Kane traded to San Jose for a Cond. ‘19 1st, Dan O’ Regan and Conditional 4th

[darksabre]

There are 5 buyers when we list our price (5 is arbitrary, I don't really know). All 5 say too high. So other teams come in with different players/better offers, and now there are only 2 partners left. It becomes a buyers market

Okay, but who actually bought yesterday that could reasonably be believed to have been interested in Kane enough to make an offer better than what Botterill got for him? 

[dudacek]

That’s an easy one. The Kane deal was completed around 2:30 pm. My guess is there wasn’t enough time to use SJ’s offer to solicit other counter offers and still get in line by 3pm. This is why the bigger deals usually get done in the few days prior to the deadline or in the morning.

Again no collusion, no conspiracy, but smart tactics by experienced GMs

But if these other teams who might have made a counter-offer were seriously interested in Kane, don’t you think they would have set themselves up to make or counter a similar late offer?

 

Are you suggesting that not only was JBot (an MBA who worked the war room for 10 years with Jim Rutherford and Ray Shero) a failure as a negotiator, that the “eight” other GMs kicking the tires on Kane were as well?

 

Or that Botterill hadn’t discussed the loose parameters of a deal with several GMs in the months prior to the deadline, then tried to reel them in over the past week or two?

[Thorny]

Personally, I know I'm a POS

 

 

Person of Significance.

 

You probably should step back and consider the source of this information. Hammy... didn't he report last season that Reino stopped attending the "ROR practices" when the practices were no longer being held? I think Randall broke that story. Could be wrong.

 

This is a team full of hockey idiots. I don't know why the term low-IQ is being glommed onto Kane. Two players this year, Scandella and Girgensons, while killing penalties, have shot the puck from their own end of the rink over the opposing goalie and into the netting for delay of game penalties.

 

 

Truly, a solid point.

 

FWIW over the past 20 years about half of the AHL rookie of the year winners turned out to not suck as NHLers.  The List Includes Mikko Rantanen, Matt Murray, Tyler Toffoli, Tyler Ennis, Rene Bourque , Teddy Purcell, Tyler Arnason, Danny Briere and Darcy Tucker.  

 

Sure there are plenty of Nathan Gerbe and Luke Adam's on the list as well but we may be pleasantly surprised with what O'Regan becomes.

Good stuff. Imagine if he becomes a solid 2nd liner. It’s not likely. But not only would the trade be a good one at that point, he’s potentially playing higher in the lineup that anyone we gave up in the initial Kane trade.

 

The entire tenure of transactions from GMTM looks terrible. But even the wisest can not see all ends. Maybe Antipin flourishes. Maybe O’Regan amounts to a nice piece. Maybe, in spite of all the negative buzz around his start, Nylander becomes a star. Only maybes (and unlikely ones at that) but there are always blank pages that need to be filled.

 

Thanks, Evander for your play these past couple seasons! It’s not your fault GMTM overpaid for you or that no other GMs wanted to give a lot for you as a rental this season. It’s ok though because one of those same GMs will give you $6+/5 Years on July 1. It would have been nice to extend you last off-season at a decent 2nd-line salary (if you and your agent were having it), but oh well.

You were one of our most entertaining players while here. Fast, brash, hard-checking, and even some head-scratching and untimely penalties, but also that time you punched out the same guy three times in one game, or that OT lob to Jack. Those were fun.

Now, go earn that payday. And hopefully, turn that pick into a 1 for us. May the Force be with you.

Hear, hear!

 

We have everything we need, right here.

 

If San Jose radically underpaid, why didn’t another GM tweak the deal just a tad to beat them - make the 4th a third or something?

Serious question.

Give me something that suggests Kane didn’t go where the market dictated.

I can entertain the idea that JBot potentially could have had more if he sold earlier.

But the idea he got played suggests collusion and that just doesn’t make sense.

Salient.

[Brawndo]

That’s an easy one. The Kane deal was completed around 2:30 pm. My guess is there wasn’t enough time to use SJ’s offer to solicit other counter offers and still get in line by 3pm. This is why the bigger deals usually get done in the few days prior to the deadline or in the morning.

 

Again no collusion, no conspiracy, but smart tactics by experienced GMs

A couple of things, McKenzie First Tweeted about the deal was at 2:10. That’s more than enough time to look for a counter proposal.

