Taro T Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Here is what I believe Murray will do. He has identified a player or two that he likes and he will trade for him(them) near the draft. The problem is that the league GM's now know that he will severely overpay to get the player he wants (based on the over payments he made with trades previously i.e. LA ans WPG) For instance, lets say he likes Ryan O'Reilly from Colorado. He will give up two players, two top prospects or top draft choices to get him. He will pay too much. I believe this is a mistake, but his track record says he will do it. When Murray talked about the Winnipeg trade he said he had to give up a top pick Myers to get two top picks in return (Kane,Bogosian). I saw him give up much more than that, but he sees things through weird glasses. While I'd agree that there probably was overpayment in the Fasching trade and possibly in the Kane trade; I'd be hard pressed to say either was a "severe" overpayment. Is it possible that DR's need to win EVERY trade he entered into might have clouded our view of what is, in fact, "overpayment?" Were there any other deals did he overpay on? Seemed to be good value on the Gorges deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted April 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I want to hear from @fakegorbyportwinestain and some of the others who supported him in this thread about Murray's comments from yesterday. It was a pretty non-commital statement with lots of ifs ands and buts and "best efforts" and question marks. Is it supposed to negate his previous statement that he hopes the team is better while still having a shot in the lottery? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I highly doubt we have our eyes on a top pick in 2016. I think if he drafts Eichel he will try to get him and Reinhart in the lineup next season and then you throw in E. Kane and the offense looks to put up at least 60 more goals and more wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 (edited) It was a pretty non-commital statement with lots of ifs ands and buts and "best efforts" and question marks. Is it supposed to negate his previous statement that he hopes the team is better while still having a shot in the lottery? It would for me if I read the original quote the way you did. It doesn't for you? This thread is about whether it is Murray's goal to to have another lottery pick next year. He was asked if it was the goal to be a playoff team next year. He said "yes." Sure he offered the usually qualifiers about being able to meet that goal. But ultimately his answer was yes. He also said the groundwork has been laid for trades and free agent acquisitions he hopes to make. That sure doesn't sound like a guy whose first choice is a lottery pick to me. Edited April 19, 2015 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 It would for me if I read the original quote the way you did. It doesn't for you? This thread is about whether it is Murray's goal to to have another lottery pick next year. He was asked if it was the goal to be a playoff team next year. He said "yes." Sure he offered the usually qualifiers about being able to meet that goal. But ultimately his answer was yes. He also said the groundwork has been laid for trades and free agent acquisitions he hopes to make. That sure doesn't sound like a guy whose first choice is a lottery pick to me. Murray has to clear roster space. I just tried to set up the forward lines and at least 1 of Foligno, Girgorenko, and Larsson will have to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 While I'd agree that there probably was overpayment in the Fasching trade and possibly in the Kane trade; I'd be hard pressed to say either was a "severe" overpayment. Is it possible that DR's need to win EVERY trade he entered into might have clouded our view of what is, in fact, "overpayment?" Were there any other deals did he overpay on? Seemed to be good value on the Gorges deal. It's just so hard to judge without knowing the context. On paper I think you could make a reasonable case he overpaid in the Kane trade by one piece. But we have no idea how many teams were in on it, what their offers looked like, and how inclined Cheveldayoff was to just let it go until summer where (presumably) more teams would be in position to bid. My best guess is the one extra piece was necessary to get the deal done during the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 It's just so hard to judge without knowing the context. On paper I think you could make a reasonable case he overpaid in the Kane trade by one piece. But we have no idea how many teams were in on it, what their offers looked like, and how inclined Cheveldayoff was to just let it go until summer where (presumably) more teams would be in position to bid. My best guess is the one extra piece was necessary to get the deal done during the season. I'm liking the deal for Kane more and more as time goes on. Armia will be 22 next month and he scored only 2 goals in 21 games since joining St. John's after the trade. He might never be an NHL regular, and Lemieux wasn't going to sign with Buffalo anyway. It's widely known that McDavid wanted to end up in Toronto or Buffalo, and the one team he didn't want to go to was Edmonton. So let's see how this plays out. I doubt Edmonton trades the pick, but what if McDavid refuses to sign? This thing is far from over IMO, he could go back to junior and set records playing a full season while a deal is worked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I'm liking the deal for Kane more and more as time goes on. Armia will be 22 next month and he scored only 2 goals in 21 games since joining St. John's after the trade. He might never be an NHL regular, and Lemieux wasn't going to sign with Buffalo anyway. It's widely known that McDavid wanted to end up in Toronto or Buffalo, and the one team he didn't want to go to was Edmonton. So let's see how this plays out. I doubt Edmonton trades the pick, but what if McDavid refuses to sign? This thing is far from over IMO, he could go back to junior and set records playing a full season while a deal is worked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 It's just so hard to judge without knowing the context. On paper I think you could make a reasonable case he overpaid in the Kane trade by one piece. But we