2020-21 Trade Rumors and Speculation

[Taro T]

6 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think its fantasyland that they would want to trade him. I also think its fantasyland that they haven't considered the option, considering their situation.

Pretty much it comes down to: can they talk a couple of the older guys with NMC's to waive them?  Logically the players shouldn't because they gave up money (usually) to obtain them & they are currently on a stacked team playing in a low tax state.

But that said, fully expect them to somehow get a couple of vets to waive their NMC.  Somebody'll be on their way out of TB.  Doubt it's Cirelli. And doubt it's the guys w/out NMC's because they still won't free up enough space to sign the kids they need/want to re-sign by shipping those guys out.

[dudacek]

16 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Pretty much it comes down to: can they talk a couple of the older guys with NMC's to waive them?  Logically the players shouldn't because they gave up money (usually) to obtain them & they are currently on a stacked team playing in a low tax state.

But that said, fully expect them to somehow get a couple of vets to waive their NMC.  Somebody'll be on their way out of TB.  Doubt it's Cirelli. And doubt it's the guys w/out NMC's because they still won't free up enough space to sign the kids they need/want to re-sign by shipping those guys out.

I think they conservatively need $10 million to sign Cirelli, Cernak and Sergachev, assuming that group buys into the Tampa discount cult. (Personally, Id have no trouble paying them $7, $5, and $3 respectively.)

Then they are going to need another ~ $4 million to fill in their final 3-5 roster spaces on minimum-wage guys. That makes them $8-9 Million over by my calculations.

Basically they will have to either trade two of Killorn, Johnson, Gourde or Palat for very little return as cap dumps (all except Killorn have full NTCs) or move one or more of Point, Sergachev, Cirelli or Cernak for larger returns.

They’ll do what’s best for the team, based on the offers that are out there.

[Broken Ankles]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I think they conservatively need $10 million to sign Cirelli, Cernak and Sergachev, assuming that group buys into the Tampa discount cult. (Personally, Id have no trouble paying them $7, $5, and $3 respectively.)

Then they are going to need another ~ $4 million to fill in their final 3-5 roster spaces on minimum-wage guys. That makes them $8-9 Million over by my calculations.

Basically they will have to either trade two of Killorn, Johnson, Gourde or Palat for very little return as cap dumps (all except Killorn have full NTCs) or move one or more of Point, Sergachev, Cirelli or Cernak for larger returns.

They’ll do what’s best for the team, based on the offers that are out there.

Why are you forgetting Little Nikita?  He's the only one other than Point without a NMC.  And his return would be bigger, would it not?  

Your valuation on Cernak is $5M? Or is it Serg with $5M and Cernak at $3M?   If you offered 4 years at $4.2M for Cernak the Offer Sheet calculator suggests the comp is only 1 second round pick.  A better bridge (outside State taxes) than Tampa could offer. 

[Andrew Amerk]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

Pretty much it comes down to: can they talk a couple of the older guys with NMC's to waive them?  Logically the players shouldn't because they gave up money (usually) to obtain them & they are currently on a stacked team playing in a low tax state.

But that said, fully expect them to somehow get a couple of vets to waive their NMC.  Somebody'll be on their way out of TB.  Doubt it's Cirelli. And doubt it's the guys w/out NMC's because they still won't free up enough space to sign the kids they need/want to re-sign by shipping those guys out.

Without looking, I’m guessing the teams with the most cap space are the NJ’s and Detroit’s and Ottawa’s of the league. 
 

Im not sure how they’re going to convince players with NTC’s to leave a Cup contender for a current bottom feeder. It will be interesting to watch. 

[dudacek]

44 minutes ago, Broken Ankles said:

Why are you forgetting Little Nikita?  He's the only one other than Point without a NMC.  And his return would be bigger, would it not?  

Your valuation on Cernak is $5M? Or is it Serg with $5M and Cernak at $3M?   If you offered 4 years at $4.2M for Cernak the Offer Sheet calculator suggests the comp is only 1 second round pick.  A better bridge (outside State taxes) than Tampa could offer. 

Yes, Serge $5, Cernak $3. I thought that Kuch had a no-trade that kicked in July 1, but I guess that’s technically not active yet due to COVID, so why not?

24 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Without looking, I’m guessing the teams with the most cap space are the NJ’s and Detroit’s and Ottawa’s of the league. 
 

Im not sure how they’re going to convince players with NTC’s to leave a Cup contender for a current bottom feeder. It will be interesting to watch. 

Don’t forget the Buffalos.

[Andrew Amerk]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Yes, Serge $5, Cernak $3. I thought that Kuch had a no-trade that kicked in July 1, but I guess that’s technically not active yet due to COVID, so why not?

