Layout Your Offseason Plan

[Thorner]

9 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

Based on your suspicions however he wouldn't be worth the trade to begin with however.

 

In my opinion while @Thorny is correct we have the prospect depth to survive a trade; that doesn't particularly make me willing to use that depth on a 1 year hail Mary who based on your readings would suffer significant regression due to Buffalo's style versus Winnipeg's.

Additionally is the issue of a new contract. I don't want a Bob contract whereas we have a goalie who is overpaid by nearly 5mil a year and has been mediocre at best besides this year's playoff run. Plus he'll be looking for year we really have no need to give out. Even slow rolling Levi's starting role for 3 seasons would equate to a mere 2 year extension. Anything longer and we are more or less pushing Levi out of Buffalo. 

I would rather just sign a stop gap than pay a king's ransom to either have a rental for a season or a long term increasingly headache inducing contract. Goalies are just far too fickle of a resource to devote such large amounts of assets to potentially get a single year of above average goaltending.

We don’t have the prospect depth to merely “survive” a trade, we have the prospect depth that necessitates a trade. Hellebuyck is way better than you think he is. I can tell from your usage of things like “above average” goaltending. And “fickle”. Hellebuyck is one of the best players in the league, watch a lot of him first hand. 

I suppose I just don’t see a one year term as a “rental” at all. The league is measured in seasons. It’s a full season. I agree with dudacek that I’m slightly surprised at the lack of desire to put, really, any value on what next season could be. 

It’s a very justifiable price to pay when we don’t have to sacrifice really much of anything long term and actively put ourselves in a position where we very likely could have a special season. Isn’t that what it’s all about? 

Make the memory!

Edited June 1, 2023 by Thorny

[Thorner]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

 Lot of negative assumptions here.

”Goalies”might be fickle, “Hellebuyck” has been anything but. Dude has had 7 seasons as an NHL starter and never had a year worse than .907 (his 1st year as a starter) or 24 wins (a COVID season). His career averages are 32 wins and .916. A significant regression to a career worst year is still a significant upgrade on UPL or Comrie. This is what I mean about looking past his talent.

Pick 13, UPL and Kisakov or something similar is not “a king’s ransom”. It’s the type of price one pays for a first liner but not a star player. It’s possible one or more of those pieces are good. But it is highly less likely any of those pieces are part of the Sabres core 3 years from now - or even beyond - than Hellebuyck would be.

But the biggest negative assumption is that we would sign Hellebuyck to a Bob contract. In order to earn such a contract Hellebuyck would have to have an impact season with the Sabres, the type of season that would justify the trade price. The Sabres would be in a position to either sign him to a deal that makes sense under their cap, or walk and pass the baton to Levi, who would be in a much better position to take it. Hellebuyck, coming off a bad year would be in no position to ask for such a contract. Coming off a good year, he would be more likely to take a team-friendly deal in Buffalo because things here “worked” and he has his desired  “chance to win”.

Sure there’s a chance he doesn’t provide contender -calibre goaltending next year, he walks and the Sabres give up the next Matt Savoie plus for nothing. But there’s a better chance they give up the next Drew Stafford to be a contender next year while giving Levi a buffer and exploring the potential of something longer term with Hellebuyck.

Thanks, I think you’ve convinced me that I’m on board with trading 13 for Hellebuyck. He’s the closest thing we’re going to get to a playoff guarantee at a cost we can afford.

Love it. 

[nfreeman]

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We don’t have the prospect depth to merely “survive” a trade, we have the prospect depth that necessitates a trade. Hellebuyck is way better than you think he is. I can tell from your usage of things like “above average” goaltending. And “fickle”. Hellebuyck is one of the best players in the league, watch a lot of him first hand. 

I suppose I just don’t see a one year term as a “rental” at all. The league is measured in seasons. It’s a full season. I agree with dudacek that I’m slightly surprised at the lack of desire to put, really, any value on what next season could be. 

It’s a very justifiable price to pay when we don’t have to sacrifice really much of anything long term and actively put ourselves in a position where we very likely could have a special season. Isn’t that what it’s all about? 

Make the memory!

The underlying point here is reasonable -- there's an opportunity to make next season the best Sabres season since 2006-2007, the Sabres seem to have a ton of good young prospects already, and advancing that opportunity by getting Helle is worth sacrificing a valuable asset in #13, which may or may not develop into another good young prospect -- but I think the bolded items are exaggerated.

