RochesterExpat

I was wrong by the way. Sorry 😞 This is true if you are offering a contract between 1 and 5 years in length. Robertson is reportedly holding out because he wants $ and term both. It's safe to assume that Buffalo is going to offer him the max term (seven years). Offer sheet AAV is calculated on the lesser of: - Number of years offered, or - Five years. When calculating a contract of 6 or 7 years, you will use 5 years for AAV. This dramatically changes the ranges in which Buffalo could offer sheet Robertson. Buffalo can afford to offer $10.5+ AAV because they currently hold the required draft picks. That's a contract value of 5 * $10.5m, or $52.5m. On a six year contract, the real AAV on a $52.5m total contract value would be $8.75m a year, but for the offer sheet AAV calculation it's still $10.5m. On a seven year contract, the real AAV on a $52.5m total contract value is $7.5m a year with the same $10.5m offer sheet AAV. Therefore, assuming that Buffalo would offer sheet a contract with 7 years of length, Buffalo could offer him $8.5-9m a year which is a reasonable amount, and they would still have the necessary draft picks to pull it off. Of course, getting him to sign it and Dallas not just matching it are entirely different stories. Of course, none of that is going to happen because real offer sheets (not just petty actions by owners) never happen. But I did want to correct the record and admit to my error. I didn't realize that about offer sheets. They just don't come up very often...

I'm assuming he meant $1-2m more than what Robertson signed for and I don't think that's an unreasonable ask.

DG has talked about pairs multiple times and referenced Skinner and TT as an example of two players with good chemistry. There's virtually zero chance they're not playing together at the start of season. TT established himself as the play driver on line one last season. Skinner has long since established that he's not a play driver and I think one of the points of contention he had with the Hockey Terrorist. It's fortunate the two of those have great chemistry. I think DG is using the preseason to measure Tuch's ability to drive plays on lines with more finesse players. Tuch was never put in that position in Vegas because he was somewhat buried in the depth chart. My $.02 on the lines and what DG is looking at specifically: [Quinn-Thompson-Olofsson] is, frankly, an evaluation of Jack Quinn's NHL readiness by placing him next to two established NHL players, and a secondary look at the Thompson/Olofsson chemistry. DG likes to challenge young players. Putting Quinn on the "first" line is pretty much perfectly in line with his philosophy. [Skinner - Mitts - Tuch] is a decent line on paper but it will only work if Tuch can drive the plays because neither Skinner or Mitts will fill that role. I think Buffalo is still evaluating Mitts at center vs wing. More importantly though, I think they're looking at Tuch's abilities to drive plays independent of TT. Tuch was never put in that position in Vegas because he was somewhat buried in the depth chart. [Krebs-Cozens-Peterka] this is like the EA NHL line of mixing a power forward, play maker and sniper/unicorn. Cozens played with Peterka in the first preseason game and Peterka looked much better in Game 1 than Game 3, so this could an evaluation of chemistry between the two. I also think this is to compare Krebs vs Peterka's readiness for the NHL since Krebs has not played well this preseason. If Krebs is going to end up on wing during the season and Peterka shows he's more prepared, we might see Krebs in Rochester. Unlikely but possible. [Asplund-Girgensons-Okposo] is probably the real 4th line with the possibility of Asplund/Okposo moving to the third line and Hinostroza slotting in on the 4th. Regardless, this is a decent shutdown line that will likely outscore most other 4th lines the NHL. May as well start getting reps in now. [Bjork-Savoie-Hinostroza] is basically who is leftover at this point. Bjork isn't likely to make the roster. Savoie will play his 10 games at most before being sent back to juniors. Buffalo knows what they have in Hinostroza and don't really need to evaluate him in the lineup per se. I would suggest that at least one benefit of this practice line is Buffalo is evaluating Savoie's speed against Hinostroza's. Both are Ferraris on the ice. [Samuelsson-Dahlin] probably the opening night 1st D pairing. Just getting reps in. [Power-Jokiharju] is probably the opening night 2nd D pairing. Just getting reps in. God I hate this pairing. [Bryson-Fitzgerald / Davies-Lyubushkin] is just evaluating if there is any chemistry in D pairings for the 5th/6th spots. Considering I think Bush has played very well in the preseason and they just signed him, I'm guessing this is really a fight for the 6th spot.

