Official Jason Karmanos Hired as Sabres Associate GM

[Thorner]

To compare the amount of maneuverability to an expansion team doesn't seem accurate. That's the part that's a stretch. 

Like I said, there's 35% of the cap already locked in from the previous season.

You can't just count KO, the expansion team would be choosing the savvy vet not just dealt KO haha

I didn't think the argument was "we will LOOK" like an expansion team. If it is...that's not a good thing? Expansion teams have always been bad up until the last one

It started as a "clean slate" thing, about space to work. Which we have a lot less of. The conversation shifted here mid discussion 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Thorny

[dudacek]

23 minutes ago, Thorny said:

To compare the amount of maneuverability to an expansion team doesn't seem accurate. That's the part that's a stretch. 

Like I said, there's 35% of the cap already locked in from the previous season.

You can't just count KO, the expansion team would be choosing the savvy vet not just dealt KO haha

I didn't think the argument was "we will LOOK" like an expansion team. If it is...that's not a good thing? Expansion teams have always been bad up until the last one

It started as a "clean slate" thing, about space to work. Which we have a lot less of. The conversation shifted here mid discussion 

An expansion team is required to take on 60 per cent of the salary cap in other team's spare parts — like $48 million or so. Their slate isn't "clean" either.

[Thorner]

15 minutes ago, dudacek said:

An expansion team is required to take on 60 per cent of the salary cap in other team's spare parts — like $48 million or so. Their slate isn't "clean" either.

Alright. If being saddled with a substantial contingent of specific players is "virtually" the same as picking among a league pool, I yield. I don't see them as having similar flexibility to an expansion team but that's just me 

More over, like I said, 4 of the 5 players we are saddled with (an at arbitrary point of 2 seasons from now*) when combined with their contracts are not players I'd want to have ie if they compare to an expansion team it's not in a good way

*The Sabres actually have 12 players committed to for next year. Blank canvas this offseason? Depends on the POV i guess

(Skinner, Okposo, Olofsson, Eakin, Thompson, Cozens, Lazar, Ristolainen, Miller, Byrson, Eichel, Girgensons are the names on the NHL books for next year)

Edited March 31, 2021 by Thorny

[WildCard]

Just now, Thorny said:

Skinner, Okposo, Olofsson, Eakin, Thompson, Cozens, Lazar, Ristolainen, Miller, Byrson, Eichel, Girgensons - those are the names on the NHL books for next year

*****, still? 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, WildCard said:

*****, still? 

2 more lol 

[LabattBlue]

Unless the new FO/coaching staff figures out a way to make Skinner a useful part of the top 6, he will be a boat anchor chewing up 11% of the cap for the next 6 years.   11 friggin percent. 😡

[Stoner]

1 minute ago, LabattBlue said:

Unless the new FO/coaching staff figures out a way to make Skinner a useful part of the top 6, he will be a boat anchor chewing up 11% of the cap for the next 6 years.   11 friggin percent. 😡

Jeff will have to figure that out. I'm not up to speed on the latest excuse for why Jeff isn't doing anything with more ice time under Granato/Adams.

[Thorner]

In the end I think we can agree that Adams certainly has the room to move about to the extent that the results can be judged as his, and only his (or his and his Advisor or w/e, if we bring someone else like Rutherford in)

Edited March 31, 2021 by Thorny

[Norcal]

13 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

Unless the new FO/coaching staff figures out a way to make Skinner a useful part of the top 6, he will be a boat anchor chewing up 11% of the cap for the next 6 years.   11 friggin percent. 😡

I thought Skinner was a closer version to what he was when he got here, or before, last game than he has been in a while. 

He's starting to hound pucks and be the pesty guy Sabres fans liked when he was acquired. He's alot more active in all three zones, shooting more and actually scoring finally.

He even made atleast one play where he came all the way back into the zone and deflected a sure prime scoring chance away in the slot, retrieved the loose puck and gave it to his D man for a zone exit. 

I feel like he could yet find his game again.

[Eleven]

3 minutes ago, Norcal said:

I thought Skinner was a closer version to what he was when he got here, or before, last game than he has been in a while. 

He's starting to hound pucks and be the pesty guy Sabres fans liked when he was acquired. He's alot more active in all three zones, shooting more and actually scoring finally.

