nfreeman

Totally agree with these and would just add that motivating Staal will be a good challenge for RK’s talents.

Here's some speculation: I think TB is is more likely to trade Gourde than Killorn or Cirelli. Pretty fast and skilled player who plays center and wing, is feisty and fairly productive, but on the small side and carries a hefty $5.1MM cap hit for 4 more seasons. Pretty much the same cash number too. He turns 29 in December. He's one of a number of expensive TB vets who has a NTC, which he probably wouldn't waive to come here, so it's probably academic, but still: he's a pretty good player who will likely be available at low cost in trade, and maybe TB would retain part of the cap hit.

Can't decide if you're joking about this and don't want to spend 60 seconds looking it up either.

Darthie, you know I luv ya, but this is like when a certain poster whose name rhymes with "shmiger" was arguing that Robyn Regehr might get power play time.

I would be very happy to pick up Grelzzy. He's an exceptional skater and good playmaker with good hockey IQ. NB though that he's only 5'9", 175 lbs -- so it would seem unlikely that the Sabres would have both him and Bryson in their top 6. In any case I think dudacek is right that the Bruins aren't going to let him go, since he's good and relatively cheap and they control his rights.

Excellent post. I agree with almost everything, although I think they are more likely to bring in 1 defenseman or possibly zero. I agree that Montour is the most likely to go. I also think that KA will be quite open to bringing in another top-6 forward if another Staal-like bargain presents itself, and that it's reasonably likely to happen given a wave of NHL cost-cutting. This would push TT down to 3RW (or lower) and/or push Cozens from C to RW. They have some positional flexibility with Kahun and Cozens, and I can also see VO playing 3LW if a higher-end LW is brought in. The 1A/1B goalie is at the top of my wish list, followed closely by another good top-6 forward.

Lazar reminds me of Adam Mair with more upside and less fighting. Not a high ceiling, but fast, good size, decent hockey IQ and great enthusiasm.

Well, I totally agree that until they actually deliver good results, we shouldn't assume that they're going to do so, or that they have the right people in place to do so. My point was just that it would be pretty strange if they were actually prioritizing marketing over winning, and I have a hard time believing that they are doing so.

You seem to be assuming that they are focused on marketing and not on building a better team. I don't see anything to support this assumption. They haven't succeeded in building a good team, but what specifically is there to indicate that they aren't trying? Did they not just trade for a legit player to fill their biggest need on the ice? Do you think the hockey staff bloodletting means they don't want to build a good team? That hockey staff delivered a terrible team for an extended period of time. It's much more likely that they are focused both on improving the team and on marketing.

I think this is probably right. Cost-cutting plus Larsson probably wanting a taste of a better team plus him being a UFA plus a commitment to Lazar probably equals Larsson gone.

How so? Should the Sabres not have a marketing department? Do you not think every NHL team has people in roles like this?

Good article on this summer's UFAs from Pierre Lebrun in the Athletic today. https://theathletic.com/2082979/2020/09/22/lebrun-uncertain-free-agent-market-brings-individual-players-cases-into-focus/ On Granlund: On Greiss and other goalies:

Here's a nice JA highlight reel from the Miami game -- end-zone cameras and Brian Baldinger narrating:

Also worth noting -- Saad has 1 year left on his contract. As @dudacek notes, supply and demand are likely to result in him being available for a fairly low price in trade. I'm interested.

Saad is a good player but plays LW (and shoots left).

I think Diggs is their best WR since Moulds and is the best player on the team. Holy mackerel. What a great pickup by BB.

But don't you think they would trade him before giving him a 2-year deal?

Let's chill out a bit in here please.

I generally agree, but I think that they will end up agreeing on a long-term deal in the sixes.