For the first one -- we cannot know how these prospects will develop.  It's quite likely that more than one of them will wash out, get injured, decide to go back home, etc.  In the meantime there is plenty of room on the Amerks' roster and all of them are far away from having to clear waivers.

For the 2nd one -- not wanting to give up #13 this year is not equivalent to not putting any value on Helle.  I, and I think most here, would give up the Sabres' 2024 #1 plus UPL and a decent prospect for Helle.  That is a pretty good package for a guy with 1 year left before UFA.  I'd be curious to know what other goalies with similar contract situations have recently been traded for better packages.

[Thorner]

Man PLEASE 

Skinner - Thompson - Tuch

Peterka - Cozens - Quinn 

Mittelstadt - Krebs - Okposo

Girgensons - Kulich - Greenway

 

Samuelsson - Dahlin

Power - Acquisition Guy

Stillman - Jokiharju

 

Hellebuyck (45 gp)

Levi (35 gp)

 

...this team would SLAP. My offseason plan would look like this cause we’d win a lot of games next year. Winning fun. YMMV. 

[Thorner]

34 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

The underlying point here is reasonable -- there's an opportunity to make next season the best Sabres season since 2006-2007, the Sabres seem to have a ton of good young prospects already, and advancing that opportunity by getting Helle is worth sacrificing a valuable asset in #13, which may or may not develop into another good young prospect -- but I think the bolded items are exaggerated.

For the first one -- we cannot know how these prospects will develop.  It's quite likely that more than one of them will wash out, get injured, decide to go back home, etc.  In the meantime there is plenty of room on the Amerks' roster and all of them are far away from having to clear waivers.

For the 2nd one -- not wanting to give up #13 this year is not equivalent to not putting any value on Helle.  I, and I think most here, would give up the Sabres' 2024 #1 plus UPL and a decent prospect for Helle.  That is a pretty good package for a guy with 1 year left before UFA.  I'd be curious to know what other goalies with similar contract situations have recently been traded for better packages.

I don’t think a trade is necessitated this offseason, but my point is that imo one is necessitated at some point because not all of these prospects in our loaded system are going to make it. I didn’t make that point in isolation: my main point was timeline. 13 if selected isn’t going to make an impact for years. In that entire timeframe, from now until then, we are going to be dealing out a prospect or two. This pick is just one guy who will arrive one year sooner than the guy we pick the following year. That one year sooner arrival isn’t important to me when the the system isn’t waiting on anything 

[Crusader1969]

On 5/31/2023 at 8:39 AM, Brawndo said:

Chad DeDomincis released a Mock Offseason this AM. 
 

Said the price for Hellebuyck isn’t astronomical. A first, rostered player and B Prospect.

He had the Sabres trading 13th OA, UPL and Kisakov for Him. 

Also this trade 

Buffalo Sabres acquire Matt Grzelcyk in exchange for Jacob Bryson and the Sabres’ 2024 second-round pick

Does not have Jost or Zemgus returning.

Mentioned VO isn’t generating much trade interest around the league 

 

I turned it off after they traded away Peterka!

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

I turned it off after they traded away Peterka!

What did Chad deal Peterka for? 

[French Collection]

36 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Man PLEASE 

Skinner - Thompson - Tuch

Peterka - Cozens - Quinn 

Mittelstadt - Krebs - Okposo

Girgensons - Kulich - Greenway

 

Samuelsson - Dahlin

Power - Acquisition Guy

Stillman - Jokiharju

 

Hellebuyck (45 gp)

Levi (35 gp)

 

...this team would SLAP. My offseason plan would look like this cause we’d win a lot of games next year. Winning fun. YMMV. 

If the acquired Dman is Graves this team would definitely make the playoffs and do some damage if they had a goalie heat up at the right time.

I would guess you regained some draft pick(s) by dealing away VO.

Rousek could be the 13th forward, giving KO breaks.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, French Collection said:

If the acquired Dman is Graves this team would definitely make the playoffs and do some damage if they had a goalie heat up at the right time.

I would guess you regained some draft pick(s) by dealing away VO.

Rousek could be the 13th forward, giving KO breaks.

We aren’t going to “feel” anything we give up in that Helle deal. We probably will feel a lot of joy in our bones though, as we enjoy the fun season the fans have so thoroughly earned through this long journey through the desert. 

