Casey Mittelstadt traded for Bowen Byram

[Doohicksie]

33 minutes ago, dudacek said:

This is not his history at all.

Oh yeah?  Go on the Avs forum.  They were glad to be rid of him and his inconsistency.

[Doohicksie]

6 minutes ago, seer775 said:

We were never going to pay Mitts top dollar to play 3C.

And that was the first mistake.  He's at least 2C material; he's played 1C with no dropoff on the top line.  If anything, paying Cozens to be 2C was the mistake; he's still a "potential" 2C.  Mitts is the real deal.

[Doohicksie]

8 minutes ago, seer775 said:

Byram > Power >>> RJ

I think you're underestimating Johnson there.

Have I seen Byram play top notch defense?  Yes.  Does he do it consistently?  No.  (And that, by the way, is why the Avs moved him.)  Does he make too many bone-headed plays?  Yes.

[Doohicksie]

1 minute ago, seer775 said:

False. Cozens has a higher ppg than Mitts at 23 y/o. Despite last year's performance, Mitts has been a no-show.

Mitts has improved every season.  So Cozens is better than Mitts was in the past.  I'm talking about Mitts NOW.  He's flat out better than Cozens.  We kept him through his lean years and traded him in his gravy years.

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, seer775 said:

We were never going to pay Mitts top dollar to play 3C. Especially considering how awful our Defensemen are. Mitts could wing, but with Skinner, Tuch, JJP, and Quinn, why bother?

Byram > Power >>> RJ, Clifton, Joker, Mule, Bryson.

Having competent defensemen is more important than having skilled forwards. Dmen play more minutes in all situations.

You build the roster from the net out.

The bold can be true without saying there was no spot on the roster for Mitts.

6 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Oh yeah?  Go on the Avs forum.  They were glad to be rid of him and his inconsistency.

This is about as true as saying Sabrespace wants to get rid of Owen Power. Some posters don't make a consensus.

And they certainly don't make something fact.

How many times have you read on this forum that Casey Mittelstadt is garbage? Tage Thompson? Rasmus freaking Dahlin?

Bo Byram has first-pair talent. Adams bet a very good player that his performance will match his talent.

I'm not going to pass judgement after 17 games.

 

[Doohicksie]

13 minutes ago, seer775 said:

That's not why they moved him. Avs needed a 2C. They have solid dmen (Makar, Girard, Toews). Without scoring, they would drop to the Jets in 4.

Right.  And who was expendable?  Why?  Byram, because he just wasn't playing up to that level.

[Doohicksie]

14 minutes ago, seer775 said:

Mitts now needs a $7M contract. He's not getting that to play 3C. 

On the Sabres he would be the 1B C.  Cozens at his current level would be 3C behind Tage and Mitts.

Just now, seer775 said:

I mean, you weren't going to get much more for a forward with two decent seasons in his contract year.

There was no reason to move him at all.  Just pay him.  But Kevyn didn't want to admit that he made a mistake anointing Tage and Cozens to the top two centers.  In fact if Casey commands $7 million or more it proves my point.

[dudacek]

32 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Mitts has improved every season.  So Cozens is better than Mitts was in the past.  I'm talking about Mitts NOW.  He's flat out better than Cozens.  We kept him through his lean years and traded him in his gravy years.

Mitts was better than Cozens this season.

But its flat out false to say he has improved every season: 25 points to 9 to 21 to 19 to 59 to 57.

Cozens is 13 to 38 to 68 to 47.

Cozens also had 18 goals in an off-season — the same number Casey had in this, his best season. Dylan had 31 goals the season he turned 22, a number Casey has never come close to.

I like Casey, but I take Cozens over him every single time.

 

16 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Right.  And who was expendable?  Why?  Byram, because he just wasn't playing up to that level.

Why is because they had 5 top-4 dmen and he was the price they had to pay to get a legit 2C.

Just like the Sabres had 3 top-2 centres and Mitts was the price they had to pay a to get a top-4 D.

That's kinda how trades work.

[sabremike]

Casey is a star for a potential cup winner while Byram was just about the biggest liability on our entire roster since he arrived. Any time Byram was on the ice for us last year I would expect something bad was going to happen.

[Pimlach]

On 4/27/2024 at 3:27 PM, seer775 said:

One more year before we ship Krebs.

Byram trade wasn't a failure because we got a Top 4 Dman. Byram is much better than Joker, RJ, Clifton, and Samuelsson. I think he's a solid step and a half over Power also.

