What to do with Moulson?

[pi2000]

Moulson, even if he has a great comeback season isn't going to be protected because his salary is more valuable to the franchise then his production given his age.

 

GMTM may have a plan to dump Moulson on Vegas.

Play him on the PP, hope he scores 30.

 

The chances of us protecting Moulson in the expansion draft are 0.00000000000000000000001%

 

How many goals does he need to score before his contract not only becomes a significant value at $5mil, but also one you need to protect in the expansion draft as an integral part of your team?   

 

In my mind there are 2 distinct possibilities and neither results in BUF losing him in the expansion draft.

 

1 - His production tails off and he becomes expendable.    No team is willing to take on that contract in any sort of trade, and LV doesn't select him in the draft... why would they?   They want young players and older vets that can lead.   Moulson is neither.   At that point we're talking buyout or waivers and eating his contract.  

 

2 - (and most likely) He loves Buffalo and doesn't want to miss out whats to come.   He plays his heart out, has a career year scoring +30g.    Now there are decisions to be made....  are the Sabres a playoff contender?  If not, trade him for significant assets at the deadline to a contender.    If BUF is in the playoff hunt, you not only need to keep him this season, but he's suddenly a integral part of your team moving forward and must be protected in the draft.

[LGR4GM]

How many goals does he need to score before his contract not only becomes a significant value at $5mil, but also one you need to protect in the expansion draft as an integral part of your team?   

 

In my mind there are 2 distinct possibilities and neither results in BUF losing him in the expansion draft.

 

1 - His production tails off and he becomes expendable.    No team is willing to take on that contract in any sort of trade, and LV doesn't select him in the draft... why would they?   They want young players and older vets that can lead.   Moulson is neither.   At that point we're talking buyout or waivers and eating his contract.  

 

2 - (and most likely) He loves Buffalo and doesn't want to miss out whats to come.   He plays his heart out, has a career year scoring +30g.    Now there are decisions to be made....  are the Sabres a playoff contender?  If not, trade him for significant assets at the deadline to a contender.    If BUF is in the playoff hunt, you not only need to keep him this season, but he's suddenly a integral part of your team moving forward and must be protected in the draft.

Wasn't Moulson leading Eichel all last season when they lived together and stuff? 

 

Matt Moulson is about to turn 33. Even if he scores 30g this season, he still has 2 more seasons left at 5mil. Now Between Okposo, Nylander, Reinhart, and potentailly Kane/Ennis/Fasching/Bailey.... you don't have room in your top 6 for him. That leaves him in the bottom 6 where he lacks the physical edge or defensive awareness to play that style. There is no reason to protect a 33 year old player in the expansion draft when I could protect somebody else like Johan Larsson instead. 

 

Integral part of the team moving forward, that's a laugh. If Moulson is an integral part of your team you have up your rebuild. 

Edited October 17, 2016 by LGR4GM

[Sabel79]

Big picture, the best case scenario is Moulson going bananas this year and getting snagged by Vegas. GMTM could do so much more with that money (in theory, at any rate) than the value Matty would provide over the rest of his contract. The return on any trade would, I am sure, not make it worth the effort.

[pi2000]

Wasn't Moulson leading Eichel all last season when they lived together and stuff? 

 

Matt Moulson is about to turn 33. Even if he scores 30g this season, he still has 2 more seasons left at 5mil. Now Between Okposo, Nylander, Reinhart, and potentailly Kane/Ennis/Fasching/Bailey.... you don't have room in your top 6 for him. That leaves him in the bottom 6 where he lacks the physical edge or defensive awareness to play that style. There is no reason to protect a 33 year old player in the expansion draft when I could protect somebody else like Johan Larsson instead. 

 

Integral part of the team moving forward, that's a laugh. If Moulson is an integral part of your team you have ###### up your rebuild. 

 

So let me get this straight.   You would give up a +30g scorer for absolutely nothing in return simply because he's 33 years old?    

 

There's no guarantee Kane/Ennis/Fashcing/Bailey/etc... will ever even sniff 30g.    

 

Dave Andreychuk won a cup at age 40 and was 5th on the team in scoring during that playoff run.    If Moulson regains his old form, you either trade him for a significant return, or keep him.   It would be irresponsible to let him go in the expansion draft for zip.

