Non Sabres Deadline Trades/Rumors

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Derrico said:

Nowhere did I say anyone was being unreasonable.

Just explaining the negativity that you didn't like to see.

[Thorner]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

If you are talking in terms of the O’Reilly trade, or that we should have brought someone else in, sure.

But you won’t convince me that Casey wasn’t one of our 12 best forwards last year.

I’m thinking Sam, Jack, Jeff were clearly better, Sobotka and Thompson clearly worse. In my view, Larry and ERod were also more effective, but that’s debatable, I guess. 

I think he was in a grouping with Sheary, Girgs, Kyle and Jason and only Olofsson showed any argument from the guys on the farm.

 

You can easily spin this as the third year of a rebuild. There is no way you can spin it as the third year of a tear-down with the rebuild to begin next year.

Pegula and Botterill are both on record that we need to be “in the playoff conversation” this year. Whatever that means, it doesn’t mean they are OK with less than 80 points.

Less than 80 points means the players Botterill has chosen to surround Eichel and Reinhart with - Skinner Mittelstadt Johansson Vesey Sheary Thompson Olofsson Dahlin Montour Miller McCabe, Scandella, Jokiharju, whatever we get for Ristolainen, Hutton, Ullmark - have failed.

For better or worse, the bulk of this team is now his.

But are you predicting playoffs for next season then? What if we take a bit of a jump this season, didn’t you mention there’s generally a “fall back” year? 

I think either way we may be looking at ‘21-‘22.

Whether that’s Write-off/contracts expire year - build year - playoffs 

or

Improvement year - step back year - playoffs 

Edited August 8, 2019 by Thorny

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

That he wasn’t ready for the NHL, much less 2C, sits on the shelf with the Reinhart bridge, to me. 

I think it’s fair to expect competent NHLer this year, but projecting a 2C roll would be a mistake, I think, just not quite as big of one as last season. 

But as I’ve already said, maybe not a mistake relative to what their plan is for this year. 

 

38 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Eichel but it will be closer then the “because Buffalo” fans on this board are projecting right now.  88 pts for the Sabres and 95 for Eichel. We have 10 UFAs and 8 key RFAs fighting for contracts next year here or in the NHL.  If this doesn’t motivate our guys to work hard, I don’t know what will.

UFAs: Sheary, Vesey, Girgensons, Larsson, Wilson, Sobotka, Hunwick, Bogosian, Scandella, and Nelson

RFAs: Reinhart, Montour, ERod, Mitts, Ullmark, Pilut, Olofsson, and Thompson (Lazar and Elie are also RFAs).

Jbot has created a Thunderdome for most of the guys on this roster.  Most of the UFAs are playing just to have a NHL job after this season.  Our top 8 RFAs are playing for big contracts or to solidify a role in the NHL.  

The 2 bolded items reminded me of something JB said on WGR yesterday -- in response to a question about extending Reino and Montour now, he was pretty definitive in stating that he believes in paying once the results have been delivered, and that the team hasn't delivered results sufficient to justify giving those guys (or others) fat extensions. 

I'm going to claim that one as a victory for my "don't pay Reino until he's shown that he can deliver a good full season and help lead the team out of the dumpster" view.

 

1 hour ago, Derrico said:

This.  

I don’t know.  I keep coming back to true saying when you have a franchise centre and franchise D you are not far away.  Seems like a lot of negativity right now and with it being early August my hope tank is filled to the brim.   I think we do hit 90-95 points this year if they stay healthy.

They showed flashes of it last season.  This team is and has been building mainly through the draft.  It’s finally time for this to start paying off.  VO looked legit on Eichel s wing in that small sample size last year.  The D is completely remade.  Miller, Joker, Montour (basically) are all new and knocking on the door. Pilut should be ready.  On paper, this is the best starting talent and DEPTH they have had in many years.  Does Eichel have a bit more (just from his age and development curve)?  What about reinhart?  Certainly expecting to see more from Mitts.  There are still big problems up front but replacing pommer with johonnson and Vesey should still be an upgrade. 

Goaktending.  Let’s hope the new goalie coach can get that back on track because we are a playoff team or not based on this.  At times in November they both looked like the real deal but also looked awful in the second half of the year.

My other major concern is coaching. I really like the RK hire but we can’t afford to get off to a slow start.  He better have his system implemented during training camp and preseason.

 

 

I agree that those are the 2 hardest building blocks to find, but in order to get back to real team status, they absolutely gotta have:

- goaltending

- coaching

- real contributions from a number of the unproven young guys

None of which they got last year (or the year before that or the year before that, etc.).

But I like the optimism and I kinda share it. 

If RK can justify JB's love, the defense, goaltending, team confidence and youngster development could all harmonically converge in a feedback loop and each factor could contribute to the other factor.