have no idea how many teams were in on it, what their offers looked like, and how inclined Cheveldayoff was to just let it go until summer where (presumably) more teams would be in position to bid. My best guess is the one extra piece was necessary to get the deal done during the season. Add in that Kane seems to be the prototypical TM 1st liner, the team had NO true 1st liners prior to the trade (though Reinhart could grow into 1, as could Ennis), the team has a ton of prospects, and making that trade could have been viewed as increasing the probability of finishing 30th and it gets tougher to view it as overpayment if the 2nd prospect &/or draft pick was the piece that made the trade happen. The Sabres also replaced their #1 D-man with a guy that stepped in as their #1 D-man. It looks like the Sabres will have ended up with 2 of the 3 best players in the trade, including the best. I hope they always end up winning on quality and expect we are at least 2 years (if not more) away from being in a position where we're worried about the quantity they're giving up. Stock up on top end talent when its available; 2nd liners (such as Moulson) usually come available; 3rd & 4th liners are always available. Add a RW, a 2/3 D, a 5D, and a goalie; and I really like this team. Even if they don't bring it in, this team will be watchable. Couldn't say that very often the last 2+ years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotentPowerPlay22 Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 I'm liking the deal for Kane more and more as time goes on. Armia will be 22 next month and he scored only 2 goals in 21 games since joining St. John's after the trade. He might never be an NHL regular, and Lemieux wasn't going to sign with Buffalo anyway. Kane was done in Winnipeg. They wanted him gone ASAP. You would think this would give Murray the bargaining leverage, but he caved to Cheveldayoff's demands anyway. Murray has got to stop telling his trading partners how much he loves their guy. He is playing poker by showing the other guy his cards. Bad strategy. Murray is known in hockey circles as a scout (and definitely not a negotiator it seems.) Right now he is getting by with this strategy because the Sabres had acquired so many assets previously. Those assets are drying up as Murray deals them away at a brisk pace. I guarantee you he will overpay again in a couple months! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Kane was done in Winnipeg. They wanted him gone ASAP. You would think this would give Murray the bargaining leverage, but he caved to Cheveldayoff's demands anyway. Murray has got to stop telling his trading partners how much he loves their guy. He is playing poker by showing the other guy his cards. Bad strategy. Murray is known in hockey circles as a scout (and definitely not a negotiator it seems.) Right now he is getting by with this strategy because the Sabres had acquired so many assets previously. Those assets are drying up as Murray deals them away at a brisk pace. I guarantee you he will overpay again in a couple months! The Sabres are running out of tradeable assets? :huh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onceagain Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Murray's fine. The sabres are fine. He looked like a pissy little boy last night but hell get over it. He needs to turn his attention to the next most important task: Making a Rex Ryan-like hire to infuse some enthusiasm into the organization. Did anyone count how many times Murray said "Pro-cess" last night? Gotta love that Canadian accent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Kane was done in Winnipeg. They wanted him gone ASAP. You would think this would give Murray the bargaining leverage, but he caved to Cheveldayoff's demands anyway. Murray has got to stop telling his trading partners how much he loves their guy. He is playing poker by showing the other guy his cards. Bad strategy. Murray is known in hockey circles as a scout (and definitely not a negotiator it seems.) Right now he is getting by with this strategy because the Sabres had acquired so many assets previously. Those assets are drying up as Murray deals them away at a brisk pace. I guarantee you he will overpay again in a couple months! Thats a lot of pure speculation with no facts....you sir are in the right thread! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 The overpayment meme is kind of silly when you have the resources to do it and the mandate to win a Cup. You don't win a Cup by maximizing assets, you win it by maximizing a roster. So, player X in one context might seem like an odd pickup at the outset, but Murray and crew are, I hope, acting like alchemists stirring a potent brew together. This isn't Darcy Regier's Sabres anymore and it doesn't have to be, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Eh I'm done rooting against them, draft Eichel and lets start progressing, not staying stagnant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted April 19, 2015 Report Share Posted April 19, 2015 Here is what I believe Murray will do. He has identified a player or two that he likes and he will trade for him(them) near the draft. The problem is that the league GM's now know that he will severely overpay to get the player he wants (based on the over payments he made with trades previously i.e. LA ans WPG) For instance, lets say he likes Ryan O'Reilly from Colorado. He will give up two players, two top prospects or top draft choices to get him. He will pay too much. I believe this is a mistake, but his track record says he will do it. When Murray talked about the Winnipeg trade he said he had to give up a top pick Myers to get two top picks in return (Kane,Bogosian). I saw him give up much more than that, but he sees things through weird glasses. Overpaying is in the eye of the beholder. If you have a critical need and obtaining it will give you a signifiant boost, overpaying to satisfy that need may be your only option. But it can pay off in spades and no one will complain that you pulled the trigger so long as it works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
