and the draft pick as well.  What position does Armia play?  RW?  Where is a major hole in the Sabres right now?  RW?  I would have liked to see him grow with the other young guys we have a bit and see what happens.  Why not?  It's a lost season anyway.  I'd rather see young guys develop than see veterans struggle and underperform.

 

 

 

Wow, Liger.  Thanks for the bio on Nylander, especially since there's a 99% chance he's never a Sabre.  I wasn't saying Lemieux was a better prospect.  I was saying as a snapshot in time and making a comparison to a top-10 or top-5 pick that Lemieux is currently scoring at the same rate in the same league.  Nothing more.  It was a comparison, not a would you rather.  I'm sure I could have found better comparisons with all the other variables in play, but I'm not taking the time to do that.  Nylander's name stuck out at me.

 

And I'm glad so many around here don't care about the trade or how bad it's looking, but we should care.  We likely could have done much better with what we gave up.  Of the 5 big guys (not counting Legwand) that Murray has given up a bunch of assets for, 2 have been great (same trade) and the other 3 have been disappointing for varied reasons.

 

Lemieux was gone the moment he didn't want to sign the ELC.   Armia is something I would have wanted to keep allthough I wasn't to sad to see him leave seeing he hadn't done much Rochester.

Guess that leaves that 1st round draft pick we gave up,  that one we should have kept.

[LGR4GM]

Wow, Liger.  Thanks for the bio on Nylander, especially since there's a 99% chance he's never a Sabre.  I wasn't saying Lemieux was a better prospect.  I was saying as a snapshot in time and making a comparison to a top-10 or top-5 pick that Lemieux is currently scoring at the same rate in the same league.  Nothing more.  It was a comparison, not a would you rather.  I'm sure I could have found better comparisons with all the other variables in play, but I'm not taking the time to do that.  Nylander's name stuck out at me.

He's not scoring at the same rate. That statement isn't accurate. You know how many guys are 20 and score like top 10 18yr olds? A bunch, they are more mature and physically more developed. It would be like if Jack Eichel had 13g, 13a and Kyle Turris had 13g, 16a and saying that Kyle Turris and Jack Eichel are scoring at the same rate so Turris is worth Eichel. One of them is far older and isn't a rookie in the league.

 

You can't compare the point totals of a 20yr old junior player to an 18yr old junior player. I would actually discount Lemiuex's point totals as well because of his size.  How many 6'1" 210lb 18yr old hockey players are in the OHL?  Some but the majority are not that big. How many 6'1" 210 lb NHL forwards are there? Most of them.  His size and weight give him a bigger advantage in juniors than he will have in the NHL. Something to consider.

[Thwomp!]

  

 

Would agree on that. To me, this is still a trade that may work out for both teams.

 

From the Sabres side, Stafford was not going to be re-signed. They were giving up ~30 games of his service & that was it. He was a good pickup for the Peg and by getting him they got a chance to see if they really did want to make an offer to him and an opportunity to pitch it.

 

Armia, due to where he was picked, needed to become at least a 2nd liner in Buffalo. You indicate that he could settle into a 3rd or 4th line role - which is acceptable for a trade 'throw in' but not (rightly or wrongly) for a #1 pick. It's why Paille was a bust in Buffalo but an effective 4th liner in Beantown.

 

Lemieux and the 1st, while they had value, the value wasn't that great and the Sabres did/do have several other assets with similar value.

 

Losing Myers hurts (I'm probably in the minority on that opinion) but what you're seeing is what he is: a big defenseman who is strong offensively but still prone to errors in judgment on when to pinch / where to pass and who rarely plays as big as he is in his own end.

 

We're seeing Bogosian is a lot of what you'd described him as. But it's been a long time since the Sabres had a mean top 4 D-man. He fills a need and IMO is still coming back from his training camp injury.