I think this is largely true. Norris (8x$7.95m) certainly is since he's the same draft year/age at signing, Stutzle (8x$8.350) because similar projections, and even Tkachuk's (7x$8.14m) contract from last year are decent comps. I think the other big contract to add as a comp is Robert Thomas with St Louis. Robertson is 20 days younger and scored two more points in two more games. Both play right wing. Robertson scored 41 goals to Thomas' 20 goals. Thomas signed an 8x$8.125m in July. I'd argue Robertson goes a bit higher than that because of his goal scoring, but it's a good comp to add to the mix. Thomas also had better line mates, but that's a different story. The funny bit is Dallas media is using Tage Thompson's contract as the floor. Thompson is 2 years older and had fewer points so I'm quite certain it's a floor, but I don't think it's the floor. I think if Norris/Stutzle are comps then, arguably, they're the floor seeing as how Robertson has the better stats. It is what it is. Dallas messed up by waiting on the extension. They let other teams drive the value up. I'd say 4 months ago people would have thought $7m was the ceiling because the flat cap. We now all but officially know that the cap is going to take some big jumps in 24 and 25. Teams want to lock in players to term now so the cap hit % is lower in the future. It blows my mind that Dallas isn't willing to offer him 8x$8.5m. I'm also surprised Robertson doesn't want to bridge now and ask for a massive payday in 2 years when the cap starts going up. I guess maybe Dallas is trying to get him to bridge at $4-5m or something stupid.

Clearly they read my Ted Talk in the prospects challenge thread.

Not to throw fuel on the fire, but I rewatched the game today (I missed it yesterday as I was coaching 8U). I thought Comrie played well. One of four goals (already discussed) I'd argue he should have had, but that score could have been 7-0 at the end of the first period if we had Tokarski or end-of-the-season Anderson in net. I struggle to takeaway from that game that Comrie played poorly. I don't understand that view, I'm sorry. If you were expecting the second coming of Hasek then he was never going to reach your expectations in the first place. My takeaways from that game: - That defense was awful and did not play well with each other at all. Holy hell. Laaksonen was out of position a bunch and Bryson and Fitzgerald do not play well with each other at all. I don't think Bryson's game was terrible, but something was weirdly off about Fitzgerald. - Rosen and Krebs got pushed around a lot. Kind of concerned about Krebs. Less so for Rosen at the moment. Rosen was invisible on the ice if he wasn't getting pushed around (he also didn't appear to get many shifts). - Quinn has no problem shooting the puck, but he's also patient enough to make plays without forcing it. That's exactly what he did with the Priskie goal where he waited for a better opportunity before making a play. Considering how the rest of the game was going, this is a pretty good sign of maturity for a 21 year old. - Kozak/Weissbach could make an interesting pairing in Rochester. - Cederqvist must not have got a lot of minutes because he was on the ice about as much as Rosen, but he was noticeable when he was on the ice. - Bjork is not making the roster.

Agreed. That's why I said there hasn't been any official number. Technically the closest to an 'officially' number is $7m as referenced by the Dallas Stars owner, Gaglardi, when he was complaining about handing out big contracts on expiring ELCs. People already posted the quote, but it's worth adding the whole quote because the last bit that's always left out is pretty important. "A kid in the third year of his entry-level (deal) puts up 40 goals and now he wants to make $7 million," he said. "If you want term with that player, he's going to take you higher than that. … The stars are taking all the money, and the guys in the middle are getting squeezed."He added, "I think there's a lot of players in the league making a million dollars who are better players, and then the guys who can put the puck in the net are getting too big a piece of the pie. … I don't like it, but that's the market, and that's the way it works."

I will keep this out of the trade thread, but if you need some entertainment, go read Twitter and search for Jason Robertson. Then look for any one with a Dallas Stars affiliation. Some great examples: Ah, yes, only three contracts for 9.5x3, 9.85x5, and 3.65x3. So just $23m tied up for three years on bad contracts. It's a stretch to say tying up 28% of the cap space on bad contracts qualifies as "so many." Also the quotes throwing Robertson under the bus for not signing. Yeah, that'll teach him. We'll pull the 5'8" 19 year old kid from the WHL and slot him in as third line center and that easily replaces a 40 goal scorer.

I believe KA's strategy is to get something in return for cap relief, but if Dallas won't give Robertson what he wants and neither camp will budge, I think KA wants Dallas to know the door is open and Buffalo has the assets available to return without further hurting Dallas' cap situation next year for Hintz (Buffalo could retain for two years on VO for example). I honestly believe that is the situation we're in. Officially, no. Most are referencing this: Which, in fairness, Weekes is usually pretty accurate even if he's a bit of an oddball.

