Confirmed with Link: Jets/Buffalo Blockbuster! part II (Kane and Bogo)

[Whileee]

GM's are not normally basket cases who need their hands held. They are usually confident personalities. This line of thinking is pretty ridiculous IMO

I agree. I just think the notion that GMs won't deal with Chevy because they didn't know Kane and Bogo had issues is ridiculous.

 

[broinwhyteridge]

Dudes a narcissistic sociopath. Completely classless. He will never change, regardless where he plays. I personally relish in his adversities.

Vegas expansion must have made him load his pants.

 

[TheDeuce]

Dudes a narcissistic sociopath. Completely classless. He will never change, regardless where he plays. I personally relish in his adversities.

And I'm completely indifferent. He could be in the KHL for all the attention I pay him outside of the occasional blip like the Playboy girlfriend post. But that post had other things going for it...



m.

 

[burnoutberry]

When I woke up and heard about this trade I almost crapped my pants! I didn't think we'd get much for Kane with his character issues, but Chevy packaged the deal up to get far more than I imagined. Nothing short of unbelievable.

 

[Jet]

Man, I really dislike "Click for next page" articles.

I was gonna say

I can go to godaddy and make a site too!

I feel bad for Bogosian. I wonder if he would have been brought along in an org like Detroit what he would have become.

I'd take him back but really what would we do with him?

 

[sully1410]

I was gonna say

I can go to godaddy and make a site too!

I feel bad for Bogosian. I wonder if he would have been brought along in an org like Detroit what he would have become.

I'd take him back but really what would we do with him?

I think he'd be the same tbh. He would still have all the tools and none of the toolbox. We were all excited when he posted that 30pt season and thought it was only going to get better, but it wasnt to be.

And you just thought he was handsome.

 

[Howard Chuck]

What a great trade.

 

[EpicGingy]

What a great trade.

I'm sure if Kane didn't get arrested today it would have remained an awful trade.

Wait...

 

[Dubi Doo]

Why would they think that? Tim Murray knew exactly what he was getting into when he accepted the trade. He is aggressive as **** in FA and trades, so not all of his deals will work out. He and his crew believed in second chances. There is nothing on Chevy's end that warrants a problem.

Exactly. Murray is going to live and die by the trigger. He'll win some and lose some. That's just how it goes when you're an aggressive GM. And lucky for Buffalo we had a ton of assets to trade to inherit those risks, so while he may have 'lost' this trade he's done a masterful job with the rebuild.

 

[antiqueslivers]

still a chance murray can offload kane to philly!

 

[KCjetsfan]

Exactly. Murray is going to live and die by the trigger. He'll win some and lose some. That's just how it goes when you're an aggressive GM. And lucky for Buffalo we had a ton of assets to trade to inherit those risks, so while he may have 'lost' this trade he's done a masterful job with the rebuild.

pretty much this.

This trade isn't as lopsided as jets fans want to paint it, using justification that even though we just got Stafford for a few months, since he resigned that should count (although many are now, finally, seeing that resign as a neutral or negative move). I guess we'll see what the final result of Kane's saga turns into, and while I'm not sure I'd call the trade a huge loss for Buffalo since that's not yet determined, it's much clearer a 'win' for the jets to not have to deal with that and get some assets in return.

 

[Whileee]

pretty much this.

This trade isn't as lopsided as jets fans want to paint it, using justification that even though we just got Stafford for a few months, since he resigned that should count (although many are now, finally, seeing that resign as a neutral or negative move). I guess we'll see what the final result of Kane's saga turns into, and while I'm not sure I'd call the trade a huge loss for Buffalo since that's not yet determined, it's much clearer a 'win' for the jets to not have to deal with that and get some assets in return.

Put it this way. Would you trade Roslovic and Lemieux for Kane? What about Roslovic, Lemieux and Armia?

 

[DeepFrickinValue]

Put it this way. Would you trade Roslovic and Lemieux for Kane? What about Roslovic, Lemieux and Armia?

it would be awesome for a Roslovic, Lemieux and Armia line in the future. Just for a game.

 

[buggs]

pretty much this.

