Trade Speculation and Rumors 2018-19

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think you're underestimating the ability of posters here to analyze a situation.If he played like he has in Sweden and during this past year, the narrative would be the same. If he played differently when he played, the narrative would be different.

I'd be interested to see if other boards (reddit, hf, etc) feel the same about him so far

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

I'd be interested to see if other boards (reddit, hf, etc) feel the same about him so far

He is universally panned by guys like you and me.

Professional hockey people seem to have higher opinions.

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

He is universally panned by guys like you and me.

Professional hockey people seem to have higher opinions.

Our local media that's been watching him every day has been as down as him as we are. People on this board that have went there have lambasted him. Granted pros are probably more qualified to hold these opinions, but I don't think Friedman or LeBrun are watching Nylander night in and night out

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, WildCard said:

Our local media that's been watching him every day has been as down as him as we are. People on this board that have went there have lambasted him. Granted pros are probably more qualified to hold these opinions, but I don't think Friedman or LeBrun are watching Nylander night in and night out

When I say professional hockey people, I’m talking about people who scout for a living, like the NHL scouts and executives polled for Hockey News Future Watch, who had him ranked 13th. I might be misremembering, but I think Pronman had him 25th or something like that.

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

When I say professional hockey people, I’m talking about people who scout for a living, like the NHL scouts and executives polled for Hockey News Future Watch, who had him ranked 13th. I might be misremembering, but I think Pronman had him 25th or something like that.

Well they've been wrong before ?

[apuszczalowski]

2 hours ago, N S said:

Of course he is.

More note worthy is Nylander at 13.  So, it's obvious who ever has put this poll together either has no clue, or has not watched Nylander play ... ?

And, the WC thingie is now officially my favourite thingie.

Or they thought it was his brother?

[TrueBlueGED]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

When I say professional hockey people, I’m talking about people who scout for a living, like the NHL scouts and executives polled for Hockey News Future Watch, who had him ranked 13th. I might be misremembering, but I think Pronman had him 25th or something like that.

If hockey people actually think he's the 13th best prospect outside the NHL, we should be leveraging the crap out of that in a trade. 

[Randall Flagg]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

When I say professional hockey people, I’m talking about people who scout for a living, like the NHL scouts and executives polled for Hockey News Future Watch, who had him ranked 13th. I might be misremembering, but I think Pronman had him 25th or something like that.

I think you know this, but I prefer appealing to the hockey and not to 'authorities' whose writeups and reasoning ultimately end up being less detailed than inkman posting drunk after a Friday night Amerks game.

[dudacek]

9 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think you know this, but I prefer appealing to the hockey and not to 'authorities' whose writeups and reasoning ultimately end up being less detailed than inkman posting drunk after a Friday night Amerks game.

I don’t remembering ever disagreeing with you as much as I do right now.

I strongly, strongly maintain Ink does some of his finest work posting drunk after an Amerks game.

[Randall Flagg]

25 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I don’t remembering ever disagreeing with you as much as I do right now.

I strongly, strongly maintain Ink does some of his finest work posting drunk after an Amerks game.

?

[Thorny]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

According to the survey of NHL executives that comprises the Hockey News Future Watch, prior to this draft, Tampa had the 13th ranked prospect pool.

They had three prospects ranked in the top 100: Foote 59, Katchouk 61 and Raddysh 62

For reference, the Sabres were 12th, with Mittelstadt 1, Nylander 13, Asplund 82, Guhle 96 and Davidsson 97.

Rankings take into account 21-and-under NHLers.

I don't really get how the Sabres tallied two prospects in the top 13 (including 1st), and finished twelfth in the rankings. Particularly when our NHL under-21s include Jack Eichel. I guess Reinhart just missed the cut?

Still seems slightly off. 

4 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

Random thought: I don't think we will, but if we trade for Pacioretty and people on the culture/locker room ROR train like Vogl defend the move like Vogl tends to do, I will freak the out 

Why? Are they not two completely different players and people? Might there have been locker room issues with O'Reilly that proved to be irreconcilable? Pacioretty really has nothing to do with that. 

