23 Aug 2014 17:58:37
Buffalo: Stewart, McCabe and a 1st 2016.

Winnipeg: Kane

Buffalo gets a potential franchise player and winnipeg gets Stewart a good young defensive prospect and a 1st.

1.) 24 Aug 2014
23 Aug 2014 19:39:52
really doubt buf trades that 1st. yes its 2016, but atm you can't really say they'll be a playoff team or anything close to it by then.

2.) 24 Aug 2014
Buffalo won't give their first even if its in 2016

3.) 24 Aug 2014
The value maybe fair but I doubt Murray would give up a 1st and McCabe. So I cannot vote either way due to the reasonably equal talent exchange but the unlikelihood of Murray making the deal. You do realize that
----Games--Goals--Ass----Pts----pt/gm
Kane 324----99----101----200---0.617 and
Ennis 267----69-----97----166---0.622
have almost identical career stats. So I think it would really be hard for Murray to justify trading three young assets for one. BTW of course I realize that Kane may have a higher upside.

4.) 24 Aug 2014
This is the best evander Kane trade I've seen on here, Winnipeg adds a 3/4round pick imo

5.) 24 Aug 2014
Not a chance. That first has a very good chance of being Connor McDavid.

6.) 24 Aug 2014
Lmao I held back for a few comments sbr2017 but you are like chirp and montrealsfinest rolled into one

7.) 24 Aug 2014
Mr_enlightened thanks for the kind remarks, I did not know my comments were so harsh, I will tone them down a bit. BTW which part of the above post is untrue: Kane has a larger upside, Ennis scores more pt/gm, the exchange of talent is fair or Murray will not give 3 assets for Kane?

8.) 24 Aug 2014
Tyler Ennis is not a part of this trade.

9.) 25 Aug 2014
Drgonzo, thanks for the feed back. The SBR do not need a LW, they need centers. Ennis plays center but should be playing LW along with Moulson and Foligno. Hodgson plays center but he seemed to perform better at RW last year so could be on RW along with Stewart, Stafford and Gionta. That gives the SBR 3 doughnut lines. Trading Stewart, McCabe and a 1st for a "franchise" LW who has not outperformed the diminutive Ennis, does not solve their problem at center.

10.) 25 Aug 2014
Argh they censored Me, Ennis is not comparable to Kane Imo.ennis puts up points but Kane could and I think will be elite and he's not a midget that's always a plus. Kanes value is all over the place depending on who you ask on here and I think his value is really high

11.) 25 Aug 2014
Lol ya I think Kane May have a higher upside too.lmao

12.) 25 Aug 2014
Drgonzo, I think every objection you have to SBR 2017 post he agrees with you. Kane has a higher upside but has not outperformed the midget Ennis, so why trade 3 assets for an underperforming "potential franchise" player.

13.) 26 Aug 2014
@sbr I didn't know I said you're comments were harsh.i think you're comments are irrelevant and you don't follow hockey closely.this is why I compare you to chirp.also you're comments like the leafs need 3 top 9 centers and sign setoguchi for 3 years remind me of montrealfinest.too the guy saying Ennis has outperformed Kane you might wanna watch the two play first.stewart is lazy,the pick is risky in two years and McCabe May or May not be a nhler. Look at more than the ppg if you can't understand Kane's value.

14.) 26 Aug 2014
Actually I did not suggest moving three assets for one.if you wanna rip into me at least get you're facts right please
1 Kane is the best player in the deal and the team that gets the best player normally wins the deal
2 The pick is risky in two years, jake McCabe has potential but is not a sure thing to even be an nhl regular yet
3 Kane is the best player on the sabres instantly I know this doesn't say much
4 Kane is a star and he brings grit the sabres need both
5 the sabres have some young talent that's not ready,maybe just maybe they want to be more competitive, maybe this sends a better message to the young players.

15.) 26 Aug 2014
Mr_enlightened, WOW!
1. No comment about Chirp.
2. I said I should not have included the leafs in my post, it was weak.
3. We will see about Setoguchi at the end of the season.
4. I compared the stats of Ennis and Kane, but closed by saying Kane had a higher upside, I never said Ennis was better.
5. Finally, my first statement in my post was the exchange of talent was fair, but Murray would probably not make the trade.
Hey, thanks for the remarks. They will certainly help me to understand you a lot better.

16.) 26 Aug 2014
Drgonzo, very interesting! I think the posted trade was for Stewart, McCabe and a 1st, I flunked kindergarten, and that is how I came up with 3 assets, sorry for my error.
1. I agreed that the trade was fair, so obviously, I thought Kane was the best player in the deal. As the far as the best player in the deal, I guess PHI won the Lindros trade?
2. Very true statements, I never disputed that.
3. Very true as a matter of fact, I posted a different trade to get Kane, so I think he would be good on the Sabres team as well.
4. I never disputed that Kane was a star and provided grit.
5. All true statements.
I guess, I do not see where we disagree. Thanks for the feedback, we will have to chat again.

17.) 26 Aug 2014
1 My suggestion was three assets for two, that's clear ^
2 just a coincidence that you/goleafsgo both seen that differently right lol
3 you are a coward. Take you're sarcasm and you're underhanded comments to a chat room
4 you didn't say Kane has a higher upside.you said he may have.stop lying
5 you already know that I think Philly lost the lindros trade.in fact it was you defending the flyers decision when we discussed it. I guess it's a good thing I did not say the team that gets the best player always wins the trade or else I'd look like I talk out my ass like you eh bud

18.) 26 Aug 2014
Wouldn't be surprised if the Sabres actually make the playoffs. They actually aquired some good players. And Neuvirth has shown he can be a great goalie.