TrueBlueGED Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I would rather trade a player a year too early, then a year too late. I agree. It's the right way to do it. If that player happens to be O'Reilly, so be it. I just don't hold any illusions that trading him will somehow make us better sooner than later. Nitpicking, but don't believe Reinhart was the "wrong" pick. Tanking that year was absolutely the wrong decision. As was choosing Nylander. And agree they have to wait at least a season to trade O'Reilly to make sure Mittelstadt pans out on the 2nd line (& also that Eichel can continue to improve on draws). I used quotes for a reason, dammit! Obviously, looking back, I'd have made a different pick, but it's not the egregious error that Nylander is looking to be. But watcha gon' do? Going forward, I'm much more concerned about making the right choices than trying to compensate for past mistakes. Nobody wants to hear patience after the past few years, but honestly, there is no trade or UFA signing that's putting us in Cup contention.* That's coming from within. *I firmly believe Tavares never sees UFA.
Doohicksie Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 Kinda makes me wonder if there are going to be any changes to the top 6 -- which in turn makes me wonder how TF can he not make changes to the top 6 given how little offense the team has produced this year. The top six will need to be improved from within: Prospects stepping up and displacing top six players. I can see Mittelstadt doing that. I could see Baptiste moving into Kane's position, should Kane be traded. I actually think he has better hockey sense than Kane so that could work out.
Randall Flagg Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I agree. It's the right way to do it. If that player happens to be O'Reilly, so be it. I just don't hold any illusions that trading him will somehow make us better sooner than later. I used quotes for a reason, dammit! Obviously, looking back, I'd have made a different pick, but it's not the egregious error that Nylander is looking to be. But watcha gon' do? Going forward, I'm much more concerned about making the right choices than trying to compensate for past mistakes. Nobody wants to hear patience after the past few years, but honestly, there is no trade or UFA signing that's putting us in Cup contention.* That's coming from within. *I firmly believe Tavares never sees UFA. Am I allowed to say I told you so yet? :nana:
Taro T Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I agree. It's the right way to do it. If that player happens to be O'Reilly, so be it. I just don't hold any illusions that trading him will somehow make us better sooner than later. I used quotes for a reason, dammit! Obviously, looking back, I'd have made a different pick, but it's not the egregious error that Nylander is looking to be. But watcha gon' do? Going forward, I'm much more concerned about making the right choices than trying to compensate for past mistakes. Nobody wants to hear patience after the past few years, but honestly, there is no trade or UFA signing that's putting us in Cup contention.* That's coming from within. *I firmly believe Tavares never sees UFA. Were Snow not his current squad's GM would agree. & even WITH that, he PROBABLY doesn't see free agency, but if he does, have a VERY good feeling that he ends up a Sabre. (Similarly to when Hawerchuk & LaFontaine, & Hasek eventually showed up.) And a spine of Tavares, Eichel, Mittelstadt would be the best in the league.
Thorner Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I'm not sure what he's supposed to do at this point, though. He doesn't have the assets to move like Murray did, and it's clear that our top players, as assembled, aren't good enough. How is he supposed to go about augmenting our top-6 (I still hate this terminology, but I'm going with it to save a side argument) without jettisoning some of it and/or growing from within? Murray left him in a really bad spot. Our timeline is all jacked up because Murray's accelerated rebuild didn't work. I agreed with Murray's approach, but he missed. That much is clear. Even if we were to keep Kane and keep trying to build, (potentially) picking the wrong players in Reinhart and Nylander is crippling. Our best trade chip is O'Reilly, but if he's dealt, we're still waiting on Mittelstadt to own that 2C spot before we're competing for much of anything, because an O'Reilly deal is likely to result in improving the blue line, not a comparable forward. Rebuilding the "right way" costs us a couple more of Jack's prime years, but I think that's probably preferable to chasing a ghost. (My wordage there? Ya, it was bad.) Anyways, this seems right. I still worry about the collateral damage on Eichel in terms of lost seasons and potentially even his hockey-psyche. To be in a losing environment for so long.