 

The more I think about this, the most likely scenario is BUF finds themselves once again as sellers at the deadline.   If Moulson is on pace for 30g, he could be a valuable piece for a team like ANA looking to add a scoring winger for their Cup run.   Does that net Fowler in return?   Maybe, maybe not, but if BUF is contending and he's scoring at a regular clip, you need to keep him at least until his contract is up, and even then maybe he's still producing and wants to play another 2-3 years or some Cup contender views him as a missing piece to their puzzle.

 

Either way, you don't let a 30g scorer go in the expansion draft for nothing in return.    You either keep him, or trade him for assets.    Anything less and GMTM is failing at his job.

[qwksndmonster]

In what universe does Moulson score 30 this season and we're still sellers at the deadline?

[wjag]

In what universe does Moulson score 30 this season and we're still sellers at the deadline?

 

You can stop right there...

[LGR4GM]

You don't protect him the expansion draft regardless of what he does. He hasn't scored 30goals since the 2011/2012 season but I am just supposed to believe he will magically this year and then again next year? Nope. He might hit 20 this year if he gets a ton of PP time but his 5v5 play yesterday was mediocre at best. Hudson Fasching was better 5v5. His age matters because the drop off has already started. If you can expose Moulson and protect someone else like Johan Larsson for example or Jake McCabe or perhaps Kulikov depending on how he does, you walk away from Moulson. That last time Moulson got 20+ goals was 2013/2014 so that now is 2 years removed. If had something else to his game other than scoring you might convince me, but the fact is he does not. To get in the 30goal range (28-32goals) he will need constant time on the #1 pp and it just isn't worth spending 5mil per year on a guy who needs to be set up on the PP to get his goals. 

[pi2000]

In what universe does Moulson score 30 this season and we're still sellers at the deadline?

 

[LGR4GM]

So let me get this straight.   You would give up a +30g scorer for absolutely nothing in return simply because he's 33 years old?    

 

There's no guarantee Kane/Ennis/Fashcing/Bailey/etc... will ever even sniff 30g.    

 

Dave Andreychuk won a cup at age 40 and was 5th on the team in scoring during that playoff run.    If Moulson regains his old form, you either trade him for a significant return, or keep him.   It would be irresponsible to let him go in the expansion draft for zip.

 

The more I think about this, the most likely scenario is BUF finds themselves once again as sellers at the deadline.   If Moulson is on pace for 30g, he could be a valuable piece for a team like ANA looking to add a scoring winger for their Cup run.   Does that net Fowler in return?   Maybe, maybe not, but if BUF is contending and he's scoring at a regular clip, you need to keep him at least until his contract is up, and even then maybe he's still producing and wants to play another 2-3 years or some Cup contender views him as a missing piece to their puzzle.

 

Either way, you don't let a 30g scorer go in the expansion draft for nothing in return.    You either keep him, or trade him for assets.    Anything less and GMTM is failing at his job.

1) Yes I would give up Moulson at the expansion draft to protect a younger asset with a future even if Moulson miraculously scored 30goals this season.

 

2) Evander Kane has scored 30goals in the NHL... like that happened. Fun fact, last time it happened was the same year Moulson got 30.

 

3) Moulson... Dave Andreychuk... come on now they shouldn't be in the same sentence. Jagr had 27goals last year but Moulson isn't him either. Moulson has lost a step. The league is getting faster and Moulson isn't. 

 

4) Cam Fowler probably will not be a Duck at the deadline. To sign Lindholm they need to trade Fowler now. They aren't taking on 5mil in salary for an additional 2 years just to get Matt freaking Moulson. 

 

5) He won't be a 30 goal scorer but you aren't letting him go for nothing. If he gets claimed you lose a guy that probably won't score 30 again and you protect every single other asset on your team because Moulson goes away. In addition you free up 5mil next season and 5mil the season after in cap space to add another player or re-sign players that are better.

Edited October 17, 2016 by LGR4GM

[pi2000]

You don't protect him the expansion draft regardless of what he does. He hasn't scored 30goals since the 2011/2012 season but I am just supposed to believe he will magically this year and then again next year? Nope. He might hit 20 this year if he gets a ton of PP time but his 5v5 play yesterday was mediocre at best. Hudson Fasching was better 5v5. His age matters because the drop off has already started. If you can expose Moulson and protect someone else like Johan Larsson for example or Jake McCabe or perhaps Kulikov depending on how he does, you walk away from Moulson. That last time Moulson got 20+ goals was 2013/2014 so that now is 2 years removed. If had something else to his game other than scoring you might convince me, but the fact is he does not. To get in the 30goal range (28-32goals) he will need constant time on the #1 pp and it just isn't worth spending 5mil per year on a guy who needs to be set up on the PP to get his goals. 