He even made atleast one play where he came all the way back into the zone and deflected a sure prime scoring chance away in the slot, retrieved the loose puck and gave it to his D man for a zone exit. 

I feel like he could yet find his game again.

I liked how he looked on Monday, too.  For most of the game, at least.

[dudacek]

43 minutes ago, Thorny said:

*The Sabres actually have 12 players committed to for next year. Blank canvas this offseason? Depends on the POV i guess

(Skinner, Okposo, Olofsson, Eakin, Thompson, Cozens, Lazar, Ristolainen, Miller, Byrson, Eichel, Girgensons are the names on the NHL books for next year)

Yes, this summer it will be interesting to see some of Adams' choices

Eichel, Olofsson, Ristolainen, Miller (Reinhart, Mittelstadt): tradable

Eakin, Thompson, Lazar, Girgensons: not particularly significant in a cap sense, in that they are relatively cheap roster pieces, or bury/buyout options

Skinner, Okposo: immovable

Edited March 31, 2021 by dudacek

[Thorner]

Miller and Eakin really stick out. Eakin especially cause he gets a fair bit of usage. I’m not sure an argument exists for bringing him back 

Those are the guys id be actively seeking to move. After that it’s listening on everyone. Again McDavid theory here. 

I’m moving others just for the sake of this team needing a shake up but hard to say who without knowing potential return. VO I’d REALLY be listening 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Thorny

[dudacek]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Miller and Eakin really stick out. Eakin especially cause he gets a fair bit of usage. I’m not sure an argument exists for bringing him back 

Those are the guys id be actively seeking to move. After that it’s listening on everyone. Again McDavid theory here. 

Miller is really my hoped-for Seattle move: expiring contract, NHL player who could get work on their PP, may be flippable at the deadline, analytics liked him prior to Buffalo, might be more attractive than other Sabre options.

I've run the numbers on a Eakin buyout. It's definitely do-able and probably the move I'd make. He can't be in our top three ever again.

[Kruppstahl]

47 minutes ago, WildCard said:

*****, still? 

Okposo should have been removed from this roster probably at least *three years* ago.

The fact that he trudges around out there night after night is truly incredible to me.

And folks wonder why we have lost 18 games in a row.

 

 

[Kruppstahl]

47 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

Unless the new FO/coaching staff figures out a way to make Skinner a useful part of the top 6, he will be a boat anchor chewing up 11% of the cap for the next 6 years.   11 friggin percent. 😡

Which makes Ralph's organizational waste of Skinner all the more outrageous.

He is one of the few guys on the team who has been getting his scoring chances all year long, despite what he has had to work with, and he still rides the 4th line and gets benched for 3 games?

His pay rate means he must be used more effectively, as you state; the fact that the guys running the team don't understand that is mind blowing.  

 

[Kruppstahl]

On 3/29/2021 at 2:45 PM, New Scotland (NS) said:

The tank was a horrible strategy.  No doubt.  The price was always going to be too high.  Very high risk.

I totally disagree with this.  I understand some people don't like the tank, and you have a right to disagree with it.

But you can't say it was a bad strategy.  It set out to get elite talent on the team, and it did.

It could have gone better (we get lucky and get McDavid instead of Eichel, and select Draisaitl instead of Reinhart) but we did still get Dahlin, too, don't forget, who some might have suggested was the most special player of all of them.

Eichel is still a top 10 center league wide.  Reinhart is easily the second best player on the team, finding a way to get production on an absolutely horrible team with injuries and Eichel out of the lineup.

Dahlin's development has gone totally sideways, but he's still here.

The tank got us the talent we wanted to get.

The fact that the organization has been managed incredibly ineptly since the tank years does *not* render the tank an unsound concept.

Pegula hasn't figured out yet that you have to pick a lane at the grocery store and then stay in it, if you ever want to check out. 

He likes to bounce from lane to lane to lane, and then wonders why he is always in line.

 

[Zamboni]

1 hour ago, LabattBlue said:

Unless the new FO/coaching staff figures out a way to make Skinner a useful part of the top 6, he will be a boat anchor chewing up 11% of the cap for the next 6 years.   11 friggin percent. 😡

And if the cap goes up ... the 11% drops.  So it won’t always be 11% most likely. 
But still a boat anchor nonetheless ...

[nucci]

22 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

Okposo should have been removed from this roster probably at least *three years* ago.

The fact that he trudges around out there night after night is truly incredible to me.