[Randall Flagg]

19 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I don't really get how the Sabres tallied two prospects in the top 13 (including 1st), and finished twelfth in the rankings. Particularly when our NHL under-21s include Jack Eichel. I guess Reinhart just missed the cut?

Still seems slightly off. 

Why? Are they not two completely different players and people? Might there have been locker room issues with O'Reilly that proved to be irreconcilable? Pacioretty really has nothing to do with that. 

Because Pacioretty has the leadership abilities of an empty cardboard box and within 2 years of him helping to push out an actual leader (who has torn apart his new locker room eh) and wearing the C, and watching his team fall from a top 5 position in the NHL over a 35 game stretch where he scored one non-empty net goal,  his GM has stated that they have no interest in keeping him past his contract and are shopping him. 

So people who are emphatic about locker room clouds (and to be clear, I am not including Botterill in this group) doing the thing they usually do and defending the moves the Sabres make (Vogl fits all of this perfectly and is who I'm thinking of) in this hypothetical situation would make me blow a gasket because I hate that reasoning in the first place, don't like the ROR trade, and hate Max Pacioretty independently of all of that.

Edited July 12, 2018 by Randall Flagg

[Hoss]

24 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Because Pacioretty has the leadership abilities of an empty cardboard box and within 2 years of him helping to push out an actual leader (who has torn apart his new locker room eh) and wearing the C, and watching his team fall from a top 5 position in the NHL over a 35 game stretch where he scored one non-empty net goal,  his GM has stated that they have no interest in keeping him past his contract and are shopping him. 

So people who are emphatic about locker room clouds (and to be clear, I am not including Botterill in this group) doing the thing they usually do and defending the moves the Sabres make (Vogl fits all of this perfectly and is who I'm thinking of) in this hypothetical situation would make me blow a gasket because I hate that reasoning in the first place, don't like the ROR trade, and hate Max Pacioretty independently of all of that.

What evidence is there that Pacioretty had anything to do with Montreal's Subban mishap? Did Pacioretty intentionally hurt Carey Price and fail to re-sign Andrei Markov?

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Hoss said:

What evidence is there that Pacioretty had anything to do with Montreal's Subban mishap? Did Pacioretty intentionally hurt Carey Price and fail to re-sign Andrei Markov?

Wasn't the word that Patches had a huge problem with PK and talked to Bergevin about it? 

I'm not claiming Pacioretty is a Matt-Duchene-style cancer, which was the whole point of the original post - a non-cancer cancer in ROR being moved for the exact same thing is what would make me so mad. 

Patches in any possible sense failed to step up as his team's season went down the drain, and in any event, Carey Price played 62 games and they still made the playoffs (and got dismantled by NYR, where Patches added to his vaunted playoff production of 19 points and 10 goals in 39 games).

The fall hasn't stopped since then. The dude is a dork that plays with as much passion as Alex Nylander in the AHL playoffs. ?

[Thorny]

Just seems pointless to try and compare two completely different people and equate the same line of thinking to both. Even if Patches could be proven to be a cancer in Montreal, it could be a completely different situation with another team. We've seen that happen loads before, look no further than Kane. By all account he's a great fit in the SJ room. 

Really, it's only in Winnipeg that he was touted as a cancer.

You can't just assume ROR and Patches present the same type of issue to any prospective team, and that their issues won't vary by team.

Painting with a fairly thick brush.

Edited July 12, 2018 by Thorny

[Hoss]

3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Wasn't the word that Patches had a huge problem with PK and talked to Bergevin about it? 

I'm not claiming Pacioretty is a Matt-Duchene-style cancer, which was the whole point of the original post - a non-cancer cancer in ROR being moved for the exact same thing is what would make me so mad. 