Now we have to move the extras for another Top 4 Dman.

Mitts isn’t the top 6 centre we thought we needed. He can and will (Adams..) be replaced.

Byram is not >> Mitts. 

Bryam is not a step in a half above Power.  He is not even equal to power. 
 

Krebs was given a good look this past year.  I saw nothing indicating he should be given the 3C job.  He simply is not ready. He isn’t even a good 4C.    Is this a year we win or not? 

We need to bring in a Lindy type defensively responsible of two way center that wins face offs and can provide secondary scoring.  Krebs is not that at this time. 

[Pimlach]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

This is not his history at all.

 

We traded Derek Roy for a guy people thought could become Duncan Keith but so far looks like he's projecting as Brandon Montour.

Weren't you one of the guys who stuck by Mitts through his early struggles?

Byram is 22, has played 164 NHL games and has 72 points.

At 22 Mitts had played 155 NHL games and had 61 NHL points

 

Bryam played for the Staley cup champs. 
 

Mitts played on the worst team in the league and was not ready for the NHL at the time they tossed in the lineup. 
 

Apples are better than oranges - that is your argument.  

Edited April 28 by Pimlach

[Night Train]

Mitts is on the right team. Yet he's getting pushed off the puck a lot today. IMO it wasn't a big trade of star players. 

[LGR4GM]

Who the F cares about this? "We need to bump those numbers," no we need to make playoffs. No one gives a ratsass if we get a 3rd instead of a 4th for Krebs if we decided to trade him. To hell with playing a guy above his head to get a better trade. Play to win or forfeit the season already. 

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Bryam played for the Staley cup champs. 
 

Mitts played on the worst team in the league and was not ready for the NHL at the time they tossed in the lineup. 
 

Apples are better than oranges - that is your argument.  

No, my argument is Doohickey is comparing 25-year-old 350-game NHL center with a 22-year-old 160-game NHL defenceman and saying what you’ve seen  is what you’re going to get.

Edited April 28 by dudacek

[sabresparaavida]

5 hours ago, seer775 said:

Not sure about that chief.

Top 4 Dman, 7th in TOI/G during their 21-22 cup run. He was 20 y/o.

False. Cozens has a higher ppg than Mitts at 23 y/o. Despite last year's performance, Mitts has been a no-show.

This is true, however he has not returned to that level of play since. He has been decisively worse the last 2 years than during his rookie season. Generally you like to see improvements from young players, not them getting worse.

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, seer775 said:

At 20 years old, Byram played top minutes on the Stanley Cup Champs. He wasn't along for the ride.

The point of playing Krebs at 3C is to figure out what kind of return we can get for him.

Right now it's looking like a 4th. We need to bump those numbers.

Trading Krebs for a fourth is not a good move.  Neither is handing him 3C.  We saw him try to play in last year. 

If Krebs get traded it’s in a multi player deal. He still has former #1 shine on him.  

Lindy will want a defensive center that wins draws.  Krebs should get a shot 4C, not 3C. 

[Doohicksie]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

No, my argument is Doohickey is comparing 25-year-old 350-game NHL center with a 22-year-old 160-game NHL defenceman and saying what you’ve seen  is what you’re going to get.

It's spelled Doohickie.

[WhenWillItEnd66]

Although i am a huge Mitts fan, i think Buffalo traded a player they needed for one that they did not. We already have enough playmaking non hitting defenseman. Will he be good for the team? Most likely yes. This team will miss Mitts and what he brought. It is now a glaring need this off season. On the other hand i am also a huge Avs fan so i will just root for Mitts there! He is having a decent playoff so far and i am happy that he got away from the perpetual tire fire that seems to be the Sabres. 

[JohnC]

12 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Trading Krebs for a fourth is not a good move.  Neither is handing him 3C.  We saw him try to play in last year. 

If Krebs get traded it’s in a multi player deal. He still has former #1 shine on him.  

Lindy will want a defensive center that wins draws.  Krebs should get a shot 4C, not 3C. 

The Sabres are now at a stage where players no longer should be handed roles with the hope that they develop into their role. My preference would be to keep Krebs and let him compete for whatever role he can attain. Unless he is packaged in a deal for a contributing return player, I wouldn't want to give him away for a useless middling pick. (Agreeing with you on this issue.) 

I have been a staunch advocate for Mitts. Hiowever, in general, I thought this was a good hockey trade for each team. What will give even more value to this deal for us is if we can acquire a good 3C to fill the void left by the Mitt departure. In the first few games that Byram played for us, I was impressed. It then seemed that he was a confused player who had trouble blending in. I'm hoping that Lindy can put Byram in a role that is conducive to his talents. 

This is a critical offseason for the GM. He needs to add pieces that better balances out this roster. The focus should be on a legitimate 3C and bulking up the lower lines. The GM isn't required to make a blockbuster deal for a star player that would result in stripping this team. He needs to make a number of deals that fill in the 4-5-6 spots that makes this team a tougher team to play. It's doable!

[Gatorman0519]

At least Lindys voice is in the room to straighten out some of this mess. 

[Doohicksie]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

I thought this was a good hockey trade for each team. What will give even more value to this deal for us is if we can acquire a good 3C to fill the void left by the Mitt departure. In the first few games that Byram played for us, I was impressed. It then seemed that he was a confused player who had trouble blending in. I'm hoping that Lindy can put Byram in a role that is conducive to his talents.

I guess that's my argument against the trade:  I'm not sure Byram filled an urgent need on the roster.  What I see in him is a player who could possibly a good piece but also is subject to inconsistent play.  But the trade *did* create an urgent need on the roster.  I think we're much worse off with Byram than we were with Mitts.  I'm not saying Byram is a bust or anything.  But I'm saying I don't think there is a clear hole that he is filling, but the absence of Mitts creates a big hole in the forward ranks.

I also realize the die was cast when Tage and Cozens got their contracts.  I think signing those two and making Casey the odd man out was a mistake.  I think Casey had made the case that he was a versatile player that could play anywhere in the Top Nine.  I don't think you can say the same for Cozens or Tage.

While in general I think Kevyn's approach to roster building is sound, I think in this case he messed up.

[JohnC]

25 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I guess that's my argument against the trade:  I'm not sure Byram filled an urgent need on the roster.  What I see in him is a player who could possibly a good piece but also is subject to inconsistent play.  But the trade *did* create an urgent need on the roster.  I think we're much worse off with Byram than we were with Mitts.  I'm not saying Byram is a bust or anything.  But I'm saying I don't think there is a clear hole that he is filling, but the absence of Mitts creates a big hole in the forward ranks.

I also realize the die was cast when Tage and Cozens got their contracts.  I think signing those two and making Casey the odd man out was a mistake.  I think Casey had made the case that he was a versatile player that could play anywhere in the Top Nine.  I don't think you can say the same for Cozens or Tage.

I'm a Casey fan. But as you point out after locking in Cozens and Tage there was going to be a near future issue with cap distribution $$$ within the roster. It's difficult to get a fair assessment of Byram based on the limited games he played for the Sabres. His first few games were impressive, and then he tailed off. That shouldn't have been a surprise because he was playing a new system and with new teammates. What I can say is if the GM doesn't fill the hole of the Mitts departure, then the deal doesn't look as good. This is a let's wait and see before we can come up with a fair assessment of the trade. 

Edited April 29 by JohnC

[Doohicksie]

It will be interesting to see which defensemen Lindy prefers.  There could well be a shakeup in the pecking order.  I think our 7-8 Ds (Johnson, Bryson) are actually pretty good and perhaps to get the right mix of puck moving, toughness, and solid D play, one or both of those guys could end up in the top six based on Lindy's system.  (anticipating several puke emojis here)

[dudacek]

I think the basic disconnect here is that while everyone here thought the Sabres needed to add a top 4 defenceman, a large number of Sabrespacers don’t think that player is Byram.

Nobody says the Knights have too many of the same type of defencemen with Pietrangelo, Theodore and Hanifan. Good is good.

To me, it’s not the theory that’s the big question here, it’s whether or not Byram and Power can be as effective as Theodore and Hanifin.

These are guys expected to round into two-way players like Dahlin has. They aren’t Phil Housleys.

Edited April 29 by dudacek

[shrader]

33 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

It will be interesting to see which defensemen Lindy prefers.  There could well be a shakeup in the pecking order.  I think our 7-8 Ds (Johnson, Bryson) are actually pretty good and perhaps to get the right mix of puck moving, toughness, and solid D play, one or both of those guys could end up in the top six based on Lindy's system.  (anticipating several puke emojis here)

RFA with a qualifying offer probably higher than he’s worth. Is he even back next year?