I’d imagine the vibes and aid to culture that season provides, both in terms of camaraderie in the room and perception league wide outside of it likely pays dividends in KA’s dealings throughout the league, afterwords, too. Jack had the success this year where the league took notice and said, “ok, that’s why you fought for what you fought for.” When the GM literally states that guys who “want to be here” is such a key focus of his plan, creating a situation that actively aids that goal is being undersold imo

 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

The underlying point here is reasonable -- there's an opportunity to make next season the best Sabres season since 2006-2007, the Sabres seem to have a ton of good young prospects already, and advancing that opportunity by getting Helle is worth sacrificing a valuable asset in #13, which may or may not develop into another good young prospect -- but I think the bolded items are exaggerated.

For the first one -- we cannot know how these prospects will develop.  It's quite likely that more than one of them will wash out, get injured, decide to go back home, etc.  In the meantime there is plenty of room on the Amerks' roster and all of them are far away from having to clear waivers.

For the 2nd one -- not wanting to give up #13 this year is not equivalent to not putting any value on Helle.  I, and I think most here, would give up the Sabres' 2024 #1 plus UPL and a decent prospect for Helle.  That is a pretty good package for a guy with 1 year left before UFA.  I'd be curious to know what other goalies with similar contract situations have recently been traded for better packages.

I disagree with your 1st point: not that some will wash out, just with the math.

NHL players on ELCs or long-term deals take up 10 roster spots, while Mittelstadt, Dahlin, Jokiharju and UPL remain under team control when their contracts expire and increase that total to 14.

There is not enough room for the 6 1st rounders (Savoie, Östlund, Kulich, Rosen, Johnson and 13) to graduate in the next 2 or 3 years, never mind the 5 recent 2nds, and tthe deeper cuts like Novikov and Rousek. 

Your 2nd point is mostly correct; very few goalies have garnered that return, period, regardless of coontract. Goalies of Hellebuyck calibre rarely reach free agency or get moved, making comparables, or recent ones at least, tough.

Edited June 1, 2023 by dudacek

[Thorner]

Good thread though 

[Crusader1969]

22 hours ago, Brawndo said:

he Sabres Front Office has created the perfect environment to make a move like this, as the roster is ready to take the next step and has assembled a deep pool of assets. 

Okposo said the expectations for the team is the playoffs, a move like this shows the FO agrees. 

He actually said Stanley Cup

[Crusader1969]

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What did Chad deal Peterka for? 

I think it was Pettersson from the Penguins during the Expected Buffalo Podcast.  

[Thorner]

People don’t appreciate how bad the Jets are defensively, and just in general. Their record was misleading, and the reason was squarely Connor Hellebuyck. Their forwards are *terrible* defensively. Remember that game in Winnipeg last/this season, that second period where we thoroughly dominated and Hellebuyck stood on his head? I’ve seen him do that a lot, live. The system they play isn’t a different one to ours that maximizes Hellebuyck, their poor system skirts by because Hellebuyck bandaids it into success. He’d probably be better here.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Thorny

[Crusader1969]

12 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We aren’t going to “feel” anything we give up in that Helle deal. We probably will feel a lot of joy in our bones though, as we enjoy the fun season the fans have so thoroughly earned through this long journey through the desert. 

I’d imagine the vibes and aid to culture that season provides, both in terms of camaraderie in the room and perception league wide outside of it likely pays dividends in KA’s dealings throughout the league, afterwords, too. Jack had the success this year where the league took notice and said, “ok, that’s why you fought for what you fought for.” When the GM literally states that guys who “want to be here” is such a key focus of his plan, creating a situation that actively aids that goal is being undersold imo

 

ok i'm convinced...trade the 13th overall pick for Helleybuck  BUT then trade back into the first by Trading Joker and get Simashev in the early 20s.

 

 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

I think it was Pettersson from the Penguins during the Expected Buffalo Podcast.  

We can just leave that particular deal out, then 

[Crusader1969]

Just now, Thorny said:

We can just leave that particular deal out, then 

Definitely!

 

 just sign a UFA for a #4.  They have the cap space to the enticing opportunity to play next to Power,  

Then, Pick up the phone to the new GM in Calgary and pick up one of their pending UFA's dmen who they can't afford to let leave for nothing. 

Now you've added 2 Dmen (lost Joker via trade proposed above) and added a top goalie. The forwards are untouched 

Here we go!

 

 

 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Crusader1969 said:

ok i'm convinced...trade the 13th overall pick for Helleybuck  BUT then trade back into the first by Trading Joker and get Simashev in the early 20s.