respk Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 It's just so hard to judge without knowing the context. On paper I think you could make a reasonable case he overpaid in the Kane trade by one piece. But we have no idea how many teams were in on it, what their offers looked like, and how inclined Cheveldayoff was to just let it go until summer where (presumably) more teams would be in position to bid. My best guess is the one extra piece was necessary to get the deal done during the season. Agree with the overpayment by either Armia or the 1st round draft. I feel better about the trade if he keeps either Armia or the 1st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Agree with the overpayment by either Armia or the 1st round draft. I feel better about the trade if he keeps either Armia or the 1st. Ok. But then the deal doesn't happen. How do you feel about it then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejeanneret Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) Sometimes when you have an abundance of mediocre you have to give that up for a bit of greatness. It's about putting together a team. I put a thread out there a while back that traded alot of assets to the team drafting 2nd if we won the lottery so we could have both McDavid and Eichel Some said it was too much, other said why trade so much for a single player. The whole idea is to build a complete team. Right now we are brainwashed to think that many players on our team or in the minors are great assets, but simply put we don't know. WE ARE A LAST PLACE TEAM PEOPLE. When you trade a bunch of maybes for someone who has already done it in the league and is a young player then I don't see a problem with that IF you still have players around him to make up a great team. Less not forget free agency as well. Even if you trade too much for a single great player you can fill a void by adding 1 or 2 key free agents. People are crying about Marcus Foligno being traded as not a good thing for Buffalo. Maybe he becomes a great star, maybe he's the next Curtis Brown. Who knows. But he hasn't done it at this level and to give him up as a piece to get someone who has done it at this level I feel is a good thing. Even if we have to include more pieces or players that also haven't done it at this level. That's what builds a champion. Edited April 20, 2015 by dejeanneret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 While I'd agree that there probably was overpayment in the Fasching trade and possibly in the Kane trade; I'd be hard pressed to say either was a "severe" overpayment. Is it possible that DR's need to win EVERY trade he entered into might have clouded our view of what is, in fact, "overpayment?" Were there any other deals did he overpay on? Seemed to be good value on the Gorges deal. I agree that maybe the Jets trade wasn't an overpayment. When they line-up next season the Sabres will have both Kane and Bogosian in the line-up. Myers will be a Jet but Stafford could be anywhere and who knows if Lemieux,the #1 pick from the Blues or Armia ever turn into anything. It was a pretty non-commital statement with lots of ifs ands and buts and "best efforts" and question marks. Is it supposed to negate his previous statement that he hopes the team is better while still having a shot in the lottery? sure he wants to win the lottery, their odds may not be great but they will still be in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
respk Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Ok. But then the deal doesn't happen. How do you feel about it then? I still think Murray should do the deal the way it was done if that's what it took. I have no way of knowing. I just think the deal would have been a fairer deal if Armia or that 1st wasn't part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicarious Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 The Sabres can make a huge improvement this coming season and still be bottom 5 in the league. I'm sorry to everyone thinking that this team is going to get 40 more points next season and make a run for the playoffs but it's not happening. I would be very happy if they ended up with around 75 points next year which would show a massive improvement and still give us a chance at the lottery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 The Sabres can make a huge improvement this coming season and still be bottom 5 in the league. I'm sorry to everyone thinking that this team is going to get 40 more points next season and make a run for the playoffs but it's not happening. I would be very happy if they ended up with around 75 points next year which would show a massive improvement and still give us a chance at the lottery. Smart take - you should post more often as I completly agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Kane was done in Winnipeg. They wanted him gone ASAP. You would think this would give Murray the bargaining leverage, but he caved to Cheveldayoff's demands anyway. Murray has got to stop telling his trading partners how much he loves their guy. He is playing poker by showing the other guy his cards. Bad strategy. Murray is known in hockey circles as a scout (and definitely not a negotiator it seems.) Right now he is getting by with this strategy because the Sabres had acquired so many assets previously. Those assets are drying up as Murray deals them away at a brisk pace. I guarantee you he will overpay again in a couple months! If you look at things in a vacuum it may be. Your statement suggests that some other team wasn't offering something slightly less valuable to the jets so unless Murray got there he wasn't going to get the trade. Murray's job is to assess talent and make the team better. His willingness to give up players is based upon so many more factors than we'd ever know. We can only judge by the outcome of the trade after the fact. The value of this trade hasn't become clear yet. When a GM makes a trade it isn't always just about that one deal. The deal could be setting the stage for the future. Murray cleared a few contracts with the deal and removed the need to deal with a future contract on the books in Lemieux. imagine if you only made the best move in chess based only on the biggest possible gain at that very moment without regard to the future gains. You'd be a horrible chess player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted April 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 Smart take - you should post more often as I completly agree with you. Tim is too busy driving to Toronto. 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.