TrueBlueGED Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 Am I allowed to say I told you so yet? :nana: No. Next year at this time if the outlook is the same? By all means, treat me as a pinata :lol: (My wordage there? Ya, it was bad.) Anyways, this seems right. I still worry about the collateral damage on Eichel in terms of lost seasons and potentially even his hockey-psyche. To be in a losing environment for so long. Nah, I just hate the way we talk about top-6 v. bottom-6 because it ultimately turns into some absolute dichotomy in the eyes of many (I'm thinking line construction here). It's certainly useful shorthand in this context, though.
Sabres Fan in NS Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. :P When in doubt always blame the damn phone.
WildCard Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 McKenzie shares a lot on the deadline expectations https://www.fanragsports.com/mckenzie-supply-and-demand-factors-may-impact-nhl-trade-pricing/
nfreeman Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I agree. It's the right way to do it. If that player happens to be O'Reilly, so be it. I just don't hold any illusions that trading him will somehow make us better sooner than later. I used quotes for a reason, dammit! Obviously, looking back, I'd have made a different pick, but it's not the egregious error that Nylander is looking to be. But watcha gon' do? Going forward, I'm much more concerned about making the right choices than trying to compensate for past mistakes. Nobody wants to hear patience after the past few years, but honestly, there is no trade or UFA signing that's putting us in Cup contention.* That's coming from within. *I firmly believe Tavares never sees UFA. Were Snow not his current squad's GM would agree. & even WITH that, he PROBABLY doesn't see free agency, but if he does, have a VERY good feeling that he ends up a Sabre. (Similarly to when Hawerchuk & LaFontaine, & Hasek eventually showed up.) And a spine of Tavares, Eichel, Mittelstadt would be the best in the league. I think JT is in fact going to leave in FA. Although the Isles appear to have an arena deal in place, there is a minimum of 3 more vagabond years before it's ready, and that's without any glitches, overruns, etc. -- which always happen in NYC. And I find the complete silence on JT's contract following the arena announcement pretty interesting. But I don't expect him to join the Sabres. I think a guy like that would want to join a team that is poised for multiple deep playoff runs, not one making a bid for DFL yet again. (Which, btw, is another reason not to tank.)
GASabresIUFAN Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 Which in turn makes me again wonder how lax his timeline really is. Increasingly it’s looking like it’s draft picks or nothing for top 6 augmentation. Which is certainly reasonable, in a vacuum. But it continues to strike me as a risky proposition when Eichel’s cheap years have wasted away, and his prime years are on the clock. Especially when the hole is only going to get deeper when Kane is moved. He’s seems to be operating as should have been the case starting in 2013, sans Tank. But we tanked. We have Eichel. So it’s a bold strategy at this point. We’ll see if it pays off. I liked Murray’s strategy better. But his execution was terrible. I don’t particularly like Botterill’s strategy, but maybe his execution will be solid. I’m not sure you can say this about Jbot and his strategy. I might use the word calculating, but that could be both cautious or aggressive. First he has had to clean up TM’s roster and contract mess. However his first big move nabbed us a top 4 D in Scandella, while ridding us of Ennis’ contract. Brillant and aggressive. It cost us Foligno, who we miss, but not someone we can’t replace. The biggest issue is still bad contracts. Bogo (5.142), Pommers (5.6), Moulson (5.0) are nearly 30% of our scheduled committments for next season. (Right now we have 57 mill committed to 15 players including Moulson, Guhle and Ullmark. Moulson and Pommer’s deals fall off after next season and Jbot will have a great deal more room to work with. That said, of the 15 players under contract, I think only 8 are certain to be here next season (Jack, ROR, KO, Pommers, Risto, Marco, Guhle and Ullmark). 5 others could end up traded or sent down (Z, Larsson, ERod, McCabe and Baloo), while Moulson will either be buried or bought out. That leaves Bogo, who if not healthy, could end up on IR for the year. Regardless, Jbot has serious flexability for the roster next season. RFA’s Nelson, Antipin, Fasching, Smith, Bailey, and Baptiste could all be re-signed on the cheap and compete for jobs next year. This would free up siginifcant cap space for Jbot to be aggressive. Don’t be surprised if we turn over another 10 players from this year's roster. I think Jbot will be aggressive, but he isn’t going to throw away assets like TM.