 

 

Good man. 

Not only has the context changed, re: depth of prospect pool and specifically the NHL roles we need said pool to fill, but the guy putting the finishing touches on everything is proving to be, with his team of guys, a very excellent drafter. Not only is it not Tim Murray needing to fill in a roster made barren through Tank, it’s not Tim Murray. Tim Murray comps re: mortgaging the future need not apply. I trust KA to do pretty much anything. He made a great trade for Eichel when under the microscope: seeing what he can do when it’s HIS pursuit in the first place is exceptionally intriguing. I want to see him use picks as currency not only because he’ll probably win the trade, I know he’ll maximize the ones he doesn’t deal. Don’t we think KA is above the curve when it comes to GMs? This is a tool we want unleashed. Trades don’t need to be, and often aren’t a zero-sum game but the longer KA is locked in a room with the other old, recycled, carousel GMs of this league, the more likely we, in my estimation, gain not only through fit but also relatively: if there’s a loser in those potential deals it’s probably the Other Guys

3 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

Definitely!

 

 just sign a UFA for a #4.  They have the cap space to the enticing opportunity to play next to Power,  

Then, Pick up the phone to the new GM in Calgary and pick up one of their pending UFA's dmen who they can't afford to let leave for nothing. 

Now you've added 2 Dmen (lost Joker via trade proposed above) and added a top goalie. The forwards are untouched 

Here we go!

 

 

 

New GM, same as old recycled GM, amirite 

[Taro T]

6 hours ago, French Collection said:

I think I would take the risk of #13, UPL and a mid level prospect for one year of Hellebuyck.

As the year goes on KA can assess the impact of Helle, the fit with the team and how Helle feels going forward.

One wild card here is how Levi develops with Helle as a mentor. I don’t expect him to get to Helle’s level by January but there should be some improvements in his game and how he handles the NHL.

A few ifs I can live with here.

If Helle is a good fit and wants to extend, KA can get this done. He has cap space and the luxury of a backup on an ELC to keep the goalie costs reasonable. The term may reflect Levi’s progress and his projected future.

If Helle doesn’t want to extend KA can move him at the deadline and possibly recoup similar assets. Helle/Levi would probably have the team inside the playoff numbers so there would have to be a few things in place to keep them there.

If Levi has shown to be not much of a step down from Helle and is ready to handle more, they stay in the playoff race.

If Levi has progressed but needs a 1B then the trade can be structured to get a goalie back. Trade partner would upgrade with Helle and send a Cam Talbot level veteran back. This lowers the return of other assets but keeps the playoffs in view.

As I said earlier,I would hate to see Hellebuyck go to New Jersey or Ottawa and be the guy that knocks the Sabres out of the playoffs for the next 5 years.

The trade being proposed at this point (13, UPL, & Kisakov/Rosen/similar) would absolutely be a great trade for the Sabres.  For so many reasons already mentioned by so many here in this discussion.  

But the point that you allude to that isn't getting made strongly enough is Hellebucyk COULD be traded this year, even IF he and Levi are working well together IF Levi has a really strong year.  If the team is going to be trying to ride Levi primarily in the playoffs, then if Adams absolutely knows he won't be able to keep Hellebucyk after the calendar flips from June '24 he can trade him for something and ideally they'd get back a Gerber-esque goalie back to fill that Gerber-esque roll from the Canes '06 playoff run.  Wouldn't go that route personally, but it might make sense to do so.  

There are so many different ways for it to play out, but if they land Helly for that sort of a package; honestly can ONLY see it not working if Helly gets seriously injured early in the season.  But that might blow up most plans should it happen to somebody else that's a key player.  IMHO, that trade is a no brainer from the Sabres perspective.  Git 'er dun, Kevyn.

(And yes, getting Saros would be a surer thing that they'd have him for the next 2 years which is the time frame they'd want another goalie "ahead" of Levi; but because he has that 2nd year under contract, can't see him being available for that same package that MIGHT land Helly.)

The Sabres would still have other assets to bring in the top 4 D-man they're looking to bring in too if they don't want to go through the UFA route.  Just can't see a way bringing in Helly would be a bad thing.

[Thorner]

17 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The trade being proposed at this point (13, UPL, & Kisakov/Rosen/similar) would absolutely be a great trade for the Sabres.  For so many reasons already mentioned by so many here in this discussion.  