 

LeBrun stated he believes a team had a firm offer for a 2019 1st Round Pick for Kane on the table, but later pulled the offer

 

LeBrun also mentioned that there maybe a plan for Kane to live with Thornton for the reminder of the season and Kevin Kurz we covers the Sharks for the Athletic mentioned he doesn’t believe Wilson makes the trade unless he intends on giving him a contract.

 

And although Chiarelli is the last GM I want Bots compared to, he told the Edmonton Press that New Jersey’s Offer for Maroon was the only one and it came in at 2:50.

And he was predicted to go before Kane and was more desirable per some Insiders

 

Botterill was on with the Instigators this AM and one of the questions asked was how he handled the trade deadline day. He mentioned that he spoke with pretty much all of the GMs over the past few weeks and knew which ones were interested in his players. Those were the ones he primarily spoke with yesterday.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Brawndo

[Radar]

The one thing that bothers me about the way the Sabres did this was denying ownership had anything to do with this trade. 

I think it had everything to do with this trade, yes the roster needs to be overhauled but it Kane's value around the league is so low, who is going to give him big bucks in free agency??

That doesn't make any sense. They wanted to get rid of him no matter what and I don't think a GM gives away an asset without the owner saying to get rid of him. 

 

Maybe behind the scenes there's something that hasn't come out yet so you never know but the Pegula's have their hands all over this again IMO

Thank you for another enlightening soap opera perspective.

[PASabreFan]

Good data.

 

But when I read this. it sounds like Cody Hodgson.  Hodgson had #2 center potential and failed.  I believe O'Regan presents a lesser opportunity/chance to have success as a #2 center.  Hopefully O'Regan's work/compete is higher and his confidence is less fragile.

Hopefully O'Regan doesn't have the same debilitating disease Hodgson had.

[WildCard]

Okay, but who actually bought yesterday that could reasonably be believed to have been interested in Kane enough to make an offer better than what Botterill got for him? 

Nashville, Boston, CBJ, Calgary, NJ, Vegas...all contending teams that got solid wingers at the deadline

[dudacek]

Nashville, Boston, CBJ, Calgary, NJ, Vegas...all contending teams that got solid wingers at the deadline

Nashville and Vegas paid for term, Botts got more for Kane than Jersey paid for Grabner and considerably more than what CBus paid for Vanek. Calgary’s best wing pickup was a waiver claim.

 

The Rangers got more for Nash but the more I look at it, that trade wasn’t as good as it appeared.

Spooner is an NHLer, but he’s also a pending RFA the Bruins didn’t want to pay and Belesky is an anchor contract; basically they wash each other out.

 

Guaranteed first is better than a conditional first, obviously.

Is O’Malley and a 4th worse than Lindgren and a 7th?

 

Didn’t we get the second best return for the second best rental player?

 

PA, help me out here: Am I just justifying Sabre mistakes again?

Edited February 27, 2018 by Mick O’Manly

[Brawndo]

Botterill mentioned that the players with term and other big fish Pacioretty and Karlsson clogged up the trade market prior to the deadline

I think you made my point for me.  Asking for proof of someone that can't possibly have access to actual facts effectively cuts off the conversation.  All of this is unsubstantiated theory and speculation.  Maybe some of it is based on media reports, but a lot of it is gut feel resulting from our own life experiences and perspective.

 

Beyond stats, what proof could we possibly have of anything in this subject matter?

We’ve the most important question is when is your And Hsif next fishing trip planned for?

[Weave]

Botterill mentioned that the players with term and other big fish Pacioretty and Karlsson clogged up the trade market prior to the deadline

 

We’ve the most important question is when is your And Hsif next fishing trip planned for?

 

I need to fish.  This #### is killing me slowly.

[woods-racer]

Nashville and Vegas paid for term, Botts got more for Kane than Jersey paid for Grabner and considerably more than what CBus paid for Vanek. Calgary’s best wing pickup was a waiver claim.

 

The Rangers got more for Nash but the more I look at it, that trade wasn’t as good as it appeared.

Spooner is a pending RFA the Bruins didn’t want to pay and Belesky is an anchor contract; basically they wash eqch other out.

 

Guaranteed first is better than a conditional first, obviously.

Is O’Malley and a 4th worse than Lindgren and a 7th?

 

Didn’t we get the second best return for the second best rental player?

 

PA, help me out here: Am I just justifying Sabre mistakes again?

 Nash didn't have the *shenanigans * baggage attached to him, and one good year did't turn Kane into an angel in GM eyes. 

 

So to sum this up, it is what the trade deadline is any more, a little bit of movement and GM's holding on to picks/prospects more than ever due to salary cap constraints.

