Rumor: Buffalo Sabres Interested in Ryan O'Reilly

Status
Not open for further replies.

gallagt01

Registered User
Jun 10, 2006
14,747
2,644
Sloan
Nothing definitive. He said They were going to walk away from tonight with Eichel and Lehner and it was a huge step forward.

Just the way it came across, it sounded like they were satisfied that this is the total haul. Just my interpretation.

Harrington claims his sources are saying Buffalo is still trying hard on the trade front. Hopefully Murray has something else up his sleeve.
 

Sabre Dance

Make Hockey Fun Again
Jul 27, 2006
12,456
2,243
Harrington claims his sources are saying Buffalo is still trying hard on the trade front. Hopefully Murray has something else up his sleeve.
I don't want to know what Murray has up his sleeve. I'm scared of this guy.
 

Sabretip

Registered User
Jan 13, 2010
9,269
59
Phoenix, AZ
Harrington claims his sources are saying Buffalo is still trying hard on the trade front. Hopefully Murray has something else up his sleeve.

Murray seems to both dismiss and validate that at the same time:

John Vogl ‏@BuffNewsVogl · 2m2 minutes ago
Murray: "He rattles off seven names, and I said, Yeah, I guess I’m in on everything, but I don’t look at it that way. It’s your job." (2/2)

John Vogl ‏@BuffNewsVogl · 3m3 minutes ago
Tim Murray on other Sabres moves: "One guy calls me and tells me I’m in on everything. I said really? What am I in on?" (1/2)

https://twitter.com/BuffNewsVogl?or...tw_p=embeddedtimeline&tw_w=403973200922411008


Mike Harrington @BNHarrington
GMTM tries to temper trader talk. Says he's made calls like any other GM but guys tell him he's "in" on more things than he realizes.

http://sabres.buffalonews.com/category/news/sabres-edge/
 

Paxon

202* Stanley Cup Champions
Jul 13, 2003
29,005
5,177
Rochester, NY
Nothing definitive. He said They were going to walk away from tonight with Eichel and Lehner and it was a huge step forward.

Just the way it came across, it sounded like they were satisfied that this is the total haul. Just my interpretation.

I think this trade probably doesn't happen if he thinks a ROR deal would get done. He could still do such a deal without 21st but it'd certainly be simpler otherwise. I don't think he's interested in paying what the Avs are demanding, not without a deal. He said as much when the ROR rumors first came up around the deadline. He said for a player in [describes ROR's situation] he'd consider taking the risk for a late 1st and a good prospect IIRC. It was in that ballpark. Avs are asking for more to be sure.
 

enthusiast

cybersabre his prophet
Oct 20, 2009
18,671
5,993
haha what the ****


"I may be pursuing all 7 guys you named, but 'in on everything?????' Whoa there"
 

Sabretip

Registered User
Jan 13, 2010
9,269
59
Phoenix, AZ
I think this trade probably doesn't happen if he thinks a ROR deal would get done. He could still do such a deal without 21st but it'd certainly be simpler otherwise. I don't think he's interested in paying what the Avs are demanding, not without a deal. He said as much when the ROR rumors first came up around the deadline. He said for a player in [describes ROR's situation] he'd consider taking the risk for a late 1st and a good prospect IIRC. It was in that ballpark. Avs are asking for more to be sure.

I still think there's more behind the scenes - when the most respected journalist in hockey (McKenzie) comes out with a comment like "I think Tim Murray will do everything in his power to get O'Reilly" - and then the next two most respected insiders (LeBrun and Dreger) concur - there have to be some hints that Murray dropped along the way to back it up. We've seen Murray often try to downplay things that others see as sensational or big deals - so his allusions to what he might give up are just generalities I think he gave the media for hypotheticals. We saw how he can be all in on someone and overpay to get who he wants - whether it was ensuring the tank, the trades for Kane and Lehner or the hunt for Babcock. I don't think he'll back out early because of Colorado asking high.