Don’t forget the Buffalos.

Are we in that coven of teams with the most space now? 
 

I thought we were somewhere like 5th for most salary last season - that’s quite a giant swing if we are among those with the most space suddenly. 

[dudacek]

36 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Are we in that coven of teams with the most space now? 
 

I thought we were somewhere like 5th for most salary last season - that’s quite a giant swing if we are among those with the most space suddenly. 

We’re 3rd with about 34 million, well behind Detroit and Ottawa with about 42.

Most teams have 5-20.Five teams (Pit, TB, Tor, NYI and Stl are projected to be over the cap if they sign their RFAs.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Are we in that coven of teams with the most space now? 
 

I thought we were somewhere like 5th for most salary last season - that’s quite a giant swing if we are among those with the most space suddenly. 

Hunwick, Sobotka, Frolik, & Simmonds all coming off the books plus trading Scandella, Sheary, & Rodrigues away along with Bogosian willingly walking away clears a ton of useless salary off the books.  That alone is a 1/3 of a roster's worth of players.  All but Scandella can be replaced with cheaper & better players & he can be replaced with cheaper.

They also have Larsson & Girgensons who might not get re-signed and Vesey who likely won't be re-signed.

You said it: That is a huge swing in cap room.

[Andrew Amerk]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Hunwick, Sobotka, Frolik, & Simmonds all coming off the books plus trading Scandella, Sheary, & Rodrigues away along with Bogosian willingly walking away clears a ton of useless salary off the books.  That alone is a 1/3 of a roster's worth of players.  All but Scandella can be replaced with cheaper & better players & he can be replaced with cheaper.

They also have Larsson & Girgensons who might not get re-signed and Vesey who likely won't be re-signed.

You said it: That is a huge swing in cap room.

Which leads to another question: is that something JBOTT was working towards/waiting for?

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Which leads to another question: is that something JBOTT was working towards/waiting for?

One would hope.  But considering he was talking like he was going to bring Simmonds back and people feared that either Sobotka or Frolik could be back (personally, thought that was a serious stretch), who knows.

[JohnC]

16 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Hunwick, Sobotka, Frolik, & Simmonds all coming off the books plus trading Scandella, Sheary, & Rodrigues away along with Bogosian willingly walking away clears a ton of useless salary off the books.  That alone is a 1/3 of a roster's worth of players.  All but Scandella can be replaced with cheaper & better players & he can be replaced with cheaper.

They also have Larsson & Girgensons who might not get re-signed and Vesey who likely won't be re-signed.

You said it: That is a huge swing in cap room.

Whatever complaints people have about Botterill the one thing he did do is put this franchise in a good financial position to be in a good situation to rework the roster. Would he have taken an advantage of the situation that he painstakingly put this team? That is debatable. But to his credit he didn't go for the quick short term fix that Murray most likely would have taken. Now that Adams/Krueger are at the helm they are in a position to reshape the roster to their liking. It will be interesting to see what their visions are in roster building and what transactions they are going to make this offseason.  

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Whatever complaints people have about Botterill the one thing he did do is put this franchise in a good financial position to be in a good situation to rework the roster. Would he have taken an advantage of the situation that he painstakingly put this team? That is debatable. But to his credit he didn't go for the quick short term fix that Murray most likely would have taken. Now that Adams/Krueger are at the helm they are in a position to reshape the roster to their liking. It will be interesting to see what their visions are in roster building and what transactions they are going to make this offseason.  

Sure... What better way to have plenty of cap room than to have a bunch of crappy players you don'y have to pay?

GENIUS!

[JohnC]

8 hours ago, SwampD said:

Sure... What better way to have plenty of cap room than to have a bunch of crappy players you don'y have to pay?

GENIUS!

It was not about the past. It was about the future. Most of the pedestrian players he brought in were short term remedies to get to a situation where he could make better long term investments. Time ran out for him. Now its' up to Kueger/Adams to take advantage of the favorable situation. 

[LGR4GM]

10 hours ago, JohnC said:

Whatever complaints people have about Botterill the one thing he did do is put this franchise in a good financial position to be in a good situation to rework the roster. Would he have taken an advantage of the situation that he painstakingly put this team? That is debatable. But to his credit he didn't go for the quick short term fix that Murray most likely would have taken. Now that Adams/Krueger are at the helm they are in a position to reshape the roster to their liking. It will be interesting to see what their visions are in roster building and what transactions they are going to make this offseason.  