[WildCard]

Nashville and Vegas paid for term, Botts got more for Kane than Jersey paid for Grabner and considerably more than what CBus paid for Vanek. Calgary’s best wing pickup was a waiver claim.

 

The Rangers got more for Nash but the more I look at it, that trade wasn’t as good as it appeared.

Spooner is an NHLer, but he’s also a pending RFA the Bruins didn’t want to pay and Belesky is an anchor contract; basically they wash each other out.

 

Guaranteed first is better than a conditional first, obviously.

Is O’Malley and a 4th worse than Lindgren and a 7th?

 

Didn’t we get the second best return for the second best rental player?

 

PA, help me out here: Am I just justifying Sabre mistakes again?

I'm not comparing Kane to the players those teams picked up though, I'm comparing Kane's reported asking price in November to what we received. If we had come down a little bit on the asking price earlier, maybe one of those teams that ended up picking up a winger decides to dance with us; instead they made the moves you detailed above

 

Last move I was really upset about us making was Bylsma. Granted I loved Murray, so maybe I'm not the best judge of GMs

 

I'm sure there's more, but the one that really sticks out as calling Murray for what he was first and often was Robviously. So, I'm gonna ask him here: what do you think about JBott? How about this move?

[darksabre]

Nashville and Vegas paid for term, Botts got more for Kane than Jersey paid for Grabner and considerably more than what CBus paid for Vanek. Calgary’s best wing pickup was a waiver claim.

 

The Rangers got more for Nash but the more I look at it, that trade wasn’t as good as it appeared.

Spooner is an NHLer, but he’s also a pending RFA the Bruins didn’t want to pay and Belesky is an anchor contract; basically they wash each other out.

 

Guaranteed first is better than a conditional first, obviously.

Is O’Malley and a 4th worse than Lindgren and a 7th?

 

Didn’t we get the second best return for the second best rental player?

 

PA, help me out here: Am I just justifying Sabre mistakes again?

Thank you. This is what I'm seeing too. I never believed there were many viable trade partners for how I was valuing Kane, with San Jose being the logical buyer because of their need for scoring of any kind.

 

But no other team needed Kane enough to outbid San Jose. They've got their depth scoring. San Jose was the only contending team in the West really lacking in that department.

 

I don't see any buyers that stick out as "definitely wanted Kane but passed because the price was too high."

 

Because clearly the price was quite low. I suspect it always was.

 

Maybe it wouldn't kill some people to consider that option.

[WildCard]

Thank you. This is what I'm seeing too. I never believed there were many viable trade partners for how I was valuing Kane, with San Jose being the logical buyer because of their need for scoring of any kind.

 

But no other team needed Kane enough to outbid San Jose. They've got their depth scoring. San Jose was the only contending team in the West really lacking in that department.

 

I don't see any buyers that stick out as "definitely wanted Kane but passed because the price was too high."

 

Because clearly the price was quite low. I suspect it always was.

 

Maybe it wouldn't kill some people to consider that option.

I think SJ was probably the best buyer for the details you listed. And I have to say, you called it. But there were so many reports saying exactly what your quotations say: potential buyers wouldn't pay that price for Kane. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to say Botterill overplayed his hand

Edited February 27, 2018 by Jokertecken

[dudacek]

I think SJ was probably the best buyer for the details you listed. And I have to say, you called it. But there were so many reports saying exactly what your quotations say: potential buyers wouldn't pay that price for Kane. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to say Botterill overplayed his hand

I think Botterill set a price based on previous deadlines, but GMs have decided those Hanzal deals were bad deals and weren’t going to pay that price. Those same experts who said what the ask was at Christmas (a reasonable starting point in a negotiation) also said in the past two weeks that no one was willing to cough up a first.

 

If we are ripping Botterill for not getting his ask, how come we aren’t praising him for squeezing out a conditional first when none were apparently on the table?

Edited February 27, 2018 by Mick O’Manly

[Huckleberry]

I think SJ was probably the best buyer for the details you listed. And I have to say, you called it. But there were so many reports saying exactly what your quotations say: potential buyers wouldn't pay that price for Kane. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to say Botterill overplayed his hand

 

In hindsight and reading everything, I doubt he had much cards to play with.    

[WildCard]

I think Botterill set a price based on previous deadlines, but GMs have decided those Hanzal deals were bad deals and weren’t going to pay that price. Those same experts who said what the ask was at Christmas (a reasonable starting point in a negotiation) also said in the past two weeks that no one was willing to cough up a first.