 

Kane might never put it all together, but man oh man, if he ever does ... . And even if he doesn't, the skill set he has will be enticing to some other GM who just KNOWS he has the coach that can get him to put it all together. If Chris Gratton could get traded for good return 4 or 5 times, Evander Kane can definitely get traded for good return twice if necessary.

 

 

 

No data on how he got hurt. He looked great on the 1st day of TC and then was gone soon after that. Skating well, playing physical, and showing a reasonable shot that day.

 

First bold: It's already worked out for Winnipeg.  And they still have plenty of futures from the trade to sit back and develop or use as assets in trades.  It may work out for the Sabres, but that is far from certain.  Maybe 50-50 at best.

 

Second bold:  Yep, that's the story on Kane.  Heard it before the trade and have been hearing it ever since.  Not promising in my view so far.

He's not scoring at the same rate. That statement isn't accurate. You know how many guys are 20 and score like top 10 18yr olds? A bunch, they are more mature and physically more developed. It would be like if Jack Eichel had 13g, 13a and Kyle Turris had 13g, 16a and saying that Kyle Turris and Jack Eichel are scoring at the same rate so Turris is worth Eichel. One of them is far older and isn't a rookie in the league.

 

You can't compare the point totals of a 20yr old junior player to an 18yr old junior player. I would actually discount Lemiuex's point totals as well because of his size.  How many 6'1" 210lb 18yr old hockey players are in the OHL?  Some but the majority are not that big. How many 6'1" 210 lb NHL forwards are there? Most of them.  His size and weight give him a bigger advantage in juniors than he will have in the NHL. Something to consider.

 

All I was arguing was the "dime a dozen", not a good prospect arguments people are throwing out there.  Not the case in my view.

Nylander is 17, or 23 months younger than Lemieux, which is a pretty big difference in the OHL and life in general at that age. Not to mention Bailey and Baptiste have nearly identical size and ppg as Lemieux in their overage seasons and can both be agitators without getting suspended and racking up penalty minutes. We had three of the same guys in our pipeline and we got rid of the lowest one IMO.

 

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=116970

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=177647

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=106161 

 

Bailey and Baptiste may be scorers, but they're not agitators.  Calling them scorers is even a stretch at this point considering their poor AHL numbers so far.  Neither are the potential complete package that Lemieux could be imo.

Still think Kaner will be there until his contract expires?

 

 

Yes.

 

I also think it's a very good possibility that his contract will be extended.

 

He is experiencing some on ice adjustments and off ice stuff (for lack of a better word), but I believe everyone with the Sabres consider Kane a key part of the *new and improved core*.

 

GMTM may keep him for a long time.  It was a big trade for him and he's not going to want to admit failure until the evidence is overwhelming.

 

To the bold:  The old and stale core is performing much better.  He's got a ways to go to be included in my group of the "new and improved core".

Actually I consider him to be excellent trade bait for a #2LHD.   Unless Murray signs one in the offseason UFA class (Yandle ) , I can see him shipping Kane out west for a LHD.

 

Lemieux was gone the moment he didn't want to sign the ELC.   Armia is something I would have wanted to keep allthough I wasn't to sad to see him leave seeing he hadn't done much Rochester.

Guess that leaves that 1st round draft pick we gave up,  that one we should have kept.

 

Love how the bolded is fact based on one tweet.  Murray has never hinted at or indicated anything of the kind.

[LGR4GM]

Lemieux is a good prospect that maxes out as a middling 2nd line player but more likely a 3rd line grinder with some offense. That is if he hits his ceiling. Kids got a lot of work to do but I think Winnipeg got a good prospect.

[inkman]

Bailey and Baptiste may be scorers, but they're not agitators. Calling them scorers is even a stretch at this point considering their poor AHL numbers so far. Neither are the potential complete package that Lemieux could be imo.

Comparing Lemieux's junior stats with the Sabres prospects professional stats doesn't jive. Compare Bailey and Baptiste as over aged juniors and their stats line up.

