tom webster Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 It's not about next season though. If Lehner amounts to what he projects to be, he'll easily be better than any option we have now. We're building a contender, a young goalie with high upside is much more valuable than a 30 year old goaltender who won't even be on the team when we're contending. Hasn't the Darcy era proven that its not about winning the trades, it is about building a team. You can't keep all these prospects. When finished this is going to be a very young team with only room for one or two new players per year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Late to the party, here's my 2 cents. Clearly TM believes that Lehner is the real deal. Hope he right and that he's not only right but that concussions don't derail Lehner's career. That the Sabres gave up 21 for him reflects more on the combination of somebody else bidding for him and TM being sold. It has nothing to do with the Sabres having leverage on the Otters nor TMs uncle BM running the show in Otterland - it has to do with market price: somebody else made an offer (or TM believed there was another offer out there) that was better than 31. Curious about Legwand coming in. Would it be more than a courtesy to BM or the item that made the Otters sign off on Buffalo's 21 over the other offer. Figured the Sabres don't want to have extremely young C's all the way through the lineup. Might they see him as having enough left to be the 3rd C rather than just battling it out w/ McCormick for 4th C? If so, that would have 2 of Girgensons, Reinhart, and Larsson not playing C and quite possibly Grigorenko out the door. Lines might look something like this to start the season: Moulson - McEichel (hey, probably last chance to use that term, had to go w/ it ;)) - Ennis Kane - Girgensons - Reinhart Foligno - Legwand - Gionta Desaulariers - Larsson - McCormick Just spitballin'. (Easy there, Liger, not saying Reinhart will be on the wing all year.) And whether this deal is good or bad comes down entirely to whether TM is right on Lehner or simply has a man crush. If he did miss on this one, the Sabres desperately need a lead goalie scout - any possibility that TP can buy whichever guy Lombardi uses? He always seems to hit on goalies. I'm not thrilled w/ this deal (was hoping for Lack via pick 51), but time will show us unequivocably whether it was good or not. Not ready to evaluate it yet though lean towards not liking it. Good post, but I don't think there's any real chance Legwand gets a bigger role than Larsson. Larsson is simply better at this point, and actually has a future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Tim Murray decided the player we drafted at 21 would be around the same level as the player we took at 31 and decided to up the ante. I think this is the key issue. It's a bit misleading to get hung up on this being a 1st rounder. Lines might look something like this to start the season: Moulson - McEichel (hey, probably last chance to use that term, had to go w/ it ;)) - Ennis Kane - Girgensons - Reinhart Foligno - Legwand - Gionta Desaulariers - Larsson - McCormick Yeah, okay. That'll work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Armia and Lemieux had plenty of value though, and each was having a good season when they were traded so their trade values were high when he pulled the trigger. So even if neither guy develops, he could have used them in separate trades. It's not like we didn't lose anything when we sent them away to Winnipeg. Now I'm wondering if he's just fibbing to justify the moves he's made or if he's actually this delusional with his thought process. I think this is a bit generous. Armia had 10 goals in 33 games in Rochester when he was traded (in his 2nd full year in the A; he had 7 goals in 54 games in his 1st year there). So he was showing improvement, but I don't think I'd go as far as saying that he was having a good year or had high value. Lemieux certainly was having a good year, but it was still junior hockey, and still early in his career (1st year after being drafted) -- so he was still very much a prospect. So I guess I'd say that Lemieux had reasonable value -- but that just means that GMTM gave up a 1st and a decent-to-good prospect for Kane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hasn't the Darcy era proven that its not about winning the trades, it is about building a team. You can't keep all these prospects. When finished this is going to be a very young team with only room for one or two new players per year. One thing has taught me: Sports fans tend never to be happy (me included). With Darcy, it was "DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SOMETHING!" and then scream when he said he was waiting for the market to set itself. Now with GM TM, it's "Whoa, there, sailor. Jesus, dude. Are you crazy? You're crazy! You're high on 'shrooms." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Counterpoint... Bogo and Kane are both former 1st round picks. So while Murray has traded 3 First round picks or players? I think. He has also brought in 2 top 4 picks. Exactly, he traded a 12th, a 15th, a 16th a 21st and a 2nd round pick for a 3rd and a 4th. Go back in history and find how many drafts that would not have been a great trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Late to the party, here's my 2 cents. Clearly TM believes that Lehner is the real deal. Hope he right and that he's not only right but that concussions don't derail Lehner's career. That the Sabres gave up 21 for him reflects more on the combination of somebody else bidding for him and TM being sold. It has nothing to do with the Sabres having leverage on the Otters nor TMs uncle BM running the show in Otterland - it has to do with market price: somebody else made an offer (or TM believed there was another offer out there) that was better than 31. Curious about Legwand coming in. Would it be more than a courtesy to BM or the item that made the Otters sign off on Buffalo's 21 over the other offer. Figured the Sabres don't want to have extremely young C's all the way through the lineup. Might they see him as having enough left to be the 3rd C rather than just battling it out w/ McCormick for 4th C? If so, that would have 2 of Girgensons, Reinhart, and Larsson not playing C and quite possibly Grigorenko out the door. Lines might look something like this to start the season: Moulson - McEichel (hey, probably last chance to use that term, had to go w/ it ;)) - Ennis Kane - Girgensons - Reinhart Foligno - Legwand - Gionta Desaulariers - Larsson - McCormick Just spitballin'. (Easy there, Liger, not saying Reinhart will be on the wing all year.) And whether this deal is good or bad comes down entirely to whether TM is right on Lehner or simply has a man crush. If he did miss on this one, the Sabres desperately need a lead goalie scout - any possibility that TP can buy whichever guy Lombardi uses? He always seems to hit on goalies. I'm not thrilled w/ this deal (was hoping for Lack via pick 51), but time will show us unequivocably whether it was good or not. Not ready to evaluate it yet though lean towards not liking it. Good post. I understand why Grigorenko and Hodgson aren't in the lineup because they were traded for O'Reilly, but where is O'Reilly? :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Yea after listening to Murray talk, I feel better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Paul Hamilton @pham1717 2m2 minutes ago Murray on Legwand, "That was the deal. It was take it or leave it. He's part of the deal." Yea, there's no way he's getting playing time over Larsson. Legwand is on the 4th line, in the press box, or down the road in Rochester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcal Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 I'll give Lehner a chance to prove GMTM right before overreacting. He's young and competitive and knows how to win, atleast in the American League where he was MVP of the finals. He could end up a stop gap while Peterson, Makarov and Ullmark et al develop. GMTM said he needed 3 goalies, he just got 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hasn't the Darcy era proven that its not about winning the trades, it is about building a team. You can't keep all these prospects. When finished this is going to be a very young team with only room for one or two new players per year. Darcy did build the best Sabres team of all-time though. And we know his plan was to draft 1-2 overall in 2014 and 2015 (i.e. "Suffering") so it's likely we'd have Reinhart and Eichel even if he'd never been fired. We don't know what moves he would eventually try to make to build around them but presumably it would not have been just to keep all of his prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Darcy did build the best Sabres team of all-time though. And we know his plan was to draft 1-2 overall in 2014 and 2015 (i.e. "Suffering") so it's likely we'd have Reinhart and Eichel even if he'd never been fired. We don't know what moves he would eventually try to make to build around them but presumably it would not have been just to keep all of his prospects. Darcy would not have been able to tank 2 years in a row. He lacked the conviction to make it happen. Darcy would have drafted Draisaitl and would have forced him to play all season long. He would have acquired vets in the summers to keep the team above water. Hell DR might have never traded Ryan Miller. I completely disagree that we would be here with Jack Eichel about to join the Sabres if Darcy remained as GM unless we had won the lottery this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Armia and Lemieux had plenty of value though, and each was having a good season when they were traded so their trade values were high when he pulled the trigger. So even if neither guy develops, he could have used them in separate trades. It's not like we didn't lose anything when we sent them away to Winnipeg. Now I'm wondering if he's just fibbing to justify the moves he's made or if he's actually this delusional with his thought