It's not impossible, and in fact I think it's JB's plan.

[dudacek]

30 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But are you predicting playoffs for next season then? What if we take a bit of a jump this season, didn’t you mention there’s generally a “fall back” year? 

I think either way we may be looking at ‘21-‘22.

Whether that’s write-off/contracts expire year - build year - playoffs 

or

Improvement year - step back year - playoffs 

I honestly have no strong feelings about how the team will do this year. We added more talent than we subtracted and we are young enough that internal improvement should be more likely than not.

But are we improved from the 76 point team we were over the course of the year, or the 60-point team we were over the back half?

Will there actually be any internal improvement? Will the new guys surprise like Lindholm or surprise like Berglund? How good is Krueger? Will our goalies be good enough? So many variables.

In terms of the big picture I believe Botterill has sold Pegula on a methodical five-year plan to put us in position to be good for an extended period of time, like Washington or Boston.

You usually expect an unexpectedly bad year and an unexpectedly good year but the graph should generally climb over the course of those five years. Maybe his first year was the unexpectedly bad year. If it’s this year, he probably should be fired. It would mean three years without showing improvement.

21-22 will be Botterill’s fifth year, so it might reasonably take that long to reach his goal of long-term playoff contender. But there should also be a 90-point plus team (preferably a playoff team) in either year 3 or 4, or the plan is not working.

Edited August 8, 2019 by dudacek

[Thorner]

27 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

 

The 2 bolded items reminded me of something JB said on WGR yesterday -- in response to a question about extending Reino and Montour now, he was pretty definitive in stating that he believes in paying once the results have been delivered, and that the team hasn't delivered results sufficient to justify giving those guys (or others) fat extensions. 

I'm going to claim that one as a victory for my "don't pay Reino until he's shown that he can deliver a good full season and help lead the team out of the dumpster" view.

 

I agree that those are the 2 hardest building blocks to find, but in order to get back to real team status, they absolutely gotta have:

- goaltending

- coaching

- real contributions from a number of the unproven young guys

None of which they got last year (or the year before that or the year before that, etc.).

But I like the optimism and I kinda share it. 

If RK can justify JB's love, the defense, goaltending, team confidence and youngster development could all harmonically converge in a feedback loop and each factor could contribute to the other factor.

It's not impossible, and in fact I think it's JB's plan.

Then he’s full of sh*t because he damn well paid Jack before he earned it. 

[darksabre]

21 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I honestly have no strong feelings about how the team will do this year. We added more talent than we subtracted and we are young enough that internal improvement should be more likely than not.

But are we improved from the 76 point team we were over the course of the year, or the 60-point team we were over the back half?

Will there actually be any internal improvement? Will the new guys surprise like Lindholm or surprise like Berglund? How good is Krueger? Will our goalies be good enough? So many variables.

In terms of the big picture I believe Botterill has sold Pegula on a methodical five-year plan to put us in position to be good for an extended period of time, like Washington or Boston.

You usually expect an unexpectedly bad year and an unexpectedly good year but the graph should generally climb over the course of those five years. Maybe his first year was the unexpectedly bad year. If it’s this year, he probably should be fired. It would mean three years without showing improvement.

21-22 will be Botterill’s fifth year, so it might reasonably take that long to reach his goal of long-term playoff contender. But there should also be a 90-point plus team (preferably a playoff team) in either year 3 or 4, or the plan is not working.

This is essentially the long and short of it.

[Thorner]

28 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I honestly have no strong feelings about how the team will do this year. We added more talent than we subtracted and we are young enough that internal improvement should be more likely than not.

But are we improved from the 76 point team we were over the course of the year, or the 60-point team we were over the back half?

Will there actually be any internal improvement? Will the new guys surprise like Lindholm or surprise like Berglund? How good is Krueger? Will our goalies be good enough? So many variables.

In terms of the big picture I believe Botterill has sold Pegula on a methodical five-year plan to put us in position to be good for an extended period of time, like Washington or Boston.

You usually expect an unexpectedly bad year and an unexpectedly good year but the graph should generally climb over the course of those five years. Maybe his first year was the unexpectedly bad year. If it’s this year, he probably should be fired. It would mean three years without showing improvement.

21-22 will be Botterill’s fifth year, so it might reasonably take that long to reach his goal of long-term playoff contender. But there should also be a 90-point plus team (preferably a playoff team) in either year 3 or 4, or the plan is not working.

But he has 5 seasons to make it. 

I also wonder if the board would have agreed that 5 years to turn into playoff contender was, at all, reasonable the day he was hired. 

Literally talking 7 years of Eichel for that to be established. 

These numbers are in fact completely ridiculous but I totally agree it’s the plan. 

Edited August 8, 2019 by Thorny

[dudacek]

13 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Then he’s full of sh*t because he damn well paid Jack before he earned it. 

I sort of agree with this.

But 20-year-old Jack did put up nearly a point per game the year before he signed that deal. He had at least earned a long-term deal, just maybe not at $10 million.

[Thorner]

31 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I sort of agree with this.

But 20-year-old Jack did put up nearly a point per game the year before he signed that deal. He had at least earned a long-term deal, just maybe not at $10 million.

It says something that our best chance at a value deal is a 10 mil per year contract. 

The guy was touted as a *cap specialist* when he came on. Has he signed a single value deal since he got here? 1? At least not one that’s not gonna bite us in the ass in a year (Reinhart). 

He’s not fundamentally opposed to paying based on potential (or allotting “potential” significant headspace during consideration) as we’ve illustrated with Jack. He guessed on Reinhart and guessed wrong. Or he was not confident enough in his abilities to sign him up long term before he specifically earned it (like he did with Jack), and he mid-judged the talent we had in Reinhart. The guy wouldn’t mention him in a single interview the first year he was hired (remember that?) and now Sam is the first name out of his mouth after Jack. Whoops.

Moreso, he hasn’t moved a single bad contract off the roster.  The cap specialist’s plan seems to be to wait for the bad contracts to naturally expire. Almost there with Bogo, KO next in a few years. Few others expiring next offseason though, thankfully. 

Not to mention, how lucky was he with Berglund? We SHOULD have 3 more years of that malcontent anchor on the cap at a significant hit. 

The highest grade Botterill could get for cap management/contracts is a barely-scraped passing grade. If we are generous. The cap specialist mantra is laugher.

 

Edited August 8, 2019 by Thorny

[CallawaySabres]

so is anyone going to actually post a rumor in this thread or no?

[pi2000]

58 minutes ago, CallawaySabres said:

so is anyone going to actually post a rumor in this thread or no?

My source says no.

[Ho-Chi-Sock]

1 hour ago, CallawaySabres said:

so is anyone going to actually post a rumor in this thread or no?

McDavid to the Sabres for Sobotka, a 3rd in 2028, and the rights to Ron Guidry.

 

happy?

[TrueBlueGED]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

LOL, well Thomas and Patrick’s numbers were only slightly better, and Lias Anderson and Michael Rasmussen put up bigger turds, so maybe you can prove it. ?

Not an unfair rebuttal, but I think my point still holds up. Being in the NHL sooner but bad at it shouldn't be construed as a positive. 

[sabresparaavida]

2 hours ago, Ho-Chi-Sock said:

McDavid to the Sabres for Sobotka, a 3rd in 2028, and the rights to Ron Guidry.

 

happy?

We need some cap dumps to go with that... we can send them Bogo and Scandella too.

[Taro T]

10 hours ago, nfreeman said:

I sure hope this does the trick, because I was deeply disappointed at how frequently and easily the opposing D took the puck from him last year.  He was nowhere near ready for the speed and skill of NHL defenders.

He'll be better this year.  But if he is the 2C he WILL be "disappointing" again, even if (especially if?) he ends up with Reinhart and Skinner as his line mates.  He just won't IMHO be ready to face the other team's top D pairing nor their top 2 lines which he'll see a lot of on the 2nd line.

Expect he'd score a bit more than last year, but there won't be a noticeable improvement in his own end.  Again, IMHO.

10 hours ago, dudacek said:

Are you saying staff made an informed decision that given Casey’s skill set playing in the NHL all year was actually going to be better for his development? I’ll be damned...

You might say that, rabbit, you might.

10 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

If it was a good decision to not have him in Rochester last season, I would be inclined to believe that there would have been tangible, meaningful development in Mitts' game from game one to game 82 last year. 

Trying to be as objective as possible, I didn't see a different player at all, and he may have even been less confident at the end. I can't really find hard evidence he developed. That's scary to me, even if he gets better this offseason, because that could be 6 months that could have had more growth (picture Asplund in the AHL last year). I don't see how Mitts would have been immune to getting better like that - he was simply really bad in the NHL all season long.

There's no improvement in his counting stats either - in his last 23 games he had 3 goals, 2 assists, 5 points, and was a -14. In his first 23 games he was 4-4 for 8 points, with a plus-minus of 0. 

I don't think it's a guarantee at all that he would have had too easy a time in the AHL - a guy like Kyle Connor had a much better post-draft college season, still spent most of a year in the AHL when he had less of an argument to go there than Mitts, and came into the league the following year as a 30 goal forward, already NHL-good. Incredibly skeptical that Mitts would have been too successful for this path to have been worth it development-wise when his NHL season was what it was. 

The reality is that compared to his peers, outside of a seven game tournament (which we've seen affect player expectations far too much an infinite amount of times), Mitts hasn't showed in high school, college, or the NHL to be the level of player that guys like Pronman had us all ready to believe he was. 