[Thwomp!]

Comparing Lemieux's junior stats with the Sabres prospects professional stats doesn't jive. Compare Bailey and Baptiste as over aged juniors and their stats line up.

 

Agitating stats too?  No.  That's my whole point.  It's not just scoring and size with Lemieux.  It's just scoring and size with Bailey and Baptiste.  There's an attitude component that's missing.  I want the Sabres to have their version of a Marchand/Gallagher/Burrows.  We don't have that currently or in the pipeline anymore.  I think Lemieux could fill that role well for some team in the NHL someday.

[inkman]

Agitating stats too? No. That's my whole point. It's not just scoring and size with Lemieux. It's just scoring and size with Bailey and Baptiste. There's an attitude component that's missing. I want the Sabres to have their version of a Marchand/Gallagher/Burrows. We don't have that currently or in the pipeline anymore. I think Lemieux could fill that role well for some team in the NHL someday.

I've understood this from the start. I don't know how important it is to have that guy anymore.

 

The Kaletas, Cookes, Averys are a dying breed. I think the league is trying to distance itself from players who aren't quite talented enough to get by without having some sort of gimmick like goading other players or operating in the gray areas of the rules.

[Thwomp!]

I've understood this from the start. I don't know how important it is to have that guy anymore.

 

The Kaletas, Cookes, Averys are a dying breed. I think the league is trying to distance itself from players who aren't quite talented enough to get by without having some sort of gimmick like goading other players or operating in the gray areas of the rules.

 

Okay, but the guys who agitate and score are great to have.  Why I mentioned Marchand/Gallagher/Burrows.  They all have a solid place in the league.  Lemieux's ceiling is one of those guys.  We don't currently have that guy in our system.

 

But to summarize everything.  I don't like the trade for several reasons.  The main one being that Winnipeg is currently winning the trade and has a good chance to run the score up on it as time passes.

[dudacek]

Two questions:

1) Would you rather have Myers and Stafford than Kane and Bogosian?

2) If the answer is 'no', what would the Jets have to get out of Armia, Lemieux and/or Roslovic in order to win the trade?

[Thwomp!]

Two questions:

1) Would you rather have Myers and Stafford than Kane and Bogosian?

2) If the answer is 'no', what would the Jets have to get out of Armia, Lemieux and/or Roslovic in order to win the trade?

 

1) I would rather have what Myers and Stafford would have brought us from another likely trade(s) along with still having more of the assets that we gave up.  But yes, I'd rather have Myers and Stafford at this point, and I'm not a huge fan of either of them.  They're playing better, they've been healthier, and they make much less in salary.

 

2) The Jets are already winning the trade.  Anything that happens for them in regard to the futures is icing on the cake.  This trade is backwards thus far.  The team getting the futures isn't supposed to win the trade before the futures have come into play.  The hill for the Sabres to climb to even get to even on this trade is getting steeper and steeper.

[beerme1]

I'd rather see young guys develop than see veterans struggle and underperform.

 

 

 

 

 

The two veterans we're talking about though are 24 years old I believe and I saw enough of Myers and Staph that I didn't need to see anymore. Plus the fact that Myers and Marphins disease or whatever could be an issue going forward according to some on the board.

I get having a problem losing Lemieux. But the biggest overriding factor is; EICHEL. Game, set and match. 

[Thwomp!]

The two veterans we're talking about though are 24 years old I believe and I saw enough of Myers and Staph that I didn't need to see anymore. Plus the fact that Myers and Marphins disease or whatever could be an issue going forward according to some on the board.

I get having a problem losing Lemieux. But the biggest overriding factor is; EICHEL. Game, set and match. 

 

Yep because a more beneficial trade couldn't have been made on the Sabres end to achieve the same result.  <_<

[LGR4GM]

Yep because a more beneficial trade couldn't have been made on the Sabres end to achieve the same result.  <_<

Possibly but again we aren't even 1 season in, why don't we check back at the end of the year and see how this trade looks.

