Archie Lee

Unless I missed something, there was never any confirmation of this. What Adams hinted at was that Arizona wanted Savoie rather than our first and that he wasn’t going to do that. So Arizona took Ottawa’s first, which at the time was looking like it would be higher than ours (and it was). There was never an indication, that I recall, that Arizona was willing to take less from Ottawa than what we were offering.

I could see a scenario where Helenius is one of the 4 best centres in a camp (not just the Sabres's camp) and makes the NHL. If he was one of the 4 best centres for the Bruins or the Lightning or the Stars, he would be surrounded by veterans who could help him ride the waves of a long NHL season, while he helps the team reach the playoffs and gains valuable experience. Here he would be surrounded by players only a few years older who are trying to find their way on their own or with the help of other youngish players who came up in the same poorly thought-out environment.

For me it will be the day they shut down capfriendly.

Not sure on the value, but he is, in my view, the sort of 4th line player that changes our make-up. Big, physical, blocks shots, kills penalties. As part of a larger strategy that comes to fruition over the next 3-4 days, I’m fine. Obviously there needs to be more.

At this point I would have to say it is likely that we do make all of the picks, though maybe we will combine a couple to trade up or move one for a comparable future pick. If we make a trade today I think it will be a mid-rd pick for a player like Iafallo (useful bottom 6 player who is overpaid but only has one or two years left on his deal).

It would not have been a popular move had Adams made it, but I actually think the Mikheyev deal would have been fine, particularly if we had also been able to sign Laferty. Mikheyev is overpaid to be sure, but only has two years left and I think is a useful bottom 6 player. Of course, he has trade protection also (12 team no trade list), so it maybe wasn't an option.

I suspect you are right and a Skinner buyout is linked to making a trade for a top 6 forward. Adams won't do anything so bold, but I would love it if they announced a Skinner buyout and then also stated that they planned to be major players in the UFA market on Monday. Let the world know that we are looking to spend some money. Guentzel, Stamkos, Lindholm, Marchessault and Kane are the big 5 UFA forwards. I don't see us being in play for any of them. After those 5 though, there are around 20 legit middle 6 forward options available. I recognize that Buffalo may not be choice #1 for many of these players, but I just can't believe that it is impossible to convince 3 of them to sign with the Sabres if we are prepared to pay at the high-end of their contract projections.

Not making excuses for Adams. His failure to recognize the need for at least incremental veteran improvements with the forwards last off-season has put him in this position where there is so much to do in 5 days. Still there is time and opportunity to make meaningful moves. I think we may still see a trade or two in the next couple of days. Less exciting players like Laughton and Iafallo are probably available. These are not franchise altering moves (and I don't mean to limit trade options in this category to these two less than sexy players), but they would change the complexion of the bottom 6 and add a new veteran presence to the team. This represents the 2nd year in a row where there was no NHL player movement when it comes to trades and the 1st rd of the draft. Maybe it is time to pivot to a UFA strategy. If the Sabres commit to buying out Skinner, focus on conservative deals for their RFA's, and slot Greenway and Krebs into 4th line roles, then there are UFA's available who could make-up a very good middle-6 forward line: Stephenson, Monahan, Wennberg, Domi, Foegele, Teravainen, Toffoli, Debrusk, Duclair, Henrique, Roslovic, Heinen, etc., will be sought after. With a Skinner buyout we would have the cap space to offer top deals in an effort to obtain 3 of them. It would mean a change of focus from trying to trade prospects for NHL players who are perhaps a little younger and have a longer runway, towards using prospects to replace players we can't afford to keep. If we signed, as an example, Stephenson, Foegele and Duclair to 3-5 year deals at top dollar (relative to their contract projections), it would mean that we likely would have to move some players next season. Maybe we can only keep one of Byram, Peterka and Quinn or have to move Samuelsson (or Tuch). I don't expect anything so bold. It is there as an option though.

Love the pick. Here’s hoping he is our Aho. Now make some moves between now and Tuesday that relate to the coming season. Lots of time left.

Fun exercise, but I really doubt a 3rd line role playing with Noah Cates will entice Kane to sign here.

I'm not great at valuing NHL talent v. draft picks. There are players though who might be available, who would change the team dynamic and who shouldn't cost a first. They aren't sexy names, but players like Laughton, Dowd, Iafallo, Mathieu Joseph, maybe Kakko, and others, might be had for post-1st-rd picks. Maybe we are grabbing an extra 2nd in order to make a move for a lesser player or two. My gut tells me that this isn't part of a larger plan (much like Byram for Mitts). I think San Jose wanted to move up and were willing to meet our ask, and and since we had nothing going on for #11, we made the trade.