Patches in any possible sense failed to step up as his team's season went down the drain, and in any event, Carey Price played 62 games and they still made the playoffs (and got dismantled by NYR, where Patches added to his vaunted playoff production of 19 points and 10 goals in 39 games).

The fall hasn't stopped since then. The dude is a dork that plays with as much passion as Alex Nylander in the AHL playoffs. ?

I've moved off my previous position that going after him with an extension in hand would be a good idea, but I don't think acquiring him would be any sort of inconsistency from the front office. He's a good player. He doesn't need to be THE "leader" here.

Also, if you're defending ROR from media reports from within the locker room but vilifying Patches for media reports from within the locker room are you not committing the crime you claim the Sabres would be committing by acquiring him?

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Just seems pointless to try and compare two completely different people and equate the same line of thinking to both. Even if Patches could be proven to be a cancer in Montreal, it could be a completely different situation with another team. We've seen that happen loads before, look no further than Kane. By all account he's a great fit in the SJ room. 

Really, it's only in Winnipeg that he was touted as a cancer.

I'mnot comparing the players, I'm comparing a hypothetical Sabre-ball-washing reaction that I can vividly picture to justification written about weeks before, tossing aside points argued firmly just then. 

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, Hoss said:

I've moved off my previous position that going after him with an extension in hand would be a good idea, but I don't think acquiring him would be any sort of inconsistency from the front office. He's a good player. He doesn't need to be THE "leader" here.

Also, if you're defending ROR from media reports from within the locker room but vilifying Patches for media reports from within the locker room are you not committing the crime you claim the Sabres would be committing by acquiring him?

His point is more that he doesn't want to see hypocritical, contradictory lines of thinking among writers like Vogl, etc.

I just don't think that follows, because as different individuals, Pacioretty and O'Reilly present completely different variables. 

[Randall Flagg]

4 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I've moved off my previous position that going after him with an extension in hand would be a good idea, but I don't think acquiring him would be any sort of inconsistency from the front office. He's a good player. He doesn't need to be THE "leader" here.

Also, if you're defending ROR from media reports from within the locker room but vilifying Patches for media reports from within the locker room are you not committing the crime you claim the Sabres would be committing by acquiring him?

Okay, but following closely shows that I even mention that Botterill's reasoning would not be what I attacked here. And I'd add patches too for assets that I view as negligible. I made it quite clear from the beginning that I was talking about something made up in my own head.

No, because I'm taking both at face value. Vogl says ROR is sad and it makes other players sad, and I don't claim any more than that. It's reported that Patches wanted Subban out, and talked to GM about it, and Subban was moved to a team with 4 playoff series in the two years since like patches wanted, and he took his letter and performed hysterically bad as Montreal's seasons fell down the tubes each year since. I added no more or no less to the situation than either of these which appear to be well-established. 

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

His point is more that he doesn't want to see hypocritical, contradictory lines of thinking among writers like Vogl, etc.

I just don't think that follows, because as different individuals, Pacioretty and O'Reilly present completely different variables. 

Right, one has far more of a track record of being dubious at the things they were critical of ROR for being or not having. So it would be contradictory logic, which would be unsurprising from a guy like Vogl if the end goal is that the Sabres look good for making the move.

Disclaimer: I don't read as much Vogl as plenty here, so I will volunteer that my perception of him might be off.  

Edited July 12, 2018 by Randall Flagg

[Thorny]

6 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I'mnot comparing the players, I'm comparing a hypothetical Sabre-ball-washing reaction that I can vividly picture to justification written about weeks before, tossing aside points argued firmly just then. 

But your justification for being against said ball-washing (note - saved for future use) is that it would be contrary the reaction that met the ROR deal. As if one set of ideals was purported for, in one situation, and not the next.

But that would only necessarily only be an issue if the two cases were identical. They are not. One could hypothetically support trading ROR as welll as acquiring Patches, without it necessarily being contradictory. 