[Thwomp!]

Possibly but again we aren't even 1 season in, why don't we check back at the end of the year and see how this trade looks.

 

Willing to do that, but a half season is a good benchmark to see where things stand.  If things were going well in the Sabres favor at a half season, I'm sure we'd be positively evaluating the hell out of it and not waiting for the end of the season.  See O'Reilly, Ryan and McGinn, Jamie.

[TrueBlueGED]

1) I would rather have what Myers and Stafford would have brought us from another likely trade(s) along with still having more of the assets that we gave up. But yes, I'd rather have Myers and Stafford at this point, and I'm not a huge fan of either of them. They're playing better, they've been healthier, and they make much less in salary.

 

2) The Jets are already winning the trade. Anything that happens for them in regard to the futures is icing on the cake. This trade is backwards thus far. The team getting the futures isn't supposed to win the trade before the futures have come into play. The hill for the Sabres to climb to even get to even on this trade is getting steeper and steeper.

This type of answer would make Hillary proud :w00t:

[LGR4GM]

Willing to do that, but a half season is a good benchmark to see where things stand.  If things were going well in the Sabres favor at a half season, I'm sure we'd be positively evaluating the hell out of it and not waiting for the end of the season.  See O'Reilly, Ryan and McGinn, Jamie.

But you are also arguing there was another trade out there that Murray could have made that would have been better.  My issue with that stance is we will never know.  Right now we in terms of the trade itself we are losing, but Stafford's natural shot percentage is lower, Myers was always going to outscore Bogo, and none of the prospects have made any real NHL impact. 

[Thwomp!]

This type of answer would make Hillary proud :w00t:

 

I live to please Hillary.  :sick:

But you are also arguing there was another trade out there that Murray could have made that would have been better.  My issue with that stance is we will never know.  Right now we in terms of the trade itself we are losing, but Stafford's natural shot percentage is lower, Myers was always going to outscore Bogo, and none of the prospects have made any real NHL impact. 

 

This trade is currently so bad in my view that it couldn't have gotten any worse, so I'd be willing to take that chance.

 

And Myers is equal in scoring to Kane and Bogo combined.  And we're not getting anywhere close to enough of the physical element from them to even come close to making up for any current deficit in scoring, either.  I can't believe I'm the only one alarmed about this.

[LGR4GM]

I live to please Hillary.  :sick:

 

This trade is currently so bad in my view that it couldn't have gotten any worse, so I'd be willing to take that chance.

 

And Myers is equal in scoring to Kane and Bogo combined.  And we're not getting anywhere close to enough of the physical element from them to even come close to making up for any current deficit in scoring, either.  I can't believe I'm the only one alarmed about this.

There's a difference between alarmed and shouting the Armageddon is nigh

[Weave]

I live to please Hillary.  :sick:

 

This trade is currently so bad in my view that it couldn't have gotten any worse, so I'd be willing to take that chance.

 

And Myers is equal in scoring to Kane and Bogo combined.  And we're not getting anywhere close to enough of the physical element from them to even come close to making up for any current deficit in scoring, either.  I can't believe I'm the only one alarmed about this.

 

You are not the only one alarmed about it.  But you are pretty lonely in believing there was much, if anything, better to be had instead of Bogo/Kane. for those shlubs.

[inkman]

Two questions:

1) Would you rather have Myers and Stafford than Kane and Bogosian?

2) If the answer is 'no', what would the Jets have to get out of Armia, Lemieux and/or Roslovic in order to win the trade?

 

Myers, as one supposed drunken GMTM conversation described, is a giant .  I'm just fine with him gone.  Kane for Stafford is much the same as Myers for Bogo except Kane is better at everything than Stafford.  We got a heart transplant maybe with a tiny sacrifice of brains.  Myers and Stafford will never do the things Bogo and Kane do.