Sabres Trade Taylor Hall (50% of His Salary Retained)and Curtis Lazar to Boston for a 2021 2nd and Anders Bjork

[Doohickie]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

OK, Mr. Smarty-Pants, but the question remains:  do you think Lazar-for-Bjork was something the Bruins made the Sabres do, or vice-versa?

It was necessary to get Boston under the cap.

[Drag0nDan]

Just now, Thorny said:

And GM's must be judged on results.

Hey everyone, pretty good preview of how the return might be hampered when Eichel wants to go to the Bruins, after his NMC kicks in.

Have to win next season. Have to. 

Well... he's not on an expiring contract which eliminates a considerable amount of leverage.

[Trettioåtta]

Paul Hamilton

@pham1717

·

35m

Kypreos also said he heard the offer from the Bruins for Hall was a third round pick until they lost big to Washington.

[Randall Flagg]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

And GM's must be judged on results.

Hey everyone, pretty good preview of how the return might be hampered when Eichel wants to go to the Bruins, after his NMC kicks in.

Have to win next season. Have 

 

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

And GM's must be judged on results.

Hey everyone, pretty good preview of how the return might be hampered when Eichel wants to go to the Bruins, after his NMC kicks in.

Have to win next season. Have to. 

I'm obviously more open to moving jack this summer than you, but I agree that moving Jack after next season is simply not an option for this franchise if they ever want to do anything noteworthy soon. Whatever they decide needs to happen this summer and needs to be done excellently 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Randall Flagg

[dudacek]

31 minutes ago, Thorny said:

To further elaborate, and why I keep mentioning Adams has zero "good" moves, is because the Hall deal (and Staal) were the things most being used as evidence to the positive re: Adams' first year as GM. It's not just about a deadline return - it was the entirety of the capital we invested into him - he WAS our offseason. What we got for devoting all that roster, and financial capital to Hall has to be viewed through the prism of what the goal was - just like the goal of the tank is to WIN, not just get a good player. 

Adams based his offseason around the move to a large degree, and got 2 goals, and a 2nd round pick. THAT'S what's important 

I think much of the past season's hockey department strategy was predetermined based on the mistaken premise handed to Adams that the "Sabres are close" and all of the pro players added were added based on anecdotal references instead of a thoroughly vetted pro personnel process.

I do think Adams has to be accountable for this, which is a manifestation of his inexperience, the gutting of the hockey department, and the misplaced organizational faith in Ralph.

I need to see what he learned from this and what is his vision for fixing the franchise.

Collecting whatever assets he can by dumping the UFAs  is the first step, seeing what he has in the kids down the stretch is the second, rebuilding the hockey department (including the coach) is the third, determining what to do with core assets (most notably Jack, Sam, Linus and Risto) the fourth, and acquiring good players over the off-season.

What happens in these areas will shape my view on whether he can overcome his naive start, or whether he is the disaster some of you have already decided he is.

Edited April 12, 2021 by dudacek

[Thorny]

5 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I'm obviously more open to moving jack this summer than you, but I agree that moving Jack after next season is simply not an option for this franchise if they ever want to do anything noteworthy soon. Whatever they decide needs to happen this summer and needs to be done excellently 

I'm obviously more open to moving jack this summer than you, but I agree that moving Jack after next season is simply not an option for this franchise if they ever want to do anything noteworthy soon. Whatever they decide needs to happen this summer and needs to be done excellently 

I agree, if we move him, it's this summer, has to be. I was thinking at the deadline next year would be possible but A) usually deals of that type don't happen around then and B)by that late usually the rumours are out that the player intends to go to one specific team or another upon UFA and that drives the price down. 

If they keep him, and don't win next season, they are probably screwed. Jack will likely ask out and the return, hampered now additionally by the NMC, which was already going to be difficult, will be bad, relatively. In some ways it's almost less risky to trade Jack this summer than keep him. 

So trade him this summer, or win this fall. That's it - those are the options that can have positive outcomes IMO

Edited April 12, 2021 by Thorny

[LabattBlue]

I heard this earlier on the instigators earlier, but can't find any link to the quotes. Peters claimed Lazar was quoted after the trade..."this team found creative ways to lose" & "I can't wait to stick it to them".  

[Radar]

1 minute ago, LabattBlue said:

I heard this earlier on the instigators earlier, but can't find any link to the quotes. Peters claimed Lazar was quoted after the trade..."this team found creative ways to lose" & "I can't wait to stick it to them".  

I didn't hear that. Please find the link. Don't think that was said.

[Thorny]

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think much of the past season's hockey department strategy was predetermined based on the mistaken premise handed to Adams that the "Sabres are close" and all of the pro players added were added based on anecdotal references instead of a thoroughly vetted pro personnel process.