process. Armia had "plenty" of value? Could you define "plenty?" He's a 22 yo that was on pace for 25 goals in Ra-cha-cha and got all of 1 game as a call up on a team w/ 0 offensive output (for all intents & purposes). He didn't see any other action in the show in the Peg either. How much more would Lemieux bring back over Legwand? Probably some. Not more than 2 rounds worth of value though IMHO. It appears that you're picking nits on this one by pointing out that TM gave up relatively fungable assets in addition to the 3 1st round picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Darcy did build the best Sabres team of all-time though. And we know his plan was to draft 1-2 overall in 2014 and 2015 (i.e. "Suffering") so it's likely we'd have Reinhart and Eichel even if he'd never been fired. We don't know what moves he would eventually try to make to build around them but presumably it would not have been just to keep all of his prospects. Are we really pining for the good old days of Darcy because of a trade that we haven't seen any results from yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico7 Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Darcy did build the best Sabres team of all-time though. And we know his plan was to draft 1-2 overall in 2014 and 2015 (i.e. "Suffering") so it's likely we'd have Reinhart and Eichel even if he'd never been fired. We don't know what moves he would eventually try to make to build around them but presumably it would not have been just to keep all of his prospects. I respectfully disagree with you. The teams of the mid 70's were head and shoulders above any of those squads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Good post, but I don't think there's any real chance Legwand gets a bigger role than Larsson. Larsson is simply better at this point, and actually has a future. Quite possible. Thus prefacing it all w/ the question: would/could Legwand be slotted into the 3rd C role so that all 3 top C slots aren't taken by rooks & 3rd year players? (Definitely didn't see Legwand as being the answer to the where to find an experienced C question.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 I'm over the initial hate. I don't think Legwand has any affect whatsoever on the team or even the deal. It's Terry's money for one year. Ultimately we got our number one goalie for 2-3 years at least. He's 23. He's big and talented. Murray was the one that scouted him. If in three years he's not very good the trade sucked. If he's good the trade was a decent trade, no more no less. If he is a top 10 goalie it was a great trade and he is growing with all the other young players we have. Hopefully we keep the goalie whisperer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 I wonder if Chicago would be interested in Legwand? He did play in their division forever practically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Same Also Lehner is ready to be our goalie when we are ready to compete. A goalie drafted this year would likely be too young We better be competing now thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Okay. I'm happy with it now. We got our goalie. That's what matters. I've been firmly against those that thought we should just go with some prayer on a late round/undrafted guy. Amen to that brother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 A few years ago, the price for a high-level backup with one month left on his deal was an early second-round pick. That was the Biron trade. This kid is younger and has two years left on his deal. The price seems appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Darcy did build the best Sabres team of all-time though. And we know his plan was to draft 1-2 overall in 2014 and 2015 (i.e. "Suffering") so it's likely we'd have Reinhart and Eichel even if he'd never been fired. We don't know what moves he would eventually try to make to build around them but presumably it would not have been just to keep all of his prospects. Reiger is long gone and good riddance. MUCH MUCH MUCH prefer Tim Murray at the helm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Good post. I understand why Grigorenko and Hodgson aren't in the lineup because they were traded for O'Reilly, but where is O'Reilly? :P Now that is rich and i might be ok with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotentPowerPlay22 Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Exactly, he traded a 12th, a 15th, a 16th a 21st and a 2nd round pick for a 3rd and a 4th. Go back in history and find how many drafts that would not have been a great trade. Exactly, he traded a 12th, a 15th, a 16th a 21st and a 31st for a 3rd and a 4th. I think he paid too much! He just paid another 1st for a second round goalie with a potential career threatening health issue plus a washed up big salary dump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 Tim murray said he really wanted legwand, and not just to get to the capfloor. I find that part hard to believe. 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.