Look at the Nash trade.

Myers>Dubinsky

Stafford>Anisimov

1st rounder >Erixon
- sbroads24

Different situations as he wanted out of Columbus while the Rangers had little interest in trading him, especially in a deal centered around a defensemen with a giant never ending contract.

How exactly would the deal you presented above have any comparison to what the Rangers would have wanted and asked for with Nash when he was having a giant season?

Doubtful on that.

I truly think the reason Murray made that trade was to make sure with 100% certainty that last place was achieved in the McDavid/Eichel draft, and trading for a player that was out for the season in Kane was ideal for that goal.

While I am not saying he doesn't like Kane, I wonder if he would have made that trade had Kane been healthy and playing at the time it was made last year.

He essentially gutted the team with Myers and Stafford going the other way, and it worked as they barely secured last place.
- kingcong39

Ok, but Kane is still an underachiever.

Hard to say. Myers was a player that was flawed, but still generated a poopload of interest around the league.
- Jeropotato

They were not getting either of Saad or Nash, who was having a giant year, for Myers, Stafford, two prospects and a 1st.

The Rangers had zero interest in offloading Nash for a Dman on a long contract, a UFA, and some could be's, and despite not being a Saad Kool Aid drinker, the Hawks were in no shape to take on the Myers contract, especially with it's length.

Ok, but Kane is still an underachiever.
- Jeropotato

And probably always will be if you expect him to be a 30-30 guy, but the end result was Eichel and that is all that matters long term.

Ok, but Kane is still an underachiever.
- Jeropotato

This is the first year in Kane's career he's played with a quality center. Has he underachieved? Maybe slightly. Has he been a bit unlucky with injuries? Yes. But we're not even half way through his first season of playing with his first solid centerman and he's putting up all respectable numbers for the games he's played thus far. If by the end of the year he plays 90% of the games left in the season and still has pedestrian numbers while playing with Eichel you may have a point but to me he hasn't had too much of a chance to shine playing on all those terrible Thrasher/Jets teams over the years.

Ok, but Kane is still an underachiever.
- Jeropotato

My biggest fear is this turning into a hodgson/kassian trade. Like I'd be okay if it was a massive overpayment but Kane was big for us over the next half decade, but if it's just one big dud of a trade...woof. Even if Armia and co. turn into busts, they had trade value at the time.

They were not getting either of Saad or Nash, who was having a giant year, for Myers, Stafford, two prospects and a 1st.

The Rangers had zero interest in offloading Nash for a Dman on a long contract, a UFA, and some could be's, and despite not being a Saad Kool Aid drinker, the Hawks were in no shape to take on the Myers contract, especially with it's length.
- kingcong39

I'm saying the caliber of player. Not specifically them.

We got an overhyped return on that deal.

Myers for Kane was fair.

Who has statistical expectations of Kane?
- Jeropotato

You'd be surprised...or maybe not your an oilers fan

Precisely. Good post
- joshs

Probably just one long typo on my part.

My biggest fear is this turning into a hodgson/kassian trade. Like I'd be okay if it was a massive overpayment but Kane was big for us over the next half decade, but if it's just one big dud of a trade...woof. Even if Armia and co. turn into busts, they had trade value at the time.
- Sabresfan-365

Bogosian and Kane have played far better than Hodgson don't be ridiculous.

Because you would expect the great Evander Kane to outproduce him considerably
- sbroads24

Any given night kane makes more of a difference.

Bogosian and Kane have played far better than Hodgson don't be ridiculous.
- bluengold12

Let me clarify. I said i fear it could turn into that deal. Hodgson started off well here. Looked very lob-sided in our favour. Im not saying it will, im just saying that i wouldn't mind it being an overpayment if Kane turned into an integral part of the team.

The real disaster would be the deal turning into just a waste of assets because as bad as you may believe they are now they did have value at one point. In fairness I don't know what else was out there. With NTC's being a factor this may have been as good as it gets.

I'm saying the caliber of player. Not specifically them.

We got an overhyped return on that deal.

Myers for Kane was fair.
- sbroads24

I am not certain that Myers, and specifically his contract, had as much value league wide as some thought. That is my only point.