I do think Adams has to be accountable for this, which is a manifestation of his inexperience, the gutting of the hockey department, and the misplaced organizational faith in Ralph.

I need to see what he learned from this and what is his vision for fixing the franchise.

Collecting whatever assets he can by dumping the UFAs  is the first step, seeing what he has in the kids down the stretch is the second, rebuilding the hockey department (including the coach) is the third, determining what to do with core assets (most notably Jack, Sam, Linus and Risto) the fourth, and acquiring good players over the off-season.

What happens in this areas will shape my view on whether he can overcome his naive start, or whether he is the disaster some of you have already decided he is.

Am I in this group? His first season is an objective disaster, but I haven't "already decided" he/his tenure is a disaster - we can only judge on results. He's had a bad year, but my opinion is he shouldn't be fired. 

I don't know about the "handed" to him bit, honestly. Wasn't the working theory than Adams came to Pegula with a plan based on the task set by Pegula to "evaluate the whole thing"? 

Adams doesn't have to be accountable for this because of a manifestation of his inexperience, he is accountable, full stop, for the results. I disagree with using "first step" in the context you did, first step to realizing his vision - this season still counts in terms of the evaluation of his vision. 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Thorny

[LabattBlue]

1 minute ago, Radar said:

I didn't hear that. Please find the link. Don't think that was said.

I was in the car at the time.  It was in the 11AM hour.

[Thorny]

We credited him prematurely for filling 2C. He did not fill 2C. It was his plan, this is his team and his season.

Take a mulligan, KA. The future of the franchise and Jack Eichel depends on what you do this offseason 

Good luck. - Morgan Freeman

[Trettioåtta]

5 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I heard this earlier on the instigators earlier, but can't find any link to the quotes. Peters claimed Lazar was quoted after the trade..."this team found creative ways to lose" & "I can't wait to stick it to them".  

Weird thing to say when you are part of the team that creatively lost...

[JohnC]

25 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I'm not bouncing anywhere.  I've said KA had no business being a GM in the first place and everything he has done has proven me correct.  I said this was a trash trade last night and now the facts are coming in that verify it was a trash trade.  We got fleeced.  Why did we get fleeced because KA doesn't know what he is doing.

1) He gave Hall a full NMC

2) He failed to get a list from Hall to whom he'd accept a trade.  The list is a waiver of the NMC to the teams on the list.  Once a waiver is done, Hall doesn't keep a right to refuse a trade to the teams on the list.  

3) He got other offers for Hall, but Hall wanted to go to Boston.  KA had to accept this offer because he failed on steps 1 and 2.  

How exactly is that bouncing around?

 

I understand your position on the Hall deal but respectively disagree with it. With respect to the Hall NMC it turned out to be a moot issue. Considering the dismal situation he was in Hall would have been willing to go anywhere, especially to a contending team, for the rest of this season. Hall's list was irrelevant because he would have gone mostly anywhere. Hall was facing the ignominious reality that he was being benched. Was it a ploy to force him to accept a trade to a team he didn't want to go to or simply because he was benched because the organization wanted to look at players to replace a player who wasn't in the team's plans? Either way the outcome is the same in that he was not for the most part going to play much, if at all, for us for the remaining season. 

You mentioned that KA got offers for Hall. What you don't know is what they were? It is highly unlikely that it was for a first round pick for him. Any GM who would have given up a first round pick for the UFA should summarily be fired for hideous incompetence. 

The bottom line is that KA got what the market offered for him. A second round pick for him, even with the Lazar and Bjork part of the deal, was a reasonable deal for all the parties involved. The mistake that many people are mistaking is overvaluing Hall's value.

The bottom line is no one got fleeced in this trade as many people are portraying it to be.  There seems to be a lot of misplaced anger for a transactional that was little more than a neutral deal. 

 

[PromoTheRobot]

Just now, Trettioåtta said:

Weird thing to say when you are part of the team that creatively lost...

Was that a real quote or Peters making a joke?

[LabattBlue]

Just now, Trettioåtta said:

Weird thing to say when you are part of the team that creatively lost...

Don't shoot the messenger, and consider the source...Peters.

Just now, PromoTheRobot said:

Was that a real quote or Peters making a joke?

I'm not sure why he would joke about that, but who knows.

[Randall Flagg]

7 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I heard this earlier on the instigators earlier, but can't find any link to the quotes. Peters claimed Lazar was quoted after the trade..."this team found creative ways to lose" & "I can't wait to stick it to them".  

Given Lazar's demeanor and attitude I would be shocked if he said this, even if he felt it. 

It'd be really funny though. 

wouldn't be surprised if they were just talking in hypotheticals, they love to do that 

[Claude Balls]

This organization sucks balls from top to bottom. Just sell the team. 