nfreeman Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I’m not sure you can say this about Jbot and his strategy. I might use the word calculating, but that could be both cautious or aggressive. First he has had to clean up TM’s roster and contract mess. However his first big move nabbed us a top 4 D in Scandella, while ridding us of Ennis’ contract. Brillant and aggressive. It cost us Foligno, who we miss, but not someone we can’t replace. The biggest issue is still bad contracts. Bogo (5.142), Pommers (5.6), Moulson (5.0) are nearly 30% of our scheduled committments for next season. (Right now we have 57 mill committed to 15 players including Moulson, Guhle and Ullmark. Moulson and Pommer’s deals fall off after next season and Jbot will have a great deal more room to work with. That said, of the 15 players under contract, I think only 8 are certain to be here next season (Jack, ROR, KO, Pommers, Risto, Marco, Guhle and Ullmark). 5 others could end up traded or sent down (Z, Larsson, ERod, McCabe and Baloo), while Moulson will either be buried or bought out. That leaves Bogo, who if not healthy, could end up on IR for the year. Regardless, Jbot has serious flexability for the roster next season. RFA’s Nelson, Antipin, Fasching, Smith, Bailey, and Baptiste could all be re-signed on the cheap and compete for jobs next year. This would free up siginifcant cap space for Jbot to be aggressive. Don’t be surprised if we turn over another 10 players from this year's roster. I think Jbot will be aggressive, but he isn’t going to throw away assets like TM. I agree with most of this, except: - Taking Pommer's contract -- specifically, the increased cost relative to Ennis' contract -- was part of the price for getting Scandella. - I think McCabe is close to a lock to be here next year.
GASabresIUFAN Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I agree with most of this, except: - Taking Pommer's contract -- specifically, the increased cost relative to Ennis' contract -- was part of the price for getting Scandella. - I think McCabe is close to a lock to be here next year. The reason I included McCabe is his play has been inconsistent this season and because he is one of our few value contracts. He might be a piece we have to give up to grease a deal for an improvement in the top 4 D. Somewhat like giving up Foligno to get Scandella.
Doohicksie Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 I’m not sure you can say this about Jbot and his strategy. I might use the word calculating, but that could be both cautious or aggressive. First he has had to clean up TM’s roster and contract mess. However his first big move nabbed us a top 4 D in Scandella, while ridding us of Ennis’ contract. Brillant and aggressive. It cost us Foligno, who we miss, but not someone we can’t replace. The biggest issue is still bad contracts. Bogo (5.142), Pommers (5.6), Moulson (5.0) are nearly 30% of our scheduled committments for next season. (Right now we have 57 mill committed to 15 players including Moulson, Guhle and Ullmark. Moulson and Pommer’s deals fall off after next season and Jbot will have a great deal more room to work with. That said, of the 15 players under contract, I think only 8 are certain to be here next season (Jack, ROR, KO, Pommers, Risto, Marco, Guhle and Ullmark). 5 others could end up traded or sent down (Z, Larsson, ERod, McCabe and Baloo), while Moulson will either be buried or bought out. That leaves Bogo, who if not healthy, could end up on IR for the year. Regardless, Jbot has serious flexability for the roster next season. RFA’s Nelson, Antipin, Fasching, Smith, Bailey, and Baptiste could all be re-signed on the cheap and compete for jobs next year. This would free up siginifcant cap space for Jbot to be aggressive. Don’t be surprised if we turn over another 10 players from this year's roster. I think Jbot will be aggressive, but he isn’t going to throw away assets like TM. He may not throw assets around so casually, but if he has that much turnover again, he risks further instability in the locker room. You get rid of known issues (is Kane a known issue? I think he used to be. Can Jack and ROR pull in the same direction?) But you may bring in other issues. At some point you need your roster to settle down if it's going to gel. We've seen XGMTM's method and we can judge it for what it was at this point. We're experiencing JBot's method now, and we don't know how successful it will be. One would hope that if we have 10 more roster spots turn over this offseason, it will be because Rochester is cranking out pieces that are NHL ready, and they are somewhat known quantities.