 

Like I said... IF.....  IF he scores +30g and GMTM loses him in the expansion draft for nothing, not even a 2nd or 3rd round pick, then he failed.    I guarantee there would be teams lining up offers to add a 30g scorer to their team for a playoff run... even if it is just as a power play specialist.    Said team can decide expose him in the expansion draft if they choose.    (IMO BUF would be better off letting Kane, or Foligno/Girgensons, go in the expansion draft, as opposed to a +30g Moulson).

 

That said, if you consider the possibility that the Sabres are contenders AND Moulson is on pace for +30g (both big IFs)... then you have no choice but to keep him as he's still a valuable piece of your team.    Or you trade him in the offseason for whatever you can get.   

Edited October 17, 2016 by pi2000

[LGR4GM]

Like I said... IF.....  IF he scores +30g and GMTM loses him in the expansion draft for nothing, not even a 2nd or 3rd round pick, then he failed.    I guarantee there would be teams lining up offers to add a 30g scorer to their team for a playoff run... even if it is just as a power play specialist.     

 

That said, if you consider the possibility that the Sabres are contenders AND Moulson is on pace for +30g (both big IFs)... then you have no choice but to keep him as he's still a valuable piece of your team.    Or you trade him in the offseason for whatever you can get.   

No there won't be because those teams will be within 1-2million of the cap and can't afford a 5mil a year PP specialist who they are stuck with for another 2 years. 

 

If we are contenders and Moulson is on pace for 30goals, sure you can keep him. 

 

You aren't losing him for nothing in an expansion draft. If Moulson was selected you are protecting everyone else you have and also freeing up 10mil in cap over 2 years where you could add a player that isn't going to be 34 next season.

 

The point is moot. He won't get 30 goals this season. He might get 20. 

[nfreeman]

Pi -- I respect the fact that you've dug yourself into a hole, but you're determined to keep digging.

 

When you get to China, enjoy the dim sum!  They eat it for breakfast there (although once you have 25 or 30 pork dumplings for breakfast, you start to get nauseated).

[LGR4GM]

If you look at every goal scored since his last 30 goals season and every game he played, his gpg average is 0.216 and that comes out to a 17.7gpg for a full 82 game season. Realistically once Jack or Kane come back Moulson will lose some of that PP time so I feel good predicted Matt Moulson will have 16-19 goals this season at best.

[pi2000]

No there won't be because those teams will be within 1-2million of the cap and can't afford a 5mil a year PP specialist who they are stuck with for another 2 years. 

 

If we are contenders and Moulson is on pace for 30goals, sure you can keep him. 

 

You aren't losing him for nothing in an expansion draft. If Moulson was selected you are protecting everyone else you have and also freeing up 10mil in cap over 2 years where you could add a player that isn't going to be 34 next season.

 

The point is moot. He won't get 30 goals this season. He might get 20. 

 

Whoever we trade him to can expose him in the expansion draft, or trade him, or do whatever they want with him after their Cup run.    They're not "stuck" with his salary for 2 more years unless they can't move him off their roster.    That's a chance many teams would be willing to make if it means a chance at the Cup.   

 

Which 7 forwards would you protect... and which one of those 7 do you think is more valuable than a +30g Moulson?   

 

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

 

My 7 would be O'Reilly, Moulson, Ennis, Larsson,  Okposo, Carrier, Foligno.     That exposes Kane and Girgensons.      I think we both agree on Kane.   Girgensons don't fit this style of play, he's not quick enough, and he doesn't score (like Moulson does), and he's not a GMTM guy.    

 

To your point about using that 5mil in available cap space.... you think you can add 30g for 5mil/yr?    Not a chance.    

 

Also, what happens if you expose him and he's not picked?    Then what?   It's basically telling him "we don't want you", then you expect he'll come back with the same vigor he did this season?    

Edited October 17, 2016 by pi2000

[LGR4GM]

Whoever we trade him to can expose him in the expansion draft, or trade him, or do whatever they want with him after their Cup run.    They're not "stuck" with his salary for 2 more years unless they can't move him off their roster.    That's a chance many teams would be willing to make if it means a chance at the Cup.   

 

Which 7 forwards would you protect... and which one of those 7 do you think is more valuable than a +30g Moulson?   