This isn't saying that he can't become a very good NHLer. 

Very early in the season, he was primarily 3rd line.  By December, there was a stretch where he officially was the 2C 8 out of 10 games.  (Oddly enough, when his play started to fall off.)

They took him off line 2 for 5 games in January and then had him at 2C for 10 of the next 15.

Once March hit, they finally gave him some slack, and only bounced him up to 2C when Eichel was out.  Not shockingly, he looked much better at the end of the year getting the match ups he should've had all year.

Let him play C on the 3rd scoring line and he'll look like a true NHLer.  Especially if the 2nd scoring line is a legit 2nd line.

Force him up to 2C and he'll be in over his head just like last time in that situation.

But the thing is, last season, even when over matched, there were several (somewhere between 5-8) times where had he been just a smidge stronger he would've had easy goals because he had position on the D for a rebound but just couldn't out muscle him.  So, he could get where he needed to be against NHLers, but he just couldn't out muscle them.  Being in the AHL wouldn't have been that beneficial to him, again IMHO, because he didn't need to learn where to be to get rebound opportunities and he'd've been more successful on that 'move the puck into the phone booth' play which wouldn't really teach him anything about when it won't / can't work.

Never said he'd dominate in the AHL but he would've been very good there.  He didn't dominate college, but had he had better line mates be would've easily been over a PPG player for the Gophers.  His line mates messed up a TON of setups there. He belonged in the NHL last year (unlike Thompson) but he should've had sheltered minutes.

 

[Scottysabres]

So when do we think Botterill will make a move or 2?

[Zamboni]

12 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

So when do we think Botterill will make a move or 2?

We? When do you think? 

 

Me personally, I think before Oct. 3rd he’ll move out a couple guys. Could be Amerks, could be Sabres.

[darksabre]

I'm inclined to agree with Zamboni. I think there's a chance some of these guys, including Risto, don't get moved until after teams see what they have in training camp and pre-season. It could happen sooner, but I'm not holding my breath.

[GASabresIUFAN]

4 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

So when do we think Botterill will make a move or 2?

Some of these big ticket RFAs need to start signing in order for the trade market to really open up. Last I checked 21 teams still had RFAs to re-sign, including Point, Marner, Tkachuk, Werenski, McAvoy, Boeser, Rantanen, Laine and Conner.  

Of the other teams 5 or so are near or over the cap.  

Bascially cap room is tight around the league and until the RFA dominoes fall, its hard for any GM to make a substantive move. This may not shake out for weeks.

Edited August 9, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[pi2000]

27 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Some of these big ticket RFAs need to start signing in order for the trade market to really open up. AST I checked 21 teams still had RFAs to re-sign, including Point, Marner, Tkachuk, Werenski, McAvoy, Boeser, Rantanen, Laine and Conner.  

Of the other teams 5 or so are near or over the cap.  

Bascially cap room is tight around the league and until the RFA dominoes fall, its hard for any GM to make a substantive move. This may not shake out for weeks.

Theoretically, what happens if there simply isn't enough cap room league wide to sign all these RFAs?

Those are some young studs who wont come cheap. 

[WildCard]

9 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

Theoretically, what happens if there simply isn't enough cap room league wide to sign all these RFAs?

Those are some young studs who wont come cheap. 

People like Elie and Sobotka lose their jobs to make room

[GASabresIUFAN]

8 minutes ago, WildCard said:

People like Elie and Sobotka lose their jobs to make room

In our case that might work because we are over-signed, but other teams need to fill out their rosters.  If you cut a roster player to save 1.075, you have to replace them on your roster with a kid earning 700K.  Not really a huge savings.  

What ultimately happens is good middle class UFA players don’t get contracts or get short-term low $ deals.  The RFA problem is one of the big reasons Gardiner is still unsigned or that Shattenkirk signed for a 1.75.  It’s why players like Pommers and Vanek, who can still contribute, don’t even have contract offers from anyone.  It’s why Johansson only got a two year deal.  

If I had to guess, Gardiner signs a one year $5 mill deal with whomever has cap space by mid-September.  

[...]

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, pi2000 said:

Theoretically, what happens if there simply isn't enough cap room league wide to sign all these RFAs?

Those are some young studs who wont come cheap. 

Also teams with cap space can start bargain hunting at other team’s expense.  LV to pay Karlsson, traded Miller to us, Gusev to NJ and Haula to Carolina for draft picks.  They hoped to keep Gusev, but no one wanted other guys who should have been cap casualties. 

https://www.knightsonice.com/2019/7/29/8937960/vegas-golden-knights-trade-nikita-gusev-to-new-jersey-devils

Edited August 9, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[MODO Hockey]

@Brawndo

Come on now, what the hell is this. I demand you to bring us some good news