Brawndo Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 Nash has given his No Trade List to the Rangers
Brawndo Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 More from McKenzie McKenzie follows up on Rick Nash trade list tweets. Nash, Grabner "eminently available." "Teams like Tampa might have an interest in McDonagh." #TBLightning #NYR also willing to listen on Zuccarello.
Brawndo Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 This probably pushes Kane down to number 2 or 3 on the TSN Tradebait List
GASabresIUFAN Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 He may not throw assets around so casually, but if he has that much turnover again, he risks further instability in the locker room. You get rid of known issues (is Kane a known issue? I think he used to be. Can Jack and ROR pull in the same direction?) But you may bring in other issues. At some point you need your roster to settle down if it's going to gel. We've seen XGMTM's method and we can judge it for what it was at this point. We're experiencing JBot's method now, and we don't know how successful it will be. One would hope that if we have 10 more roster spots turn over this offseason, it will be because Rochester is cranking out pieces that are NHL ready, and they are somewhat known quantities. I agree. I’ve assumed Ullmark and Guhle make the team and listed RFA’s from Roch, Bailey, Baptiste, Nelson (who is playing well in Buffalo) Fasching and Smith as potential Sabres next season. Based on what I’ve seen this season YTD that Guhle, Ullmark, Smith, Nelson, Baptiste and Bailey make the team. That’s 6 of the 10 roster turnover and they’d replace guys like Gorges, Falk, Wilson, Josefson, Nolan and Johnson.
Doohicksie Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 Ullmark replaces Johnson or Lehner? (i.e., any chance Ullmark is next year's starter?)
GASabresIUFAN Posted February 5, 2018 Report Posted February 5, 2018 (edited) Ullmark replaces Johnson or Lehner? (i.e., any chance Ullmark is next year's starter?) Yes, maybe. Ullmark at worst is the backup next season. I see more of a 50/50 net with either Lehner back for one last try or a signing of a Halak Or similar as insurance if Ullmark doesn’t perform. I’m willing to bet that by mid season next year Ullmark is the established no. 1. Edited February 5, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN
Tondas Posted February 6, 2018 Report Posted February 6, 2018 Ullmark replaces Johnson or Lehner? (i.e., any chance Ullmark is next year's starter?) I was assuming that Ullmark would be the starter nest season. I can't see either Lehner or Johnson with the Sabres next year.
Huckleberry Posted February 6, 2018 Report Posted February 6, 2018 Lehner hasn't been that bad, but yeah he is a nice piece for Chicago to replace crawford, or the Inslanders.
LTS Posted February 6, 2018 Report Posted February 6, 2018 Lehner hasn't been that bad, but yeah he is a nice piece for Chicago to replace crawford, or the Inslanders. If the Islanders do not acquire a goaltender at the trade deadline then John Tavares should honestly ask himself if he wants to be part of that team next year. They are killing it on offense but their goaltending is flat out awful. It's pretty much the worst in the league. They are a borderline playoff team and every day they waste with Halak and Greiss in net is a day they move further from solidifying their spot in this years playoffs. There's no reason for them to be 2nd in goals scored and DFL in goals against. They need to make some moves. It would be instuling to the fan base to not make the playoffs with that kind of offensive output. Lehner gives them a goaltender into next season that they control. Not sure they are getting that from anyone else. I wonder if they'd go for Lehner, Gorges for Halak and some other parts? :)
LGR4GM Posted February 6, 2018 Report Posted February 6, 2018 Why do we want Halak? Idk. I think I would rather have Lehner and Ullmark next year than Ullmark and Halak.
dudacek Posted February 6, 2018 Report Posted February 6, 2018 (edited) We want Halak so Ullmark can stay in Rochester and because the Islanders will want to dump a goalie and a contract if they are bringing in same. We do not want Halak long-term. Some people seem to think he’s at the level he was five years ago. He’s not. He’s bad - way closer to Johnson than Lehner and should not be re-signed I’m with LTS. Move makes sense. Question is, what piece will Snow be willing to give up. *** Also, I listened to the Botterill interview. If O’Reilly is going anywhere, it’s for a king’s ransom. Either Botterill considers Ryan a core piece, or he is an outstanding poker player. Edited February 6, 2018 by Mick O’Manly
Recommended Posts