But the point that you allude to that isn't getting made strongly enough is Hellebucyk COULD be traded this year, even IF he and Levi are working well together IF Levi has a really strong year.  If the team is going to be trying to ride Levi primarily in the playoffs, then if Adams absolutely knows he won't be able to keep Hellebucyk after the calendar flips from June '24 he can trade him for something and ideally they'd get back a Gerber-esque goalie back to fill that Gerber-esque roll from the Canes '06 playoff run.  Wouldn't go that route personally, but it might make sense to do so.  

There are so many different ways for it to play out, but if they land Helly for that sort of a package; honestly can ONLY see it not working if Helly gets seriously injured early in the season.  But that might blow up most plans should it happen to somebody else that's a key player.  IMHO, that trade is a no brainer from the Sabres perspective.  Git 'er dun, Kevyn.

(And yes, getting Saros would be a surer thing that they'd have him for the next 2 years which is the time frame they'd want another goalie "ahead" of Levi; but because he has that 2nd year under contract, can't see him being available for that same package that MIGHT land Helly.)

The Sabres would still have other assets to bring in the top 4 D-man they're looking to bring in too if they don't want to go through the UFA route.  Just can't see a way bringing in Helly would be a bad thing.

And Helle is better than Saros, anyways. Imo ppl really are in some ways taking the “goalies are voodoo” thing a bit too far. The spirit of the statement wasn’t ever strictly that, it was that, *outside of a few exceptions that prove the rule*, goalies are voodoo. Hellebuyck is a certified outlier. He’ll be in the vezina conversation assuming health. Dahlin will be in the Norris convo assuming health, like the comp dudacek made. We score a lot of goals. What’s not to like 

In my reading there was as much optimism that Comrie could extrapolate his numbers over a large sample size, something he’d never done, as there is that Helle can merely retain a status quo. The latter is exponentially more likely. Maybe the difference is just that KA had acquired Comrie and not yet Hellebuyck. If KA puts his seal of approval on Hellebuyck through acquisition the mood prob changes 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

In the end I’ve watched us get burned far too many times to trust trading so much for a goalie for a singular season. 
 

It also partially stems from how good this particular draft is and that I don’t want to just throw away a top 15 pick for a rental. He could be the greatest rental of all time but barring a Cup win we almost suredly lose the trade over time.

 

I guess the other option would be to try and get another 1st in a trade up and offer that 20’s pick or play with the Jets to get pick 18 back. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by thewookie1

[Weave]

I love it.  Thorny is fully in move surplus high value picks/prospects because we are talking roundS of playoffs, and Eleven is in Angry Eleven mode throwing max sarcasm at moving good players for picks.

Are we back now?  Are we normal again?  God, I hope so.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

In the end I’ve watched us get burned far too many times to trust trading so much for a goalie for a singular season. 
 

It also partially stems from how good this particular draft is and that I don’t want to just throw away a top 15 pick for a rental. He could be the greatest rental of all time but barring a Cup win we almost suredly lose the trade over time.

 

I guess the other option would be to try and get another 1st in a trade up and offer that 20’s pick or play with the Jets to get pick 18 back. 

At some point the calculation changes from “winning trades” in and of themselves to trades being a means to an end. 

Teams more interested in supplementing their system than winning games use the language of “winning trades”. Teams interested in winning are more interested in trades that facilitate said winning.

This is classic “lose the battle win the war” stuff. 

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

At some point the calculation changes from “winning trades” in and of themselves to trades being a means to an end. 

Teams more interested in supplementing their system than winning games use the language of “winning trades”. Teams interested in winning are more interested in trades that facilitate said winning.

This is classic “lose the battle win the war” stuff. 

This leads to people saying things like the Sabres “won” the ROR trade. Ok? The Blues won the cup, because of the trade. That supersedes any Vacuum calculation.

From their point of view.

Did the Sabres also win the trade, from their perspective? Imo my answer to even that is no because from our perspective the trade played a big part in tanking the roster Botterill was trying to create. Bad timing, just like Murray. Just for different reasons. 

The Eichel trade fits the bill as a win win 

i think you’ll find the common denominator in successful swaps is much less tied to strategy than it is to the mind implementing it: what is it that @dudaceksays about Botterill (unless I’m mistaken): his errors were not strategy based but rather execution. Adams execution has been undeniable imo

Edited June 1, 2023 by Thorny

[Weave]

We need a Hellebucyk version of the Gimme fuel, gimme fire, gimme Timo ***** Meier t shirt someone way more creative than me was hawking in NJ.