If anything, my hunch is that he'd only back out if: 1) Avs won't let teams talk to ROR before a trade; 2) somehow he gets wind that ROR won't play or re-sign with Buffalo; or 3) another team makes a firm offer for ROR and Colorado tries to get Buffalo to up the ante even more than is reasonable.
 

Moskau

Registered User
Jun 30, 2004
19,978
4,743
WNY
Nothing definitive. He said They were going to walk away from tonight with Eichel and Lehner and it was a huge step forward.

Just the way it came across, it sounded like they were satisfied that this is the total haul. Just my interpretation.
I don't think RoR gets traded this weekend anyways.
 

Tyler2829

Registered User
Jun 20, 2009
653
80
Rochester, NY
I still think there's more behind the scenes - when the most respected journalist in hockey (McKenzie) comes out with a comment like "I think Tim Murray will do everything in his power to get O'Reilly" - and then the next two most respected insiders (LeBrun and Dreger) concur - there have to be some hints that Murray dropped along the way to back it up. We've seen Murray often try to downplay things that others see as sensational or big deals - so his allusions to what he might give up are just generalities I think he gave the media for hypotheticals. We saw how he can be all in on someone and overpay to get who he wants - whether it was ensuring the tank, the trades for Kane and Lehner or the hunt for Babcock. I don't think he'll back out early because of Colorado asking high.

If anything, my hunch is that he'd only back out if: 1) Avs won't let teams talk to ROR before a trade; 2) somehow he gets wind that ROR won't play or re-sign with Buffalo; or 3) another team makes a firm offer for ROR and Colorado tries to get Buffalo to up the ante even more than is reasonable.

But didn't Murray come out and say that he hadn't even spoken to Sakic about O'Reilly after McKenzie said that?
 

OkimLom

Registered User
May 3, 2010
15,274
6,753
After thinking this over some more, I still feel okay with this trade.

The way I look at it, Murray knows more about Lehner than any of us. Lehner's young, he still has untapped potential, I trust Murray with being confident Lehner will be healthy enough to be a good goalie.

I am curious how Murray sees the talent level from say #21-#31. Are they interchangeable? After hearing how Murray would take BPA, were they eyeing taking Samsonov with the #21 and decided it seemed to be smarter to grab a guy who is further developed? Did the KHL aspect scare him?(since we know how much Murray "hates" Russians) Did they think they can get a comparable talent-wise @ #31?

The Legwand contract really didn't upset me. We have the majority of our main roster signed, we have tons of money, we were able to absorb a contract that a team didn't want(which is a positive) and use it to get a guy we were targeting. It doesn't hurt us in any way either short term or long term. It also gives us a center option for our 4th line, with McCormick's health history in question.

I know people will be upset with using a #21 overall pick as the main piece to get a goalie(which we needed). I can understand that, but I feel we crossed off a need(a goalie), which we don't have to wait long for, that fits the age range which coincides with the rest of the team and allows them to develop together. When we walk away from tonight, we can say we walked away with our #1 Center and a starting goalie that we can play from the first night. To me, thats valuable.

I think some people are upset with us using our #21 pick in this trade because it could've been used as a piece to acquire a guy like ROR, or move up in the draft(which seems to be difficult to do). People seem to be angry because of Hypothetical situations which we conjured up on these boards, even though we don't know what the true value of the players are. For all we know, Murray could've went to Sakic and ask what he wanted for ROR, and his asking price was too high. Sakic could've said 2 x 1st round picks (one needing to be in the top 15) and a B prospect and Murry probably thought it was too high.

This of course, is my opinion.

TLDR; Our perceived values of players are affecting our attitude towards this trade IMO.
 

Paxon

202* Stanley Cup Champions
Jul 13, 2003
29,005
5,177
Rochester, NY
haha what the ****


"I may be pursuing all 7 guys you named, but 'in on everything?????' Whoa there"

What he said essentially is that he has had conversations about X players but he doesn't know if that means he's "in" on them because he's not sure how serious their side of the conversation is taken in a given instance. In other words, he's dipping his toes out there but that's just how the job works.
 

Weaves

Registered User
Oct 28, 2013
296
98
Ottawa
After thinking this over some more, I still feel okay with this trade.

The way I look at it, Murray knows more about Lehner than any of us. Lehner's young, he still has untapped potential, I trust Murray with being confident Lehner will be healthy enough to be a good goalie.

I am curious how Murray sees the talent level from say #21-#31. Are they interchangeable? After hearing how Murray would take BPA, were they eyeing taking Samsonov with the #21 and decided it seemed to be smarter to grab a guy who is further developed? Did the KHL aspect scare him?(since we know how much Murray "hates" Russians) Did they think they can get a comparable talent-wise @ #31?

The Legwand contract really didn't upset me. We have the majority of our main roster signed, we have tons of money, we were able to absorb a contract that a team didn't want(which is a positive) and use it to get a guy we were targeting. It doesn't hurt us in any way either short term or long term. It also gives us a center option for our 4th line, with McCormick's health history in question.

I know people will be upset with using a #21 overall pick as the main piece to get a goalie(which we needed). I can understand that, but I feel we crossed off a need(a goalie), which we don't have to wait long for, that fits the age range which coincides with the rest of the team and allows them to develop together. When we walk away from tonight, we can say we walked away with our #1 Center and a starting goalie that we can play from the first night. To me, thats valuable.

I think some people are upset with us using our #21 pick in this trade because it could've been used as a piece to acquire a guy like ROR, or move up in the draft(which seems to be difficult to do). People seem to be angry because of Hypothetical situations which we conjured up on these boards, even though we don't know what the true value of the players are. For all we know, Murray could've went to Sakic and ask what he wanted for ROR, and his asking price was too high. Sakic could've said 2 x 1st round picks (one needing to be in the top 15) and a B prospect and Murry probably thought it was too high.

This of course, is my opinion.

TLDR; Our perceived values of players are affecting our attitude towards this trade IMO.

I was going to post something similar to this, but I feel you are absolutely right. While I am personally not high on using high draft picks on goalies, if this fits the Murray Mould then so be it. I sense a bit of overreaction on this board, and I feel once people realize that we finally have a above average goalie, it will make a huge difference.
 

OkimLom

Registered User
May 3, 2010
15,274
6,753
Go listen to his scrum that's posted here.

The answer to your question is more or less they're pretty sure they can.

It's funny, as I had that open(listening to the video) I was typing that wall of text. I didn't get to that part until after I submitted it.
 

sabrebuild

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
10,517
2,770
Pittsburgh
I was going to post something similar to this, but I feel you are absolutely right. While I am personally not high on using high draft picks on goalies, if this fits the Murray Mould then so be it. I sense a bit of overreaction on this board, and I feel once people realize that we finally have a above average goalie, it will make a huge difference.

What do you mean finally have above average tending? Miller has been gone for only a year and a half and statistically we have had above average goaltending except for the last month of last year with all the injuries.

If you switched Neuvy with Crawford I'd be shocked if Chicago missed a beat. The individual in net is much less important than the team in front.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
56,214
35,374
Rochester, NY
The motivation for a trade now is to include draft picks in this crop - if the Avs don't make the move this weekend, then one can presume they'd place a premium on NHL players and prospects more than draft picks.

If they want to get back to the playoffs, they may want a real hockey trade and move ROR for a top 2 or 4 NHL D.
 

Puppa2Miller

Registered User
Oct 4, 2007
1,195
624
Go listen to his scrum that's posted here.

The answer to your question is more or less they're pretty sure they can.

I have never heard the word "scrum" used today in this context on here or the radio until today and now I have heard it 100x. Just weird. Not you for using it, just that I have never heard it used like that before.
 

haseoke39

Registered User
Mar 29, 2011
13,938
2,491
Nothing definitive. He said They were going to walk away from tonight with Eichel and Lehner and it was a huge step forward.

"Hey, the league gave us these free picks today, and we only squandered half of them! Great progress!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad