mjd1001

I have thought about this a lot. I really like the player he has been the last few years and that is the type of player the Sabres need. But I can't get by the fact that anytime, maybe right now, he'll not be the same player because of age and overall workload he has been though. Even if Calgary kept $2m or even $3m for the entire length of the deal, what you may be trading for is a guy that is worth his contract for 1 year, and someone you are stuck with for 3 or 4 years that you totally regret. I thought for a minute the 35+ rule would be a way around this regarding a buyout, but it appears the deal must be SIGNED at age 35 or later. Kadri signed this deal before he was 35, so the preferential buyout rules to age 35+ would not apply to him. Remember in 2 years from now, Skinner's buyout hits them hard ($4.4 million in dead money in 2025-26 and $6.4 million in dead money in 2026-2027). If you trade for Kadri, you might be paying him $7m (even $5m if Calgary retained) for a guy vastly declining who is 35 years old in one of those years and 36 years old in another. I'm not sure I want $11.4 million and $13.4 million tied up with Dead cap Skinner money AND an older Kadri...right at a time that the current crop of young guys is going to need to get paid. Forget about the higher Skinner cap hit in 26/27, just look at 25/27. You will have an aging Kadri, and between Skinners Buyout and him, plus you have Thompson, Cozens, Tuch, Dahlin, Power, Samuelson, Clifton, and UPL Signed. That is over $60m already, with less than half the roster signed and how do you pay for a new Deal for Quinn? Peterka? Possibly Byram and Levi? And fill out the rest of the roster? And then of course it gets that much worse the following year when Skinner counts more against the Cap, Kadri is one year older even, and Benson will need a new deal. I know it is likely Kadri would help this year, but for how much he would help this year, I don't think its close to worth it for what he does to your roster/cap/signing ability the next 4 years.

I agree. I understand all the points that the post above are making for why he would fit on this team, but again, when he is starting the season at 34, he can/might/ hit that wall really quick. 2 years from now? Next year? A month into this season? None of that would surprise me. You very well could be getting someone what you have 3/4 of this board wanting to buy out the remaining 4 years of a deal. You can criticize this team, and Adams for not making enough "win now" moves. For not bringing in enough 26-30 year old vets who ":know how to win'. Bringing in a 34 year old guy on a big contract who is signed for years and years is just overcompensating.

I like to go to a game or two every once in a while to take in the atmosphere, especially if its a weekend game where there are more people there. But normally I enjoy the games just as much from home. Thinking about my entire life watching this team, by chance most of the games I have gone to over the 20-25 years, when I went they were never good. When they were good (my best memories of the team) I always was watching on Television. If/when this team gets good again, the 'nostalgic' feeling for me will be if I can do what I did when they were good last time...watch the pregame, get my food/snacks, get a comfortable spot on the couch or chair, and watch from home.

I'll have to double check, but I think he is turning 34 next month, which means when his deal is up, he'll be 38...about 4-5 months from turning 39.

I think Kadri has really good production the last 3 seasons, but he is going to be 34 at the start of the season and has a LOT of miles on him. I'm not sure when he hits the 'age wall' but it could be any day, literally. Would he make the team better right now? Yeah, I think he would but my worry is for how long? I don't think all that long. Plus he is a pretty slow (below average) skater, the team seems to be moving away from that, and he's sure not getting any faster as he gets older. 3 years ago with him at 31 I would consider it, but I'm not trading much for a guy that age with 5 years left on his deal. Apparently he want to move back 'east', seeing he is from London, ON, I think Detroit might be one to watch. If Pittsburgh is bringing the 'old' band back this year and want to make one run at the playoffs, maybe them? (but they have no prospects to offer for him). Did he leave Toronto on good terms? He is also the kind of player they can use for sure. If Toronto offered their 2026 first...Robertson (who asked to be traded), and something to make the cap work until Tavares comes off the books or can be resigned at a lower deal, I think that would REALLY help the leafs. As for the price...Krebs? Sure. A future first (assuming lotter protected)...eh...Its not that I value it for using it next year, but I wonder as the season goes on if it might be better used on someone else? And Rosen....he certainly is not untouchable at all, but many on here seem to think he's entering Bust territory already...yet I think he might actually become a very good 2-way 3rd liner (a guy who gets you 10-20 goals eventually WITH a good 2 way game).

Depends on the style of play. As a team get to a +10 goal differential, you are just about assured to be in the playoffs. Allow 270 goals, but score 280...doesn't matter you are probably in. As a team get to +30/+40 and you are in and likely viewed as a serious threat to advance. Score 280, allow 240.....score 250 and allow 210...doesn't matter much. Its hard to put numbers on how the goalie(s) will play without knowing the style of play in front of them.

I think Thompson, Bryam, Power, and Quinn are over 'bets'. (of course the issue with them is possible injuries.) Cozens and Tuch I'm a bit worried with them reaching those numbers. If Tuch is healthy and with Tage all year sure, but that "if" is pretty big.

Its like with Uwe Krupp, Schmelik...and many others...you are big so why don't you hit people? You know what else size can do for you? You take up a lot of ice. Between your stick and your reach, there is a lot less room out there, and sometimes when you hit someone, you take yourself out of the play and the team D would be better if you just held your position.

One one hand it is frustrating they could spend more, especially on one or 2 year deals. But on the other hand, if its a choice of signing a vet 28-30 year old to a longer term, high dollar deal and then NOT having money to pay guys like Peterka and Quinn in a couple of years.....I'd rather they not bring in the high priced guy and instead confirm what you have in the young guys on your roster and pay then when the time comes. Of course there is a 'middle ground' where you do MORE than they have without giving out bad contracts. That is where I wish they would be.

So my question is...does the team have the deferred part of the contract hit their cap AFTER the contract is done? If a deal is signed where 5 million is deferred to AFTER the contract is done, so it doesn't hit the cap during the contract, does that $5m count against the cap when it is paid out?

I agree for the most part, but the question is....is there a chance any of them would thrive under Ruff more than Granato? Or maybe the other way around? Tage I think gets you 50 this year. I have said that over and over since last season ended (if healthy). Quinn, JJP...both have the potential this year to give you 30. Power is just so young and many/most 2-way D-men just take time to get to be their best. He had an up and down year last year but I expect him to be better every year for the next 2-3 seasons. Dahlin? If the TEAM plays better around him (they make the playoffs/100 points) he should be a Norris candidate. Sure, Makar is great, so is Fox....but in EVERY aspect of the game (hitting, passing, skating, defensive positioning, ice time), I think he might be the most talented/well rounded D-man in the game. Lest just hope they all respond under Ruff.

Ruff is the wildcard, at least for the first 20 games or so. I think he is a good coach, a really good coach, I'm happy with the hire. But, how will each player respond to his style? I expect the first 20 games to be rough, I expect they to start to play very well after that. But what I also expect is there might be a player or two that we don't think much of that will have a major role, but also one of the top 5-8 players here now that totally underperform. Overall, I just can't wait for the season to start. I don't love they are starting overseas this year, and HATE it is against New Jersey (I expect them to have an 0-2 start, I think Jersey is that good), but overall I have a lot of anticipation for the season as a whole. lets get started.

I tried it, but I am so used to the interface from capfriendly....that is why I go with capwages...they have it laid out the same way. Honestly I do go to puckpedia every so often anyway just to see if anyone is putting more info up. Its interesting to see if the Blues thing is picked up by other teams, but it doesn't really help much when you want the whole league available.

Capfriendly is gone Blues look like they just came out with a version of their own, looks like just for the Blues now and only appears to be an app. Just a reminder: try Capwages.com It seems like many still don't know about capwages, but its close to a clone of what capfriendly was.

To be a top 10 team in the league (basically a team with a realistic chance of moving forward in the playoffs), you need to be about a +40 on the goals by the end of the season. Now I'm sure the Sabres want to be as good as they can be, but maybe they are going to 'sacrifice' getting to 270, or 290+, and accept a bit less if they can get/keep the goals down. Yeah, those 3rd and 4th lines don't look to be scoring much, but what it they are a SIGNIFICANT improvement over what was here last year? Last year the Sabres allowed about 2.5 goals per game for MORE than the 2nd half of the season (Since January 1). So it wasn't a short stretch, for a 'majority' of the season they allowed right around that 2.5 goal average. What if they get better defensive zone play from the forwards AND the young D-men play a bit better now that they are one year older. 2.5 goals per game shouldn't be out of reach if you get those (even slight) improvements allowing for UPL to have a (slight) regression. 2.5 goals per game, IF it is possible, would mean they only need to score about 250 on the season to be closer to that +40 overall number. So, its great to want to get more goals and figure out where they are coming from. But if the changes you made keep your goals allowed near (or likely just above) that 200 mark for the season, you only 'need' to score in the mid 240-250 range to be a very good team.

To think when he bought the team remember: "hockey heaven" “Starting today, there will be no financial mandates on the Buffalo Sabres’ hockey department” “There is no salary cap in the National Hockey League on scouting budgets and player development budgets.", ‘If I want to make some money, I’ll drill another well.’” "Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres’ reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup." Remember what we were all (most) feeling after that press conference? And to think, since then basically we have seen the worst run over that length of time EVER in ANY MAJOR sport in North American history. It is mind boggling how you can basically proclaim that you are going to take a small market franchise and do anything and everything possible to win the cup (multiple cups) and then proceed to be the worse ever at almost everything regarding success. That is some seriously messed up stuff if you really think deeply about it. If you went back to the day of Pegula's press conference and someone told you that over the next 15 year, they would manage 'only' 7 or 8 playoff appearances, 2-3 series wins, and maybe make the conference finals once but never make (let alone win) the cup, well, if we heard that back then we would be pretty disappointed. But we didn't get that. None of it, not even close. I think its pretty safe to say Pegula's ownership thus far over the Sabres is the worst ownership performance ever. Anywhere in major sports (unless you want to through in some Donald Sterling lack-of-success with the racism added on top of it)

I need camp and preseason to start. Things have been really slow. I've even been looking at more 'around the league' stuff than usual the past few weeks, not much going on, not much discussion. Maybe this time of the year it is always like this and I don't remember it well. I just really want something to get going.

Could computers/programming/AI 'reverse engineer' (in a way) what I highlighted above? The Computer/AI creates the model for the team by analyzing what is working. Meaning, instead of you creating the ideal 'model' of what you want and then have the ai look for it...how about AI simply look at what is working (who are the best goaltenders) and analyze what they are doing that makes them successful? Do they come out of the net a few inches more than other goalies? Do they play a rush from 25% off the center of the net slightly different position than other goalies do? Are there things ANY goaltender does when they do have a good game/good save that they don't even know they are doing that makes them successful? The player themself might not know that...and the difference between success and failure might be something SO SMALL that the human eye doesn't recognize it.....but a computer/AI can analyze things frame by frame, hundreds of thousand of total frames of gameplay, and look for even the smallest things. It can then 'spit out' its conclusions, a human coach and look at it and see if its on to something that no one else saw (or had the time to see). That can then be used as a coaching tool for your current players, or you now can have the SAME AI look for things in scouting video of free agents/prospects.

Again, I am not a huge Krebs fan. On this forum I have probably criticized him, and what he has done in this lineup more than any other player besides Cozens. I was just pointing out there are times when a player 'turns things around' at a very late age. Yes, there are some guys that are hits right away. Some take until they are 24 or 25 and then become great players. The two I mentioned, and you re-mentioned, were borderline busts, then had a great scoring year, and since then are still 'better' than they were at Krebs age. My whole point is there are players that turn into all levels at all different ages. Should the Sabres keep him around 2-3 more years? I'd personnaly like to start with 1 year...see how it goes. And even then, that is where I will trust the scouting staff and Ruff to make that decision. They know a lot more about young players and hockey in general than I do.

Analytics looks just at the numbers for the most part. Very deep And specific numbers, but you're just analyzing the numbers. Is it possible artificial intelligence IS The move back to more of an eye test? The artificial intelligence could be what analyzes the videos, looks for trends, and merges that with the pure analytics?

Oh.... I've never denied, beyond the ones you mentioned, there are many, many more drafted in the middle too late first round that do turn into busts. The odds are definitely against him at this point. I'm just saying if management thinks there is even a chance that he could grow into more than he is now, it wouldn't be unprecedented. There are those who didn't turn into legit NHL players until their mid-twenties. I never really liked his game, even when he first put on the uniform. I thought... He's probably not going to be good right now, but let's see a flash of something... I never saw that flash. I think he may not even be a good third or fourth liner, he may be a journeyman, that AAA type guy. I'm just willing to have him hang around another year... Provided he doesn't take too much ice time away from a player who's clearly better

Probably, but not 100%. There are first and early 2nd rounders that looked liked busts until they got to 24 or later... -Lawson Crouse averaged under 10 goals per season, he only hit 20+ after he turned 24. -Joel Erikson Ek played 4 seasons without hitting 10 goals, after his 24 year old season, he has scored 20-30 every year since -Sam Bennet was widely considered a bust, averaging just over 10 goals a season until he was 25. At 25, he scored 28. -Jared McCann never got out of the teens in goals through 24 years of age. Since he turned 25, he has scored 27, 40, and 29. -Elias Lindholm only reached the teens in goals until he was 24, at 25 he put up 29 goals, and at 27 hit 40. -Valeri Nikushkin put up 46 total goals over 6 seasons (including a season he played 59 games with ZERO goals) through 25 years old. In the 3 years since he turned 26 he has 70 goals in 169 games (34 goal per 82 pace) -Ryan Hartman was another first round pick. He played in the NHL from age 20-26, never breaking the teens, and most of the time in single digits for goals. At age 27 he scored 34. There are other examples. Now, with all that said, I personally don't think Krebs has 'it'. He supposedly has great vision/passing, but I remember ONE time all last season he seemed to see the ice well and made a good pass. If they cut him or traded him for a mid round pick now, I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Its just that...every once in a while, you have guys that look like totals busts and end up 'getting it' past age 24.

I guess my thinking is...We are where right now very close to what Taro T is saying, yet its possible to get to where LTS is saying. My question is, how long between those? And at what point does some super-rich owner who may (or may not) know anything about AI programming decide he/she wants to develop a department to try to see what it can do for the team. Maybe its not strictly "learning AI" but something like....analyzing film of your own players just like coaches do, but analyzing each player and doing so almost frame by frame, 1/10th of a second by 10th of a second, seeing how often they react one way vs react another way, spitting out trends on every player in the league in more detail than ever before..and going from there? Seeing how you can exploit other players, or how your players can get better, not on a macro level, but on a tiny small micro level that coaches haven't broken down film before. Maybe almost as close as seeing a player who 'tips' which way he is going to pass the puck by the slightest positioning of his hands on his stick, or a small 'tell' that someone positions their feet slightly differently before a pass vs a shot. Something that coaches simply cannot analyze every single player on ever team, frame by frame of video...that a computer can do in a matter of minutes.

Maybe anyone out there is interested in this topic, Its not something I think about all the time but I do think about it. What is next after analytics...AI? Or maybe AI makes analytics better/more useful? And what exactly is AI we are talking about? In some ways Artificial intelligence is overhyped, it is no where near doing some things we want. In other ways, it is so far advanced, doing things we haven't ever dreamt of. In the middle, AI is advanced but it really isn't what we think of AI as...it is analyzing tons of data but in some ways its not quite teaching itself and evolving as much as we thought it would be. Put that discussion aside, Can it give a team an edge in a sport? Can AI analyze tactics in hockey, maybe play calling in football, and determine trends quicker than a whole room full of coaches does now? Can it 'look for' trends analyzing ALL data (even data we don't look at) and learn which prospects are more likely to be stars? Or maybe the particular type of 'development' a player needs to better reach their peak? Think about this, trends that have worked in sports (the trap, the left wing lock in hockey, or different formations in football), at one point they weren't being used, someone thought of them, put them into play......can't things like that be 'thought' of quicker and discovered and tested 'quicker' by using complex programs/AI based software? Maybe complex programs aren't there yet, and might be years away, but how much should each team be investing into this? Should a team like the Sabres or Bills hold open interviews....interview software engineers who are involved in AI and basically say to them "We don't know much about AI in sports, but tell us what you think YOU can do to implement an AI program and tell us how it can help us?" I saw a post in Twitter and it is showing the current level of software/AI...how much it actually is impacting Amazon right now, that is what got me thinking. Anyone have any thoughts?

Maybe they will give up fewer goals...but...the key may be to just not 'mess up' how they played in the 2nd half of last season giving up goals, whether that is through goaltending, defensive play, or both. Personally, I think something changed with this team right about January 1, where the forwards started playing MUCH better from the turn of the calendar into 2024 through the end of the season. One of the things I enjoy is looking at each goal allowed game by game (I try to post about it after games) and see if there was something OBVIOUS that caused the goals allowed. And usually, it was a forward (or a couple of them) that made an OBVIOUS mistake that led to close to 1/2 of the goals allowed. That almost stopped after the first of the year. Sure, the PK had some issues, and Cozens still chased a lot to get him out of position, but they got a lot better and it was noticable. The Sabres allowed a total of 112 goals in their last 44 games (basically since the calendar turned to 2024.) That's about 2.55 goals per 60/game. Over 82 games, that is 209 goals allowed. Over last season, only 2 teams allowed less goals than that. If part of that is UPL, and part of that is the forwards just playing better in their own zone, then I think...don't mess that up! just find a way to score 3-4 more goals per month and you are where you need to be. They did score 135 since Jan 1 while allowing 112. They were a plus 23 in goal differential. YES, I KNOW that we can always take small segments of a season and project them over long stretches to make a point we want to make...and it always doesn't work. So, this math exercise can be dangerous. But, a +35 over the last 44 games (NOT an insignificant sample size) is a +65 over an 82 game stretch. Remember, in the league, and in particular the east, if you are a positive team over the entire year in goal differential, you make the playoffs more than 90% of the time. Only 2 teams last year were better than a +65 for the season. So again, yeah, every team has stretches like that. But again, take what you did for the 2nd half of last year...make it a bit better but don't mess up what they started to do.