Going to catch fire for this, but 40 goals isn't elite at the OHL level. It's no slouch, sure, and the fact he did it in 16-17, 17-18 and 18-19 is impressive. OHL leading scorers are almost always above 50 goals per season if not 60. I would argue that's where we start using the term "elite." And before we argue that he was nearly a goal-per-game pace before being traded in 18-19, it was because the Frontenacs were awful and he was getting all the ice time. He was also 19 and physically a man among boys as often happens for the final season in major junior. He was traded so the Frontenacs could tank for Shane Wright funny enough. Drew Stafford was the same age when he started pro hockey and scored 22 goals in 34 games in the AHL and 13 goals in 41 games in Buffalo--in the same year. Drew Stafford is not an elite goal scorer. This argument I understand and this is where it becomes purely subjective. I don't believe that necessarily qualifies you as elite because I think that term should be used very sparingly (I also get annoyed that we have 'generational talents' in every other draft). Not to be pedantic about it, but I'm in agreement with mjd1001 that elite should be reserved for the top 10 (or higher) in the league and specifically players who are consistently there. The problem is EA Sports now has us applying the elite label to players who don't deserve it... but that's a different story. Jason Robertson is a great hockey player--not just good. He is a genuinely great scorer. He might end up in the top 10 consistently in scoring at some point in which case we can revisit this conversation. But as of right now? No, he is not. I would argue that us even debating whether he is an elite talent suggests he isn't. There is no debating Connor McDavid, Nathan MacKinnon, Auston Matthews, Nikita Kucherov, etc. are elite hockey players or that Alexander Ovechkin is an elite goal scorer. But there is no debate because those players are genuinely elite as they've consistently proven it. In defense of two or less, he only ever called him an elite goal scorer. You were responding to others who used the term elite and he chimed in. He wasn't the one moving the goal posts. His argument itself was that he was an elite goal scorer. You can absolutely be elite at finishing or elite at playmaking without having the rest of your game fit the criteria for being an elite hockey player. I would also agree with you that Robertson is on the cusp of qualifying as an elite goal scorer. He just isn't there yet. I also recognize the argument that a player with a 41 goal season is arguably an elite finisher.

Using the Kevin Fiala trade as a comparable you're not far off on what he should go for. Robertson is not going to command the trades people are talking about. He is an unsigned (albeit restricted) player with one and a half very good/great seasons. He is not going for more than Jack Eichel, sorry. I agree and I also think it was only mentioned because it was more than a simple phone call. That being said, I'd be willing to bet the conversation went like this: That wouldn't surprise me at all.

I was coaching 8U tonight and apparently we could have swapped in for Buffalo during the first period from the sounds of it. Kind of glad I missed the game.

Bolded the important part. But also yes.

If Buffalo could add Robertson for VO/Mitts/1st, but the cost of retaining $2m in cap for two years on VO's contract kept KA from doing it, I'd be moving back to Buffalo and starting a pitchfork store next to Harborcenter. The good news is after a week I could afford to buy the team and fire KA.

I'm sure KA called Dallas. That was the extent of it. Frankly if KA didn't call Dallas to ask his extension should be pulled.

Funny enough, Dallas doesn't have the $7.5m in cap space for VO and Mitts.

We got Bishop and a 7th (Linus Sjodin). We gave up future considerations. Unless you mean to package Robertson + future considerations....

It would be the most Buffalo thing ever for the Sabres to be up 3 games to zero in the SCF and then civilization collapses.

I'm decidedly in this camp. We know he's been active on draft days inquiring about moving picks (up, down and sideways). I suspect he made a call to Dallas to ask what they'd be interested in. I'm also pretty sure at least 20 other GMs have picked up the phone as well. I suspect it'll be an unprotected 1st.

I suspect you'll be adding at least one of the 2nds to that because Robertson's age.

<$1.3m (lol) $2.1-4.2m (lol) $10.5m+ at the cost of 4 1st round picks (lol). Buffalo would need to get back our third round pick to offer sheet any other ranges.

I'm bummed that we didn't get to see him play in the pre-season. He looked good in his brief outing against Montreal in the Prospect Challenge and when we saw him at Development Camp. I really wanted to see how he stacked up against "the men" in the preseason.

I came back to this thread to say this about Lybushkin and Pilut. Pilut has played very well and I think many of us (myself included) were sleeping on him. To be a fly on the wall in the Sabres’ office right now…

Andy should have had that.

Rousek with a nice little play. Biro with the finish.