Botterill consistently added poor players to this team hurting our cap situation. Bridging Reinhart instead of signing him to a longer term deal was stupid. The only thing Botterill did was line up a bunch of expiring contracts which is the only reason we have some flexibility. 

[LGR4GM]

43 minutes ago, JohnC said:

It was not about the past. It was about the future. Most of the pedestrian players he brought in were short term remedies to get to a situation where he could make better long term investments. Time ran out for him. Now its' up to Kueger/Adams to take advantage of the favorable situation. 

I don't believe that for a second. He consistently failed at making any good investments short or long term. 

[kas23]

11 hours ago, JohnC said:

Whatever complaints people have about Botterill the one thing he did do is put this franchise in a good financial position to be in a good situation to rework the roster. Would he have taken an advantage of the situation that he painstakingly put this team? That is debatable. But to his credit he didn't go for the quick short term fix that Murray most likely would have taken. Now that Adams/Krueger are at the helm they are in a position to reshape the roster to their liking. It will be interesting to see what their visions are in roster building and what transactions they are going to make this offseason.  

The issue is that he was the one that created the problem in the first place. All those players coming off the books (except Bogo), he’s the one that gave them a spot on the team. Instead of actively trying to fix his problem, he used tincture of time (and the hope that players would lose their passion for hockey) to fix his problem. 

[JohnC]

37 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Botterill consistently added poor players to this team hurting our cap situation. Bridging Reinhart instead of signing him to a longer term deal was stupid. The only thing Botterill did was line up a bunch of expiring contracts which is the only reason we have some flexibility. 

The majority of the players that he brought in were on short term deals. There is no question that for the short term the cap was tight because his strategy was to have the short term cap stretching contracts expire in the near future so he would have greater flexibility to rework the roster. And that is exactly what happened! Botterill was never going for the quick fix. In handling contracts he was strategic and not tactical. And now the Sabres are in a good situation, the place where he wanted to be.  

I disagree with you on the handling of the Reinhart contract. Reinhart is a good player who is going to earn a large contract because he demonstrated the caliber of player he is. But it was not imprudent for the GM to challenge Reinhart and through his play earn the big contract. And that's what Reinhart did. How many times has this befuddled franchise rewarded players with long term contracts only to have them fade as players once the lengthy contract is linked? The bridge contract that Reinhart got was not only the right approach for the organization to take it was the right approach for Reinhart. 

14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't believe that for a second. He consistently failed at making any good investments short or long term. 

The Sabres are now in a position to bring in players. Not all teams are in that favorable situation. You might find that problematic but I don't. 

[JohnC]

14 minutes ago, kas23 said:

The issue is that he was the one that created the problem in the first place. All those players coming off the books (except Bogo), he’s the one that gave them a spot on the team. Instead of actively trying to fix his problem, he used tincture of time (and the hope that players would lose their passion for hockey) to fix his problem. 

Reworking the contract structure of the team was not going to be done quickly. The contracts that he brought in were mostly short term contracts. He was not looking for the quick fix. It took time to get to the point where we are now. I'm not saying that the former GM didn't make mistakes. He certainly did. But his strategy about contracts and the cap was the right strategy. I do believe that relatively the Sabres are in a good cap situation now. And that is how he planned it. 

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The majority of the players that he brought in were on short term deals. There is no question that for the short term the cap was tight because his strategy was to have the short term cap stretching contracts expire in the near future so he would have greater flexibility to rework the roster. And that is exactly what happened! Botterill was never going for the quick fix. In handling contracts he was strategic and not tactical. And now the Sabres are in a good situation, the place where he wanted to be.  

I disagree with you on the handling of the Reinhart contract. Reinhart is a good player who is going to earn a large contract because he demonstrated the caliber of player he is. But it was not imprudent for the GM to challenge Reinhart and through his play earn the big contract. And that's what Reinhart did. How many times has this befuddled franchise rewarded players with long term contracts only to have them fade as players once the lengthy contract is linked? The bridge contract that Reinhart got was not only the right approach for the organization to take it was the right approach for Reinhart. 

The Sabres are now in a position to bring in players. Not all teams are in that favorable situation. You might find that problematic but I don't. 

So he brought in short term contracts, that put us at the cap, so in the future when the short term contracts were gone, he could also spend to the cap? 

Reinhart should have been extended last year. 