 

If we are ripping Botterill for not getting his ask, how come we aren’t praising him for squeezing out a conditional first when none were apparently on the table?

Good point with the bold. I remember the Friedman articles on the NHL landscape after the McDavid deal, and there was a lot about NHL GMs staying away from FA and overpaying outside talent; they'd rather pay giant contracts to drafted, young talent for potential future performance, or maybe even start going after other team's RFAs

 

Almost every deal though, especially for a talent like Kane, comes with a 1st. It's just incredible to me that he didn't even get that. Even if the 1st was conditional on SJ's playing performance, which we see all the time at the deadline, that would be so much better. Does anyone really think an older SJ team is going to give Kane the term and money he wants? If that was his condition, why not trade him to a team more likely to sign him long term? If there wasn't a team likely to fulfill that condition, why not use the playoff performance conditional?

[pi2000]

This reminds me of the Chris Gratton trade to PHX in 2003.   Gratton and Kane are similar types of players.  Both traded for an undersized overaged prospect with some offensive flair who hadn't yet established himself in the NHL.

Edited February 28, 2018 by pi2000

[WildCard]

This reminds me of the Chris Gratton trade to PHX in 2003.   Gratton and Kane are similar types of players.  Both traded for an undersized overaged prospect with some offensive flair who hadn't yet established himself in the NHL.

We can only hope

[Huckleberry]

This reminds me of the Chris Gratton trade to PHX in 2003.   Gratton and Kane are similar types of players.  Both traded for an undersized overaged prospect with some offensive flair who hadn't yet established himself in the NHL.

 

Now you are just making us all drool.

[That Aud Smell]

This reminds me of the Chris Gratton trade to PHX in 2003. Gratton and Kane are similar types of players. Both traded for an undersized overaged prospect with some offensive flair who hadn't yet established himself in the NHL.

Oh, you son of a b1tch.

 

Next thing you’ll tell me is that O’Regan is training with a Boston strong man.

[PerreaultForever]

Do you think Botterill actually thinks they can reunite the O'Regan-Eichel-Rodrigues line and it'll work in the nhl? I mean if he's Briere why not, but is he? I doubt it based on his SJ numbers. 

[pi2000]

Now you are just making us all drool.

 

Oh, you son of a b1tch.

 

Next thing you’ll tell me is that O’Regan is training with a Boston strong man.

 

both named Daniel, both 5'10 180lbs

 

Daniel O'Regan, born in Berlin, Germany was drafted in 2012.   

 

Guess who was the leading point producer for the Berlin Polar Bears in 2012? 

 

Daniel Briere

[Brawndo]

Good point with the bold. I remember the Friedman articles on the NHL landscape after the McDavid deal, and there was a lot about NHL GMs staying away from FA and overpaying outside talent; they'd rather pay giant contracts to drafted, young talent for potential future performance, or maybe even start going after other team's RFAs

 

1, Almost every deal though, especially for a talent like Kane, comes with a 1st. It's just incredible to me that he didn't even get that.

 

2.Even if the 1st was conditional on SJ's playing performance, which we see all the time at the deadline, that would be so much better.

 

3.Does anyone really think an older SJ team is going to give Kane the term and money he wants?

 

4.If that was his condition, why not trade him to a team more likely to sign him long term? If there wasn't a team likely to fulfill that condition, why not use the playoff performance conditional?

1.it is incredible, buy Kane’s Rep. proceeded him whether it was deserved or not. There were issues in the Winnipeg Locker Room during his time there and the Sabres Room Dysfunction is well documented and GMs were afraid to disrupt their chemistry. Burns, Thornton and Pavelski are a strong enough leadership group to absorb him.

 

2, They did, win the Cup and the Pick is a first.

 

3. Neither are the 30 other teams, but McKenzie and LeBrun have mentioned there is interest by Sharks in extending him.

 

4. McKenzie mentioned SJ as a landing spot for Kane in UFA about two months ago well before the trade.

Edited February 28, 2018 by Brawndo

[Taro T]

This reminds me of the Chris Gratton trade to PHX in 2003.   Gratton and Kane are similar types of players.  Both traded for an undersized overaged prospect with some offensive flair who hadn't yet established himself in the NHL.

Though Briere wasn't established in the NHL when the Sabres traded for him, he had already demonstrated a proficiency on the PP at the NHL level.

 

He was FAR more an established player than O'Regan is.