 

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

 

My 7 would be O'Reilly, Moulson, Ennis, Larsson,  Okposo, Carrier.     That exposes Kane, Foligno and Girgensons.      I think we both agree on Kane.    Foligno and Girgensons don't fit this style of play, they're not quick enough, they don't score (like Moulson does), and they're not GMTM guys.    

 

To your point about using that 5mil in available cap space.... you think you can add 30g for 5mil/yr?    Not a chance.    

 

Also, what happens if you expose him and he's not picked?    Then what?   It's basically telling him "we don't want you", then you expect he'll come back with the same vigor he did this season?    

You assume a team can get rid of him which I am not sure of.

 

Which 7 do I protect? Well the 6 you list and then depending either Foligno or Kane. I think Zemgus will go in the Fowler deal (fingers crossed). 

 

To my point about the 5mil cap thing... you are now assuming not only will he score 30 this year but also next year and the year after. He won't. So yes I think that if I can save 5mil against the cap going into next season I can replace Matt Moulson's production for less then that amount. 

 

This is a terrible argument. We have to expose someone and someone has to be picked. What if we expose Kane, Foligno, Moulson, and Bogosian. They take Bogosian... does that mean that the forwards should all cry and take their toys home? If they do we should trade them ASAP for whatever we can get because that is weak sauce. Several players will be exposed and the players should understand the business of it. This argument out of all of your arguments is the worst. Matt Moulson upset because he gets exposed so he doesn't bother to come back and play hard... if that is the case he isn't worth the paper his contract is written on and his teammates should freeze him out of the room. 

[Huckleberry]

Even I would expose Moulson in the draft, for none other than you need that cap space in two years.

[pi2000]

You assume a team can get rid of him which I am not sure of.

 

Which 7 do I protect? Well the 6 you list and then depending either Foligno or Kane. I think Zemgus will go in the Fowler deal (fingers crossed). 

 

To my point about the 5mil cap thing... you are now assuming not only will he score 30 this year but also next year and the year after. He won't. So yes I think that if I can save 5mil against the cap going into next season I can replace Matt Moulson's production for less then that amount. 

 

This is a terrible argument. We have to expose someone and someone has to be picked. What if we expose Kane, Foligno, Moulson, and Bogosian. They take Bogosian... does that mean that the forwards should all cry and take their toys home? If they do we should trade them ASAP for whatever we can get because that is weak sauce. Several players will be exposed and the players should understand the business of it. This argument out of all of your arguments is the worst. Matt Moulson upset because he gets exposed so he doesn't bother to come back and play hard... if that is the case he isn't worth the paper his contract is written on and his teammates should freeze him out of the room. 

 

 

He loves it here and put in a ton of work in the offseason to earn his spot on this team.   GMTM gave him that chance, he didn't give up on him because he knows how badly he wants to be here for the rest of his career.    He has a young family and so forth.... so yeah Matt Moulson would have every right to be pissed about being exposed after he did everything that was asked of him.   

 

Again, which 7 F would you protect?    If Moulson regains his form I wouldn't waste that 7th spot on Kane or Girgensons.

[LGR4GM]

He loves it here and put in a ton of work in the offseason to earn his spot on this team.   GMTM gave him that chance, he didn't give up on him because he knows how badly he wants to be here for the rest of his career.    He has a young family and so forth.... so yeah Matt Moulson would have every right to be pissed about being exposed after he did everything that was asked of him.   

 

Again, which 7 F would you protect?    If Moulson regains his form I wouldn't waste that 7th spot on Kane or Girgensons.

First: If Matt Moulson doesn't understand that he is getting exposed because younger guys need to be protected than that is his problem. He has a right to be pissed about being exposed but if he just picks up his ball and mails it in because of that he has no one to blame but himself. I don't care how bad he wants to be here, I care how good he plays hockey. I am long done with the "well he was a good guy who wanted to be here" shtick. 

 

I told you which forwards but I see specifically you want to know if Matt Moulson scores 30g who will I protect. Fine, I will play along in this mythical universe. 

My 7 would be O'Reilly, Larsson,  Okposo, Carrier, Foligno.     Then I need 2 more and in this scenario we have a 30g Moulson and then Kane, and  Deslauriers.  Isn't that everyone? Zemgus is only on a 1 year deal so not sure if he needs to be protected. Let's say he does. So I have 4 players with only 2 spots. Well I protect Zemgus unless he poops the bed and I protect either Moulson or Kane depending on the season. If Kane keeps clean and heals and plays like he can then I protect him. If that doesn't happen then I protect Moulson. 

[Doohicksie]

It's just business.  Matty Mo knows that.

[wjag]

It's just business.  Matty Mo knows that.

 

And he will continue to get paid..

 

Just found this:

 

"He had three goals in 11 games last October, but scored just eight times in 81 contests. Moulson is looking to be much better in 2016-17 and he is off to a good start with a goal in each of his first two matches."

 

So before we get too excited, this just might be his norm.

Edited October 17, 2016 by wjag

[dudacek]

I think Pi has an Easy Button with LGR's avatar on it.

 

I think Dan Bylsma has actually put Matt Moulson in a position that allows both him and the the team to succeed.

If Matt can continue to bury perfect PP feeds from Sam and ROR (he couldn't last year) and get sheltered even strength minutes he could surprise the hell out of me and contribute. His feet do look better, but it's his hands that ultimately matter.

[That Aud Smell]

I think Pi has an Easy Button with LGR's avatar on it.

 

I think Dan Bylsma has actually put Matt Moulson in a position that allows both him and the the team to succeed.

If Matt can continue to bury perfect PP feeds from Sam and ROR (he couldn't last year) and get sheltered even strength minutes he could surprise the hell out of me and contribute. His feet do look better, but it's his hands that ultimately matter.

 

Good call -- I'd assumed, as some had theorized, that his hands (and hand-eye) had "gone."

[pi2000]

And he will continue to get paid..

 

Just found this:

 

"He had three goals in 11 games last October, but scored just eight times in 81 contests. Moulson is looking to be much better in 2016-17 and he is off to a good start with a goal in each of his first two matches."

 

So before we get too excited, this just might be his norm.

 

Yeah, he gets paid regardless, but that's not what motivates him.    He's playing like his hair is on fire out of the gate.    If he keeps that up, yeah I want him around for another season or two, don't care that he's 33.    It shows me that he's willing to do whatever it takes to stick around... I like that, and I want those guys on my team.     There will always be room for a guy like that. 

 

First: If Matt Moulson doesn't understand that he is getting exposed because younger guys need to be protected than that is his problem. He has a right to be pissed about being exposed but if he just picks up his ball and mails it in because of that he has no one to blame but himself. I don't care how bad he wants to be here, I care how good he plays hockey. I am long done with the "well he was a good guy who wanted to be here" shtick. 

 

I told you which forwards but I see specifically you want to know if Matt Moulson scores 30g who will I protect. Fine, I will play along in this mythical universe. 

My 7 would be O'Reilly, Larsson,  Okposo, Carrier, Foligno.     Then I need 2 more and in this scenario we have a 30g Moulson and then Kane, and  Deslauriers.  Isn't that everyone? Zemgus is only on a 1 year deal so not sure if he needs to be protected. Let's say he does. So I have 4 players with only 2 spots. Well I protect Zemgus unless he poops the bed and I protect either Moulson or Kane depending on the season. If Kane keeps clean and heals and plays like he can then I protect him. If that doesn't happen then I protect Moulson. 

 

 

..but what if Ennis AND Moulson scores 30g AND BUF is a in a playoff spot at the deadline.    Then what?

 

Let me answer,  you protect them.   Why?   Because you can't lose those guys for nothing.    Guys like Foligno, Girgensons are easily replaceable, hell I'd argue we need to upgrade both their spots.   It's easy to find faster, more skilled players who are just as big, that can pot 10-15g year.   Those guys are a dime a dozen.     What's not easy to find are 30g scoring wingers.    You have one on your team?  You do what you need to do to keep them, and milk everything you can out of them.

 

But I digress.... chances are Moulson doesn't even score 20,  Ennis doesn't score 20, and BUF is on the outside looking in again this year....  but consider there infinite parallel universes (there are) in at last one of those universes both Ennis and Moulson score 30 on our way to a lengthy playoff run, I hope that's the universe we live in.

[TheAud]

If Moulson gets tons of top line Powerplay time and has a career high shooting percentage and stays healthy for 82 games he could crack 30 goals. 

Then we'd pray Las Vegas takes him off our hands in the off-season. It's not like any of that would be sustainable even if he were 29 years old, but he'd be turning 34.

 

$5M in cap space to use towards other higher value areas...

[MODO Hockey]

Man, Moulson has really stepped his game up in my oppinion. He has been great so far, comparing with last season the difference is huge, if he keeps this up he will once again find him self in a 30 goal season.