This trade isn't as lopsided as jets fans want to paint it, using justification that even though we just got Stafford for a few months, since he resigned that should count (although many are now, finally, seeing that resign as a neutral or negative move). I guess we'll see what the final result of Kane's saga turns into, and while I'm not sure I'd call the trade a huge loss for Buffalo since that's not yet determined, it's much clearer a 'win' for the jets to not have to deal with that and get some assets in return.

Your statement is highly contextual.

Not winning the lottery changes the dynamic substantially. Absent Laine we're quite likely to have only pulled in Connor as a rookie forward and his development arc would have very likely paralleled Ehlers development with a start on the third line, eventually moving up to the top six should he follow a similar development line. Absent Laine we actually need to have Stafford for our roster as a top six player. Certainly he's an imperfect forward but we didn't exactly have a ton of guys filling the net on a regular basis. Stafford did that and did it reasonably well. He's not the greatest on defense perhaps but there are no guarantees that either Laine or Connor are going to be exceptional in that manner in their rookie seasons either. We might all speculate and hope that they'll bring more to the table than Stafford but it is entirely within the realm of possibility that both are more of a defensive liability than Stafford has been in the past, especially as rookies. Their ceilings both offensively and defensively might be higher but they've proven precisely nothing at this point.

I don't consider the signing of Stafford as neutral or negative. When he was signed there was no indication we'd get an offensive phenom at #2 OA. I consider it a slight overpay to get a shorter term. That term to me is looking just slightly off ideal. Should Laine or Connor (both) have Ehlers-like seasons then Stafford becomes a luxury item that expires at the end of the year. He might have negative tendencies/trends in certain aspects of his game, but now that we have Laine we all seem to think of him (Stafford) as some sort of Devin Setoguchi clone and that's not accurate. However if Laine and/or Connor disappoint to an extent we'll likely be thankful to have a veteran top six presence that can score.

I respectfully disagree that Stafford isn't a winning part of that trade. Initially he was just a rental that was helpful. Last season he was third in goals on a team that badly needed goal scoring. This season it appears he'll be a luxury we don't need. That's a good place to be but outside of winning that second slot in the lottery we're drafting Tkachuk-Keller-Nylander-Sergachev, all of whom are likely headed back to their junior leagues.

Bogosian-Myers is a rub to me. Kane appears the better player overall of the remaining but the headaches and teams disruption are absolutely worth what appears to a 2.25 season acquisition that was needed (Stafford), what looks to be going forward a 3rd line winger (Armia) that exceeds much of what we've played the last five years on the 3rd line and a 1st round pick (Roslovic) that appears to be a very reasonable shot at a middle six player. That's three roster players, two that might be with the Jets for the long run all to off-load a player with "issues" that his teammates didn't like? No, that's a clear win, even though we gave up the best player.

 

[Gm0ney]

Put it this way. Would you trade Roslovic and Lemieux for Kane? What about Roslovic, Lemieux and Armia?

Put it this way. Would you have traded Kane for a late 2015 1st round pick and two "B" prospects in winter 2015?

 

[Whileee]

I think there's a reasonable chance that Myers continues to improve his performance with the Jets as he did last season, in which case he might well be a clear upgrade on Bogo.

 

[Whileee]

Put it this way. Would you have traded Kane for a late 2015 1st round pick and two "B" prospects in winter 2015?

I supported the trade at the time, even though I liked Kane and Bogo as players.

I think the trade looks even better now because Lemieux is a better prospect than I had anticipated. So is Armia. Roslovic looks like he might be icing on the cake.

 

[Jetsfan87]

Buffalo was banking on Kane not being an idiot, and being the hockey player that he has the talent to be (25+ goals a year, speedy power forward). If he did that it is a very even trade in my opinion, since he can't/won't Buffalo got fleeced...

 

[roccerfeller]

Your statement is highly contextual.