[PromoTheRobot]

Just now, LabattBlue said:

I'm not sure why he would joke about that, but who knows.

Naw, Peters never says anything in jest.

[ExWNYer]

7 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I heard this earlier on the instigators earlier, but can't find any link to the quotes. Peters claimed Lazar was quoted after the trade..."this team found creative ways to lose" & "I can't wait to stick it to them".  

 

5 minutes ago, Radar said:

I didn't hear that. Please find the link. Don't think that was said.

 

It was said on 'The Instigators'. I heard it, as well.

[Thorny]

20 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

Well... he's not on an expiring contract which eliminates a considerable amount of leverage.

Definitely, not suggesting the returns in any way would be comparable, merely that the deal illustrates the large relative affect such a clause can have on a deal. It's one thing to be in the situation with Hall, we can't *let* it get to that with Jack. 

10 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I heard this earlier on the instigators earlier, but can't find any link to the quotes. Peters claimed Lazar was quoted after the trade..."this team found creative ways to lose" & "I can't wait to stick it to them".  

I think they're thinking of Brett Favre 

[freester]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I understand your position on the Hall deal but respectively disagree with it. With respect to the Hall NMC it turned out to be a moot issue. Considering the dismal situation he was in Hall would have been willing to go anywhere, especially to a contending team, for the rest of this season. Hall's list was irrelevant because he would have gone mostly anywhere. Hall was facing the ignominious reality that he was being benched. Was it a ploy to force him to accept a trade to a team he didn't want to go to or simply because he was benched because the organization wanted to look at players to replace a player who wasn't in the team's plans? Either way the outcome is the same in that he was not for the most part going to play much, if at all, for us for the remaining season. 

You mentioned that KA got offers for Hall. What you don't know is what they were? It is highly unlikely that it was for a first round pick for him. Any GM who would have given up a first round pick for the UFA should summarily be fired for hideous incompetence. 

The bottom line is that KA got what the market offered for him. A second round pick for him, even with the Lazar and Bjork part of the deal, was a reasonable deal for all the parties involved. The mistake that many people are mistaking is overvaluing Hall's value.

The bottom line is no one got fleeced in this trade as many people are portraying it to be.  There seems to be a lot of misplaced anger for a transactional that was little more than a neutral deal. 

 

This is clearly wrong. KA was being criticized on NHL network this AM for all of these incompetent moves. He could have told Hall “this is where you’re going or you can sit in press box”. As KA has no experience the agent and Bruins took him to the woodshed. 

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Am I in this group? His first season is an objective disaster, but I haven't "already decided" he/his tenure is a disaster - we can only judge on results. He's had a bad year, but my opinion is he shouldn't be fired. 

I don't know about the "handed" to him bit, honestly. Wasn't the working theory than Adams came to Pegula with a plan based on the task set by Pegula to "evaluate the whole thing"? 

Adams doesn't have to be accountable for this because of a manifestation of his inexperience, he is accountable, full stop, for the results. 

I don't know, are you? I don't perceive you to be.

I don't think we are too far off on the rest of it.

[carpandean]

49 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

2) He failed to get a list from Hall to whom he'd accept a trade.  The list is a waiver of the NMC to the teams on the list.  Once a waiver is done, Hall doesn't keep a right to refuse a trade to the teams on the list. 

He had a full NMC, so he wasn't required to provide any list.  Things would have been much better had he signed a limited-NMC, where he had to provide a list of teams that he wouldn't accept a trade to, but he didn't.  That's only a courtesy for a player with a NMC, not any sort of a requirement. 

Maybe Adams did ask Hall, but only he said he'd accept a trade to X, Y and Z, only one of whom was making an offer.  So, he took trade offers from others, hoping he could use that at least as leverage ("multiple teams interested") with the Bruins, but also because he could try to make the case to Taylor for any other decent team.  Maybe, at a third, he told Hall that he wouldn't take the Bruins offer, so he continued seeing who else might be interested.  Then, when the Bruins bumped it to a second, having not convinced Taylor to accept any of the other trades, he finally made the deal.

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

I don't know, are you? I don't perceive you to be.

I don't think we are too far off on the rest of it.

Well you quoted me and said "you guys" so it was pretty ambiguous 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Thorny

[GASabresIUFAN]

@johnC

Hall himself said his NMC got him to Boston.  If doesn't matter how much the other offers were or where they were.  KA gave Hall the right to refuse any deal both through the NMC and then not securing a waiver to a list of teams.  Thus we did get fleeced and it's his own fault.  We had the best player available at the deadline and got a below a real market value return.  My guess is had KA secured a waiver to a list of teams, we'd have received at least a 1st for Hall.

Edited April 12, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN