Post-Game Talk (GBU): Sabres get Byroned

[Doug Prishpreed]

Paul Byron scored...didn't Buffalo basically trade him for Fasching? First they got Reghr for him, then the two 2nd rounders for Reghr, which were eventually flipped for Fasching, if memory serves?

If true, I'd say it's definitely a solid trade for Buffalo...though of course we won't know until their respective careers play out.

 

[B U F F A L O]

Paul Byron scored...didn't Buffalo basically trade him for Fasching? First they got Reghr for him, then the two 2nd rounders for Reghr, which were eventually flipped for Fasching, if memory serves?

If true, I'd say it's definitely a solid trade for Buffalo...though of course we won't know until their respective careers play out.

Following that trade history:

Sabres send:
Butler
Byron

Sabres receive:
Regher
Kotalik
2012 2nd rounder (McCabe)

-----

Sabres send:
Regher

Sabres receive:
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

-----

Sabres send:
McNabb
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

Sabres receive:
Fasching
Deslauriers

-----

So ultimately the trade ends up being:

Sabres send:
Butler
Byron
Regher
McNabb
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

Sabres receive:
Kotalik
CGY 2012 2nd rounder (McCabe)
Fasching
Deslauriers

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Following that trade history:

So ultimately the trade ends up being:

Sabres send:
Butler
Byron
Regher
McNabb
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

Sabres receive:
Kotalik
CGY 2012 2nd rounder (McCabe)
Fasching
Deslauriers

Interesting! Thanks for doing that.

So it wasn't a directly tracable one-for-one asset exchange, but they were pieces in larger trades that linked to one another. Overall, I'd rather take the package that Buffalo recieved above, but it more or less seems even, not knowing how most of these guys turn out.

Thanks!

 

[B U F F A L O]

Interesting! Thanks for doing that.

So it wasn't a directly tracable one-for-one asset exchange, but they were pieces in larger trades that linked to one another. Overall, I'd rather take the package that Buffalo recieved above, but it more or less seems even, not knowing how most of these guys turn out.

Thanks!

Also, I think technicality wise the trade involves sending back both LA 2nd rounders, but I would consider those 2 separate trades as one saying we sent Regher and McNabb for Fasching and Deslauriers.

 

[sabresfan65]

Following that trade history:


So ultimately the trade ends up being:

Sabres send:
Butler
Byron
McNabb


Sabres receive:
Kotalik
CGY 2012 2nd rounder (McCabe)
Fasching
Deslauriers

Regher
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

All appear as send and receive so they cancel out of the equation.

 

[B U F F A L O]

Regher
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

All appear as send and receive so they cancel out of the equation.

I disagree. Regher cant be, since he got sent to a different team than received from. As I mentioned above, the 2nd rounders should probably cancel out since they went back to the original team.

 

[zbubble]

I disagree. Regher cant be, since he got sent to a different team than received from. As I mentioned above, the 2nd rounders should probably cancel out since they went back to the original team.

sabresfan65 is right. It really doesn't matter that Regehr went to a different team, it only matters that he was received by us and sent by us, effectively cancelling out of the equation.

 

[B U F F A L O]

sabresfan65 is right. It really doesn't matter that Regehr went to a different team, it only matters that he was received by us and sent by us, effectively cancelling out of the equation.

Regher and the 2nd rounders were parts of getting Fasching and Deslauriers. You cant just cancel them out of the equation. Otherwise you have to cancel out Fasching and Deslauriers too.

 

[mgeise]

Regher and the 2nd rounders were parts of getting Fasching and Deslauriers. You cant just cancel them out of the equation. Otherwise you have to cancel out Fasching and Deslauriers too.

Say you traded a bike for a TV and table from someone and then traded the TV to a different person for $100. Ultimately, you'd look at it as the bike for $100 and the table. It doesn't matter that the TV was traded in separate transactions with two different people because it wasn't an asset you already owned previous to the series of trades.

Regehr and the 2nd rounders are like the TV in this scenario. The assets that began the series of transactions were Byron and Butler for Regehr, Kotalik, and a Calgary 2nd; Regehr was flipped for two LA 2nds; McNabb and the two LA 2nds were traded for Fasching and Deslauriers. When looking at the series of transactions that way, Regehr and the two LA 2nds are canceled out.

 

[dotcommunism]

Regher and the 2nd rounders were parts of getting Fasching and Deslauriers. You cant just cancel them out of the equation. Otherwise you have to cancel out Fasching and Deslauriers too.

You're kind of missing the point. Regehr and the 2nds are both coming in to the Sabres and going out from the Sabres in your "calculation". Therefore, they aren't part of the organization's net change

Saying something like:

So ultimately the trade ends up being:

Sabres send:
Butler
Byron
Regher
McNabb
LA 2014 2nd rounder
LA 2015 2nd rounder

Sabres receive:
Kotalik
CGY 2012 2nd rounder (McCabe)
Fasching
Deslauriers

fundamentally does not make sense. The way you constructed it, you're double counting all of the assets that the Sabres gave up, when most of them were in fact acquired for other assets the Sabres gave up. You're saying the Sabres gave up far more than they did.

If you want to look at it like it's an equation:

Byron + Butler = Regehr + CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik
Regehr = 2 LAK 2nds
McNabb + 2 LAK 2nds = Fasching + Deslauriers

Adding them together gives us

Byron + Butler + Regehr + McNabb + 2 LAK 2nds = Regehr + CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik + 2 LAK 2nds + Fasching + Deslauriers

The common terms on each side of the equation cancel each other out giving us:

Byron + Butler + McNabb = CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik + Fasching + Deslauriers

 

[B U F F A L O]

You're kind of missing the point. Regehr and the 2nds are both coming in to the Sabres and going out from the Sabres in your "calculation". Therefore, they aren't part of the organization's net change

Saying something like:


fundamentally does not make sense. The way you constructed it, you're double counting all of the assets that the Sabres gave up, when most of them were in fact acquired for other assets the Sabres gave up. You're saying the Sabres gave up far more than they did.

If you want to look at it like it's an equation:

Byron + Butler = Regehr + CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik
Regehr = 2 LAK 2nds
McNabb + 2 LAK 2nds = Fasching + Deslauriers

Adding them together gives us

Byron + Butler + Regehr + McNabb + 2 LAK 2nds = Regehr + CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik + 2 LAK 2nds + Fasching + Deslauriers

The common terms on each side of the equation cancel each other out giving us:

Byron + Butler + McNabb = CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik + Fasching + Deslauriers

I dont view this as a mathematical equation that you have to follow the rules of math, but...

 

[dire wolf]

I dont view this as a mathematical equation that you have to follow the rules of math, but...

you should. the other guys are right on this one. : )

 

[dire wolf]

Byron + Butler + McNabb = CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik + Fasching + Deslauriers

Seriously, this is incredible value.

 

[vcv]

Byron + Butler + McNabb = CGY 2nd (McCabe) + Kotalik + Fasching + Deslauriers

And you can cancel out Kotalik since Kotalik = 0, so

Byron + Butler + McNabb = McCabe + Fasching + Deslauriers

 

[NotABadPeriod]

I dont view this as a mathematical equation that you have to follow the rules of math, but...

Then you have to add Regehr and the 2 LA picks to what the Sabres received in your list.

You can either say:

Byron, Butler, McNabb for Fasching, CGY 2nd (McCabe), Deslauriers, and Kotalik

or

Byron, Butler, Regehr, 2 LA 2nd rounders, McNabb for Fasching, CGY 2nd (McCabe), Deslauriers, Regehr, Kotalik, and 2 LA 2nd rounders.

 

[JLewyB]

And you can cancel out Kotalik since Kotalik = 0, so

Byron + Butler + McNabb = McCabe + Fasching + Deslauriers

actually, didn't we receive the 2nd rounder from Calgary because we took on so much salary between kotalik and regehr. Kotalik is actually on the other side of the equation. So maybe it should like this

Byron + Butler + McNabb + wasted salary/cap space(kotalik)=McCabe+Fasching+Deslauriers

Nailing that McCabe pick really tips the trade in our favor.