O'Reilly could have been a non-starter in our locker room, and fine in another. Same for Pacioretty. Or they could both be cancers no matter where they go.

Edited July 12, 2018 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

But your justification for being against said ball-washing (note - saved for future use) is that it would be contrary the reaction that met the ROR deal. As if one set of ideal was purported for in situation and not the next.

But that would only necessarily only be an issue if the two cases were identical. They are not. One could hypothetically support trading ROR as welll as acquiring Patches, without it necessarily being contradictory. 

But you couldn't say that ROR needs to go because of X, and then paint X being brought in as a great move. X being a guy that's down on himself and doesn't lead and in general has a "locker room cloud" of some ill-defined form. 

[Thorny]

6 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

But you couldn't say that ROR needs to go because of X, and then paint X being brought in as a great move. X being a guy that's down on himself and doesn't lead and in general has a "locker room cloud" of some ill-defined form. 

I agree with that. But we are dealing with unknown variables here. Let's say ROR had to be moved because he hated Jack Eichel, and demanded a trade behind the scenes. That could be detrimental to our locker room in a way a Patches acquisition may not be.

But I'm seeing that's not really your point. At least within the context of your argument the "actual" is rather irrelevant, you just don't want to see someone like Vogl praise a move for a certain specific reason and lambast another for the same. 

I'd say it's folly to expect anything less, pretty much media wide. Remember, Buffalo tanked and it was disgraceful, but Toronto did the same and it was a "Shanaplan"...

Edited July 12, 2018 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

There are other reasons to support a Pacioretty addition, even if I hate the guy. I just wouldn't ignore the elephant in the room if I had stood on that soap box a week ago. Otherwise an internet poster might be mad at me. 

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

I agree with that. But we are dealing with unknown variables here. Let's say ROR had to be moved because he hated Jack Eichel, and demanded a trade behind the scenes. That could be detrimental to our locker room in a way a Patches acquisition may not be.

But I'm seeing that's not really your point. At least within the context of your argument the "actual" is rather irrelevant, you just don't want to see someone like Vogl praise a move for a certain specific reason and lambast another for the same. 

While possible, Vogl didn't TALK about that. He TALKED about specific things that he claims he did know and used them as justification. 

Vogl irks me, I think you nailed it there. I'm pissed at him for something he hasn't done ? Sorry John.

[dudacek]

Here’s how I looked at the O’Reilly trade (and really Botterill’s 2018 moves in general)

There were issues on the ice that were obvious to everyone: speed up front, lack of scoring, the inability to push the play (offensively and defensively) from the backline, and goaltending.

There were also issues off the ice that we couldn’t see, but - from the voices coming from the dressing room - seemed real: lack of passion, uncoachability, division.

Long before the trades started happening, I took the position that I had no way of knowing the source of those off-ice issues, or the cure, but I expected Botterill to identify it and fix it. And I expected there would be moves coming that didn’t entirely make sense to me on the surface.

When he moved two of our best assets for lesser parts and let our starting goalie walk for nothing, it wasn’t a huge leap to conclude these were moves he deemed necessary to fix the invisible problems.

I can’t say they were good moves because on the surface they were not. But I also can’t say they were the wrong moves either, because I am too far away see the same issues he may have seen, and I desperately wanted him to fix the issues I couldn’t see.

The team was broken. Trading the best player from the worst team seems like an odd way to fix it.

But there comes a time you just have to “trust the process” and see where it leads.

Edited July 13, 2018 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

I saw an interesting view on hf, that Botterill may have gotten frustrated at not getting pieces he really wanted for Kane, and combined with how this core had done for him so far just tossed the idea of rebuilding what he was given on the fly, like anyone would suggest there was a chance to do when he came in, with pieces like Kane and ROR playing and playing well for us. And if he came to that conclusion, getting a 1st, 2nd, and a decent prospect for ROR fits in nicely - the return doesn't matter as much for now because he committed to that path which handily for him buys some more time and lets him truly build a team he envisions.