Not winning the lottery changes the dynamic substantially. Absent Laine we're quite likely to have only pulled in Connor as a rookie forward and his development arc would have very likely paralleled Ehlers development with a start on the third line, eventually moving up to the top six should he follow a similar development line. Absent Laine we actually need to have Stafford for our roster as a top six player. Certainly he's an imperfect forward but we didn't exactly have a ton of guys filling the net on a regular basis. Stafford did that and did it reasonably well. He's not the greatest on defense perhaps but there are no guarantees that either Laine or Connor are going to be exceptional in that manner in their rookie seasons either. We might all speculate and hope that they'll bring more to the table than Stafford but it is entirely within the realm of possibility that both are more of a defensive liability than Stafford has been in the past, especially as rookies. Their ceilings both offensively and defensively might be higher but they've proven precisely nothing at this point.

I don't consider the signing of Stafford as neutral or negative. When he was signed there was no indication we'd get an offensive phenom at #2 OA. I consider it a slight overpay to get a shorter term. That term to me is looking just slightly off ideal. Should Laine or Connor (both) have Ehlers-like seasons then Stafford becomes a luxury item that expires at the end of the year. He might have negative tendencies/trends in certain aspects of his game, but now that we have Laine we all seem to think of him (Stafford) as some sort of Devin Setoguchi clone and that's not accurate. However if Laine and/or Connor disappoint to an extent we'll likely be thankful to have a veteran top six presence that can score.

I respectfully disagree that Stafford isn't a winning part of that trade. Initially he was just a rental that was helpful. Last season he was third in goals on a team that badly needed goal scoring. This season it appears he'll be a luxury we don't need. That's a good place to be but outside of winning that second slot in the lottery we're drafting Tkachuk-Keller-Nylander-Sergachev, all of whom are likely headed back to their junior leagues.

Bogosian-Myers is a rub to me. Kane appears the better player overall of the remaining but the headaches and teams disruption are absolutely worth what appears to a 2.25 season acquisition that was needed (Stafford), what looks to be going forward a 3rd line winger (Armia) that exceeds much of what we've played the last five years on the 3rd line and a 1st round pick (Roslovic) that appears to be a very reasonable shot at a middle six player. That's three roster players, two that might be with the Jets for the long run all to off-load a player with "issues" that his teammates didn't like? No, that's a clear win, even though we gave up the best player.

Awesome post (also Lemieux)

 

[Gm0ney]

I supported the trade at the time, even though I liked Kane and Bogo as players.

I think the trade looks even better now because Lemieux is a better prospect than I had anticipated. So is Armia. Roslovic looks like he might be icing on the cake.

So far it appears they're panning out better than expected - but at the time, it was Kane for a late 1st and two B prospects. Do you think the Jets knew what they were getting? Was it skill or was it luck?

 

[YetAnotherGM]

So far it appears they're panning out better than expected - but at the time, it was Kane for a late 1st and two B prospects. Do you think the Jets knew what they were getting? Was it skill or was it luck?

Got to be luck

 

[Whileee]

So far it appears they're panning out better than expected - but at the time, it was Kane for a late 1st and two B prospects. Do you think the Jets knew what they were getting? Was it skill or was it luck?

If it turns out positive, it must be good luck.

If something turns out negative, it's idiocy not bad luck.

Am I doing this right, now?

 

[surixon]

So far it appears they're panning out better than expected - but at the time, it was Kane for a late 1st and two B prospects. Do you think the Jets knew what they were getting? Was it skill or was it luck?

If I remember correctly the Jets wanted both those kids included in the deal. The Jets would have heavily scouted both Lemieux and Armia and formed projections for both players which lead to the Jets brass wanting them.

The amateur scouts would have also assembled over half a year worth scouting at the time of the trade and would likely have been pretty confident that they would be able to get a good player in that range.

There will always be some luck involved but I think the Jets should be commended for getting what they did.

 

[Mud Turtle]

Let's give the Jets scouts some more credit. It's looking more and more like they nailed another one. Not just one, but three prospects!
Well done. I hope the team lets our scouts hoist the Stanley Cup when it comes here in 2019! They deserve it.

 

[Gm0ney]

If it turns out positive, it must be good luck.

If something turns out negative, it's idiocy not bad luck.

Am I doing this right, now?

You're not doing it right at all. I think there's quite a bit of luck involved with how prospects pan out. You disagree?