They could have been in this position last year. I don't find it problematic, I find it problematic that he had this opportunity for at least 1 if not 2 years and instead continued the policy of doing nothing but adding garbage. What big contract is he now free of that handicapped him? Bogo? Sure but he also added Simmonds and Frolic that means he had the money. What about adding Vesey, there's 3 million of useless money on the cap. There weren't any big contract that are suddenly gone that Botterill himself did not bring in. The only exception is Bogo's 5.25mil 

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

Reworking the contract structure of the team was not going to be done quickly. The contracts that he brought in were mostly short term contracts. He was not looking for the quick fix. It took time to get to the point where we are now. I'm not saying that the former GM didn't make mistakes. He certainly did. But his strategy about contracts and the cap was the right strategy. I do believe that relatively the Sabres are in a good cap situation now. And that is how he planned it. 

Again, what contract was there on this team, this season that handcuffed him? There isn't one. He brought in Hunwich, he brought in Sobotka. Every other expiring contract except Bogo was Botterill's acquisition. 

Edited July 22, 2020 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Reworking the contract structure of the team was not going to be done quickly. The contracts that he brought in were mostly short term contracts. He was not looking for the quick fix. It took time to get to the point where we are now. I'm not saying that the former GM didn't make mistakes. He certainly did. But his strategy about contracts and the cap was the right strategy. I do believe that relatively the Sabres are in a good cap situation now. And that is how he planned it. 

Any strategy that relies on Sobtka, Frolic, Vesey, Simmonds is a bad one. You are right he did plan for these players to be off all at once but he also planned to bring some of them back (simmonds for example). He would have just screwed up his own cap again as he did almost every year he was here. He could have done completely different things and had far better outcomes but he either couldn't negotiate well enough to get those better players or he actually thought the guys he got were good. Either way he is too blame. 

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

So he brought in short term contracts, that put us at the cap, so in the future when the short term contracts were gone, he could also spend to the cap? 

Reinhart should have been extended last year. 

They could have been in this position last year. I don't find it problematic, I find it problematic that he had this opportunity for at least 1 if not 2 years and instead continued the policy of doing nothing but adding garbage. What big contract is he now free of that handicapped him? Bogo? Sure but he also added Simmonds and Frolic that means he had the money. What about adding Vesey, there's 3 million of useless money on the cap. There weren't any big contract that are suddenly gone that Botterill himself did not bring in. The only exception is Bogo's 5.25mil 

Again, what contract was there on this team, this season that handcuffed him? There isn't one. 

Adding players such as Simmonds and Frolic were basically stopgap acquisitions. Just because you have some cap money to work with doesn't mean that the players you might want to add in the present time are available at that time. You bring up three players such as Simmonds, Frolic and Vesey. They were all added with short term contracts. If you categorize them as garbage that's fine. None of them are worth debating over because that garbage will be gone this season leaving the Sabres in a position (hopefully) to make some impactful deals to fill their spots. 

[LGR4GM]

15 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Adding players such as Simmonds and Frolic were basically stopgap acquisitions. Just because you have some cap money to work with doesn't mean that the players you might want to add in the present time are available at that time. You bring up three players such as Simmonds, Frolic and Vesey. They were all added with short term contracts. If you categorize them as garbage that's fine. None of them are worth debating over because that garbage will be gone this season leaving the Sabres in a position (hopefully) to make some impactful deals to fill their spots. 

But again, he had this cap space last year. Bogo is the only contract that Botterill is not responsible for that he now would not have. 

[LGR4GM]

If Botterill's entire strategy was to limp along until this offseason than he deserved to be fired. To quote Tony Stark:

 

[Marvin]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

If Botterill's entire strategy was to limp along until this offseason than he deserved to be fired. To quote Tony Stark:

 

To slightly misquote Ford Prefect from the radio show, "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy", Fit the Third: if I had a head like Botterill's, I could have endless fun beating it against a wall.

He cleared out some cap...and promptly wasted it on Frolik, Simmonds, etc.  He clearly thought that he could build the team by dumpster diving, by overloading on defencemen, and a dearth of natural centres.  This is inexcusably, mind-bogglingly bad roster construction.

The Sabres' performance during his tenure was unacceptable by any measure.  The worst part was there was promise in the last two seasons that he flat out squandered by not acquiring a 2C (particularly 2 years ago, with 3 x 1st round picks).

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

It was not about the past. It was about the future. Most of the pedestrian players he brought in were short term remedies to get to a situation where he could make better long term investments. Time ran out for him. Now its' up to Kueger/Adams to take advantage of the favorable situation. 

I don't think it was a wise move to open up the roster/ cap situation this much when we are likely on most players no-trade list and not a favorable destination for FA. That pretty much leaves an inexperienced GM being forced to trade for players or re-sign guys you didn't really want to sign.

We only have 4 signed forwards. We have 4 RFA's we could sign. That would leave about 5 spots to fill while not being anyone's choice of destination. 

Edited July 22, 2020 by MakeSabresGrr8Again