I am not certain that Myers, and specifically his contract, had as much value league wide as some thought. That is my only point.
- kingcong39

My thought as well at the time.

I am not certain that Myers, and specifically his contract, had as much value league wide as some thought. That is my only point.
- kingcong39

It most likely did, with the lack of quality Defensemen available. I was more surprised at what you gave up for Kane, where interest was limited.

I am not certain that Myers, and specifically his contract, had as much value league wide as some thought. That is my only point.
- kingcong39

I'm not sure Kane had as much value as people thought either.

Remember, the only reason WPG made that deal was because they knew they would never get a better offer.

They made that trade when half of the teams in the NHL weren't interested because they were in playoff positions, and Kane was out for the year

Let me clarify. I said i fear it could turn into that deal. Hodgson started off well here. Looked very lob-sided in our favour. Im not saying it will, im just saying that i wouldn't mind it being an overpayment if Kane turned into an integral part of the team.

The real disaster would be the deal turning into just a waste of assets because as bad as you may believe they are now they did have value at one point. In fairness I don't know what else was out there. With NTC's being a factor this may have been as good as it gets.
- Sabresfan-365

I guess. But Bogosian and Kane were all ready somewhat established players whereas Hodgson was unproven when he got here.
The only assets I worry about are the 1st we gave up I don't know how he's doing. And Lemiuex But the kids a punk so I'm not too worried about it.

Let me clarify. I said i fear it could turn into that deal. Hodgson started off well here. Looked very lob-sided in our favour. Im not saying it will, im just saying that i wouldn't mind it being an overpayment if Kane turned into an integral part of the team.

The real disaster would be the deal turning into just a waste of assets because as bad as you may believe they are now they did have value at one point. In fairness I don't know what else was out there. With NTC's being a factor this may have been as good as it gets.
- Sabresfan-365

I think you nailed it with the this being as good as it gets line.

I only have one small problem with your wasted assets line and that is this: if you hold on to assets, waiting for that deal when you clearly pull the wool over the eyes of another GM, there is a great chance every GM sees right through you and you get no deal or a deal that is sorely lacking.

If Murray truly did not believe in Myers, Stafford, and Armia, then his thinking the entire time was likely one of I will take the best trade available for the items I believe are junk/not to my liking, and for all we know, there was no better return availble for the some of those parts.

Amazing to me how different the view would look if the trade was like below.

Jets get: Myers, Stafford, Armia, Lemiuex
Sabres get: Kane, Bogosian, 2015 or 2016 1st

Kane has zero hockey sense and is prone to poor decisions off the ice, no matter the outcome of this recent news. The Jets won that trade by a landslide just for getting this over rated, will never reach potential or expectations, short career because of stupidity cancer off their team

It most likely did, with the lack of quality Defensemen available. I was more surprised at what you gave up for Kane, where interest was limited.
- Jeropotato

His contract is $5.5M through 2018-2019, which is tough for other teams to take on, especially teams with good players that you want in return.

I guess. But Bogosian and Kane were all ready somewhat established players whereas Hodgson was unproven when he got here.
The only assets I worry about are the 1st we gave up I don't know how he's doing. And Lemiuex But the kids a punk so I'm not too worried about it.
- bluengold12

I think Lemieux might end up being a very good NHL player.

I'm not sure Kane had as much value as people thought either.

Remember, the only reason WPG made that deal was because they knew they would never get a better offer.

They made that trade when half of the teams in the NHL weren't interested because they were in playoff positions, and Kane was out for the year
- sbroads24

The two bolded parts are why the trade was made, IMO.

I have a feeling Murray thought he would never get a better offer for Myers and Stafford then what he got from the Jets.

His contract is $5.5M through 2018-2019, which is tough for other teams to take on, especially teams with good players that you want in return.
- kingcong39

Had the Sabres asked for Eberle, they may well have gotten him straight up, and he's better than Kane, tho it makes too many current Sabres redundant.

I think Lemieux might end up being a very good NHL player.
- Jeropotato

He refused to sign his elc with buffalo.

I think Lemieux might end up being a very good NHL player.
- Jeropotato

He could be. But you have to give to get. And seen as we destroyed the Avalanche in that trade I think giving up a good prospect and getting two established players in this one is fine