Which of your arguments are going unaddressed? You said Fast's analytics "massacre" those of Kessel. I introduced analytics refuting your point. You said Fast is a better defensive player than Kessel. I agreed. I haven't yet addressed the snarky straw man "4 years ago" in your most recent post, but it doesn't really need addressing, since I've already provided stats showing that Kessel's been quantum levels more productive than Fast has been for 3 of the last 4 years. As for the most recent season being the most likely to be applicable in a comparison -- that is also a fair point, but it doesn't end the discussion. Kessel has been a borderline elite offensive producer for pretty much his entire career. Fast has been a nice 2-way player, but less productive than Jochen Hecht. Kessel very well might be a spent force, and carrying his contract for its last 2 years might be a major mistake -- but he might not, and he might instead be a great pickup at a position of need. KA is getting paid less than most other NHL GMs, but still a lot, to make the correct call on items like this. I agree that we have qualitatively different evaluations here. Sometimes people are certain about things that are hard to be certain about -- e.g. many, and I'm not sure whether you're one of them, were certain that the Habs erred enormously in trading PK for Weber. As for contracts, Jesper certainly would be cheaper than Kessel. Term, and therefore commitment, is another matter entirely. Would Fast, at age 28 and in his first bite at the UFA apple, accept a 3-year deal from a crappy Sabres team? Or would he require a 5-year deal to come here? How much less appealing would you find him in that situation, relative to Kessel's 2-year commitment? I don't agree with your conclusion, which is that the Sabres would be better off with Fast at 2RW than with Kessel -- but that doesn't mean I'm ignoring your points, or that repetition of broad and unsupported assertions makes them correct.

This is fair and is certainly part of the risk associated with Kessel. Part of Kessel's nuttiness: there was an article about him in the Athletic or Player's Tribune or a similar publication in the last couple of years with photos of his house. He has a home theater with one chair in it. This assumption, regardless of how often it is repeated, is nuts. ES points last 4 years: Kessel -- 40, 50, 46, 21 Fast -- 21, 33, 20, 29 Other than last year, it's not even close. The 2 players are apples and oranges. As for the #fancystats, where Fast allegedly massacres Kessel -- Corsi, last 4 years: Kessel -- 47.4, 51.6, 47.7, 50.4 Fast -- 47.6, 45.3, 47.3, 47.8 Fenwick, last 4 years: Kessel -- 47.7, 52.2, 47.9, 48.9 Fast -- 48.2, 45.6, 48.5, 49.3 I think the Fast-Donskoi comparison is apt. Fast is a nice player in a third-line role. However, for a team desperate to add scoring, he's not the guy. There are plenty of reasons not to want Kessel, but the idea that Fast would be better than Kessel in boosting 2nd line scoring ain't one of them IMHO.

Well, I think there's a wide range between Kessel's production this past season and a return all the way to his peak. I also think that, as @Curt notes upthread, if his heart is in it -- which very well may not be the case if he finds himself on the Sabres -- and if he's on a line with credible and skilled linemates, like Skinner and Staal, that 55-60 pts is entirely possible. OTOH, we all know to a metaphysical certainty that Fast isn't going to deliver more than 30 pts as a Sabre. The Sabres desperately need to score more. Fast, while certainly possessing certain qualities that Kessel lacks, isn't going to solve that problem. Kessel represents the kind of low-cost, high-upside opportunity that doesn't come along that often and that might pay off handsomely.

Whoa. Fast, pts last 4 seasons: 21, 33, 20, 29 Kessel, pts last 4 seasons: 70, 92, 82, 38 I agree on defensive responsibility, but they are not comparable in scoring ability. Now this is fair. Taking the risk on the 2nd year is part of the price here.

So, I from time to time have entertained the idea of trading for Kessel. I didn't watch him this year in AZ, and his #s this year were way down, but until this past season he's been a no-BS top-6 RW who is fast and can score in multiple ways. He's also kinda nutty and moody like Skinner, so that would have to be considered. In any case, though, he's a guy who will probably be available pretty cheaply, as AZ is looking to dump payroll, his production was down last year, he turns 33 next month and he makes $6MM cash (and a $6.8MM cap hit) per year, with 2 more years on his deal. So the price to get him, the fit for the Sabres' need, the relatively short commitment and even the slight cash-to-cap discount all seem in line for this to be plausible. A 2nd line of Skinner-Staal-Kessel would be very dangerous and entertaining. Just sayin'.

Excellent thread as always @GASabresIUFAN However, I think there is no way the Sabres give Reino a 2-year deal. It will either be a LT deal (most likely outcome) or they will trade him (maybe a 25% chance). I also think they will want to sign VO to a longer term deal. i agree that Montour or Risto is likely to be traded — which one it is will depend on the trade partner’s preferences.