And folks wonder why we have lost 18 games in a row.

 

 

I don't think anyone does

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

I totally disagree with this.  I understand some people don't like the tank, and you have a right to disagree with it.

But you can't say it was a bad strategy.  It set out to get elite talent on the team, and it did.

It could have gone better (we get lucky and get McDavid instead of Eichel, and select Draisaitl instead of Reinhart) but we did still get Dahlin, too, don't forget, who some might have suggested was the most special player of all of them.

Eichel is still a top 10 center league wide.  Reinhart is easily the second best player on the team, finding a way to get production on an absolutely horrible team with injuries and Eichel out of the lineup.

Dahlin's development has gone totally sideways, but he's still here.

The tank got us the talent we wanted to get.

The fact that the organization has been managed incredibly ineptly since the tank years does *not* render the tank an unsound concept.

Pegula hasn't figured out yet that you have to pick a lane at the grocery store and then stay in it, if you ever want to check out. 

He likes to bounce from lane to lane to lane, and then wonders why he is always in line.

 

But likewise, achieving the stated goal of the tank doesn’t by definition render the tank a sound concept when,

 - The merits of whether that should have been the goal are in question, and if, 

- no thought is paid to the widespread affects the tank had/may have had to the roster at large (scorched earth strategy) 

“it achieved what it set out to do” is a rather minuscule victory if said goal resulted in the ground this roster was to be built in being salted so nothing could grow again. 

Tldr - win battle lose war no equals success

A strategy achieving it’s goal does not inherently mean it was a good strategy 

[GASabresIUFAN]

People should stop dumping on KO.  He is the only Sabre scoring right now.  He has 2 goals and 4 assists in his last 8 games and has 4 points in his last 4.  

[Curt]

39 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

I totally disagree with this.  I understand some people don't like the tank, and you have a right to disagree with it.

But you can't say it was a bad strategy.  It set out to get elite talent on the team, and it did.

It could have gone better (we get lucky and get McDavid instead of Eichel, and select Draisaitl instead of Reinhart) but we did still get Dahlin, too, don't forget, who some might have suggested was the most special player of all of them.

Eichel is still a top 10 center league wide.  Reinhart is easily the second best player on the team, finding a way to get production on an absolutely horrible team with injuries and Eichel out of the lineup.

Dahlin's development has gone totally sideways, but he's still here.

The tank got us the talent we wanted to get.

The fact that the organization has been managed incredibly ineptly since the tank years does *not* render the tank an unsound concept.

Pegula hasn't figured out yet that you have to pick a lane at the grocery store and then stay in it, if you ever want to check out. 

He likes to bounce from lane to lane to lane, and then wonders why he is always in line.

 

But at what cost?  At what cost?

[Brawndo]

Adams was on the Morning Skate Livecast with Duff and Biron, He mentioned He was interviewing an AGM Candidate in Pittsburgh when he found out that Granato and Ellis were in Covid Protocol. 
 

That would have been Jason Karamanos Interview 

[Mustache of God]

Does Skinner have a NMC that requires us to protect him in the expansion draft?

[Curt]

3 minutes ago, Mustache of God said:

Does Skinner have a NMC that requires us to protect him in the expansion draft?

Unfortunately, yes.  Players with a NMC are required to be protected.

[nfreeman]

38 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But likewise, achieving the stated goal of the tank doesn’t by definition render the tank a sound concept when,

 - The merits of whether that should have been the goal are in question, and if, 

- no thought is paid to the widespread affects the tank had/may have had to the roster at large (scorched earth strategy) 

“it achieved what it set out to do” is a rather minuscule victory if said goal resulted in the ground this roster was to be built in being salted so nothing could grow again. 

Tldr - win battle lose war no equals success

A strategy achieving it’s goal does not inherently mean it was a good strategy 

Eggs-actly.

For the zillionth time:  the point of the tank was to end up with a winning team -- NOT just to end up with a star player.  The misguided souls who supported the tank did so because they thought, wrongly, that getting a star player was the surest path to developing a winning team.  The wise ones who opposed the tank knew that really bad teams usually stay in the basement -- they don't just pop down to pick up a bottle of champagne and then pop back up to become the life of the party.

Also, Dahlin was not part of the tank.  The Sabres were trying to be good that year -- they just failed miserably due to incompetence at GM and HC.