Not reading any specific implication into your comment, but it seems likely if we trade for Necas there will be a few “why do we even have Ventura” and “does Adams even consider analytics” posts. I get it, but what makes people think our analytics team doesn’t love Necas? Our internal models may well tell a story that the public models don’t. Why pay a small fortune for an internal analytics team and model development if we are just going to go by what J Fresh tweets (and I like J Fresh).

Agreed. My prospect knowledge comes from what I have read and not what I’ve seen (I have seen almost nothing). The point is that for a player to fall in the draft another has to rise. When you are drafting outside of the top 5 the tendency is for fans to look for someone to fall when it is always possible that your team actually likes a player who will be considered a bit of a reach. There appears to be no inside info in this guys mock, just an attempt to apply some logic that may well be very faulty (which is good, because it got me reading about a player I had not considered much). I don’t think we are taking Luchanko, but would not be shocked if we take a player rated in the 18-22 range, because we did that just 3 years ago.

A little bit I guess, but I think it would be like the Rosen draft. We were picking 13 and as fans generally focused on who might fall, not recognizing that the Sabres might be a team that reaches a bit. The consolidated rankings had Rosen around 20-21. We reached, but not ridiculously so. Luchanko come in around 19 in consolidated rankings. It wouldn’t be that much of a head scratcher.

Correct, but then question was “how much cap space do they have before the buyout”.

This is the correct answer and I know that you’re just giving the raw $ number (Not suggesting you are being misleading). Unless they do something unexpected though, at least $8 million of that and as much as $11 million, is going to UPL, Joker, Krebs and Bryson. That still leaves money to do some meaningful stuff, but close to half of that $23.5 could be gone on existing RFA’s.

For us, the hump is the playoffs.

I don’t like the idea of Necas as a centre and bumping Cozens to 3C. If we acquire Necas then I want him in the top 6 playing with Thompson or Cozens (I’m indifferent to who plays centre; they can try Necas at centre with Cozens on the wing and then switch it up if it doesn’t work). With a Skinner buyout it doesn’t need to be our only move. Could still grab Mangiapane in trade or Stephenson as UFA. My guess is that Carolina would want Quinn or Peterka and I’m not sure that’s a good deal (actually think it would be a bad deal).

Fair enough. I just don’t think that a Skinner signing would even register as a factor in what the Leafs can do if they move Marner.

I don’t get the connection? They are worlds apart as players.

Great series. Better team won, but boy it was close. Panthers are maybe the best team I have seen at taking away shooting lanes. The Oilers didn’t back down from any of the dirtbag stuff and because of that Florida didn’t do as much of it. Tonight, and early in the series, I thought the Oilers were much too quick to shorten their bench. They ran their top 5 into the ice and by game’s end there was nothing left in the tank. Fun to watch though. Congrats to both teams and mostly to the Panthers of course. Now let’s make some trades.

Agree on 3 of your 4 views. - I would be good with the Washington deal. I think if we really wanted to make this happen then we should just make it Dowd and Jensen for Joker and a 2nd. Not sure if the Caps been do that as it doesn’t make them a better team now. - The Blueger deal would be good. - Don’t understand the Farabee deal. - My one difference from you is on Foegele. I think he is just a really good middle six glue player. I think he is like pre-Oilers Hyman. Not saying he is going to become a 50 goal scorer (not close), but I think he can play higher in the line-up and that there is more offence coming.

I didn’t make any excuses for Adams, nor did I suggest that you or I or anyone should view the team as up and coming, nor did I state Adams should not be fired if we miss the playoffs. I only pointed out that it’s far from a sure thing that he will be fired if we do miss the playoffs and offered an opinion on why the person who makes the decision, Pegula, might see it different than us.

I’m no expert either. I think Wheeler and Pronman are correct though that our 1st rd pick would be viewed as a more valuable asset than any of our prospects. Savoie had a great regular season. He was 19 though (not 17, like Catton). Also, I think Savoie’s performance against tougher competition may hurt his value a bit. He had a poor World Juniors, his playoff production dropped this year v last year and he did not have a strong Mem Cup tournament. I’m not personally down on Savoie, but I think it is fair to say his value has slipped.

If these players were dropped into the draft on Friday, they would go lower than where they were taken in their draft years.