dudacek

Like most moves the “why” matters. Right now this is neither good, nor bad, on its own. Value is fine. What does this set up? Anything? Getting an extra prospect means nothing to me.

Maybe we really do want to draft Jett Luchanko?

So the buyout leak is out there as an attempt to leverage Jeff into being more flexible as to where he will waive?

My impression was always that the Sabres were very divided on Östlund and Kulich, and that Kulich was literally the next player on their list. The fact that they made the call between the two that morning is interesting.

Is the premise of this post that Europeans don't supply grit and we should be concerned about players' birth certificates?

Luchanko is a likable player, but that just seems like overthinking things based on perceived needs. Not picking Buium in that particular scenario would be shocking to me. Not only to my personal perception of the players, but also to my perception of how the Sabres draft.

The fans were fully bought in during the spring of ‘23. It was that summer when they started to doubt when they ignored the goalie question, didn’t fill for Quinn’s injury and only brought in depth guys on D. I’d say only the goalie decision had anything to do with blocking. But I agree with your 2nd paragraph entirely. 23.5M.

Do people think Adams was ever planning to implement a “no blocking” philosophy in perpetuity? It was put in place primarily to ensure Thompson, Cozens, Mittelstadt, Asplund, Dahlin, Samuelsson and Jokiharju would get hard minutes in 21/22 for development purposes. Then to give Krebs, Peterka, Quinn, Power and the goalies an open path in more typical rookie roles for the same reason the following year. Benson and Johnson weren’t on the team last year because of “no-blocking”, they were there because Olofsson and Eric Johnson fell on their faces.

Not sure how he fits into their cap, but in terms of roster fit, Necas makes more sense for the Devils than the Sabres. Tulsky floating the Sabres as interested in order to get Jersey to cough up 10 makes sense. (As does floating NJ, I guess, assuming the Sabres have already offered 11 and Carolina is trying for an add 🤷) I just hope our attention and assets are actually being dangled for a better fit.

I think most of us have reached the point where no piece on this team is untouchable. But WGR did an interesting exercise this morning about which Sabre would hurt the most to lose. With trade winds blowing, I thought it might be interesting to see which players fit that bill best for Sabrespace. Here’s the scenario: You have negotiated a deal with the Oilers for McDavid. As part of the deal, you have to give up one young roster player, and one non-roster asset. You are allowed to say that one Sabre from each category is off limits, then they get their pick of the rest. Under those circumstances, who do you protect?

He’s better than Skinner and has upside Jeff doesn’t have any more, but otherwise I think this is where I am. I could maybe live with it in the context of other moves, but he’s not the player I’d be focused on. Skinner and assets doesn’t make sense if we’re going to sign him to a deal that effectively makes him part of the core. That might change if we can sign him to a deal like the one Casey just signed and flip him in two years.

I'd rather spend my money in a different aisle, but if you're talking about "replacing Mittelstadt" as a skilled forward, he has a very similar profile. He's faster, a little bigger, of a similar talent level and the same age. Has mostly played wing, but is historically a centre and wants to play centre. He's probably not as diligent, but has very good possession numbers in an offensive deployment.

Article seems to be a deliberate Carolina plant pointing to 1 of 2 things: Making the Sabres think another team is offering a high pick and getting them to up their offer; Or, making another team think the Sabres are offering a high pick and getting that team to up their offer. Thing I like about it is that it either reflects, or is playing off a perception, that the Sabres are all in right now.

#11 for Necas? Yes or no, Sabrespace?

In a deeper article about the Canes, Lebrun says we have serious interest in Necas. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5594383/2024/06/26/nhl-rumblings-necas-guentzel-tanev-kane/ The hottest potato right now involves pending restricted free agent Martin Necas, who wants a change of scenery. The Canes have heard from nearly every single team in the NHL on him — I believe the Buffalo Sabres have very serious interest — but it’s getting to be crunch time if a trade is going to happen that involves a first-round pick Friday as part of the package. “Teams are calling. We’ve been working hard on it,” Tulsky said. “I would say that’s been one of my biggest focuses, trying to figure out where that’s going to go. We’ve had a lot of interest. We’ve had a few offers that I would consider very serious. “Whether or not any of them get across the line remains to be seen.” While Tulsky wouldn’t say, other league sources say that there is one team in particular that is pretty close with Carolina on the framework of a deal and that if that trade goes through, it would involve a first-round pick Friday night. So if that particular team decides to go ahead with Carolina, we will know within 48 hours here.

He shouldn't be captain because LGR wonders if he might ask out?

Not going to argue with you because I read your overarching point as none of that impresses you. Which is essentially how I began my post and essentially how I feel as well I’ll simply say that Adams could have done none of the above and some people here were expecting him to do none of the above. (Skinner is the Sabres highest-paid player. Dahlin’s contract kicks in July 1.)

I know people won’t (and shouldnt) be happy until we see results, but the perception Adams is sitting on his hands doesn’t ring true to me. In the space of 3 months he has: Traded his captain Traded his leading scorer Acquired one of the more highly touted young defencemen of the past 5 years, who has a Stanley Cup ring Fired his coach Hired one of the winningest NHL coaches of all time (Apparently) cut his highest-paid player And we haven’t even hit the draft yet. This is hardly running it back.

I think this is apt in the sense that it’s what happened last year. I’ll let you know if I agree it’s a fatal flaw in a week or so.

Is there an argument that a sacrifice needed to be made to show the room that all the talk about accountability isn’t just hollow, and Jeff was the logical sacrifice on many levels?

The "must trade #11 at all costs" movement is over-the-top. The correct button is "trade assets that can help down the road for assets that can help now"

Agreed. Adams list of top picks is overflowing with those types: Benson, Savoie, Power, Quinn... And his trades, Tuch, Greenway, Byram... Wait, what are we talking about...?

Talking the Skinner buyout on Vancouver radio right now and comparing it to the Ekman-Larson buyout the Canucks did last year: costly, and for a useful player, but it opened up needed flexibility for them to make needed moves. Thought it was interesting, especially given the other similarities in our path compared to our expansion cousins Lengthy stretch of disappointing seasons A 92 point upswing followed by a drop to 83 and fan base ready to burn it down Core players having down years at the same time Firing nice guy coach for veteran old school guy Adding a mobile top 4 defenceman Serious upgrades to the bottom 6 (still just talk at this point for Buffalo) The Ekman-Larsson buyout is very similar to Skinner's ($18M over 3 years, bought out over 6 under a similar schedule) and the criticisms of his game/fit were similar as well. Of course OEL then went on to win the cup 😁

Not looking at him as the next Jarome, just as a rising prospect who fits nicely into our team DNA (plays fast, rush skills), yet also adds needed elements (o-zone tenacity, willingness to go to the hard areas) — in short, great fit and value at #11.

Terrible contract ends predictably. This better mean more than simply cost-cutting or some kind of malformed “addition by subtraction” scheme.