Off-season Game Plan 2024

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

 

Frankly it seems the past 13 years, a number of defensive defenseman haven't quite worked here very well. McNabb never had a shot and McCabe was solid but wanted to go to Chicago for his wife. (Then Chicago traded him) 

Bush was a good big defenseman but his issue was he was a trainwreck in getting the puck up the ice

This is what I'm saying. We have been playing a wide open, unstructured, move the puck quickly type of D for years now and it is madness imo. These type of players look worse in that type of non system system. Look at how clueless Clifton seemed first part of the year when he went from highly structured to our idea. Byram got here and it was all like wtf are we doing? It's a philosophy we have had here since Pegula got here. It's madness that I am hoping will end now with Ruff.

These guys are the guys you need come playoff time and that's where they shine. 

[Archie Lee]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

Realize your comments are generalized, but you picked the wrong post to complain about too little patience for Cozens or that he's the guy that should be the 3rd line C.  Every lineup this kid has come up with for this upcoming season has him at 2C with Quinn stapled to his side.

And, while it's likely that Krebs is the 4C this coming season, he very well could be next year's Jost.  (IMHO, it's more likely he's the 4C than the 3C, but that's in the mix too.)  By next year's Jost mean the 13th F who slots in pretty much anywhere in the bottom 6 when an injury hits.  He really needs to be working his butt off this off-season because there is an opportunity there for him to grab the 3C role or he could Asplund his way right out of town or he could be any of several things on the 4th line.

Again, Pat Kane can be on a bonus laden 1 year deal.  Meaning he can come it at $1-2MM officially on a contract that would give him a good shot at getting $6MM this year.  If the Sabres end up under the cap w/ that bonus, great; there are no cap ramifications the following season.  If they don't stay under the cap, that overage gets taken off next year's cap.  Which is why having Kane pretty much forces their hand to dump Skinner NEXT off-season provided Kane doesn't hit the proverbial wall this year.

We KNOW there was interest on both sides for a deal but it didn't happen when the Sabres started the year as basketcases.  From what Adams has said he's looking for this off-season, expect he would fit the W role to a T.  He just needs to convince him that the Sabres have their heads out of their you know whats.

So, no, their remaining cap doesn't keep them from making "two bigger $$ additions."

You are correct that if they can convince Kane to take such a deal then they could fit him and a bigger contract under the cap.  

Edited May 25 by Archie Lee

[French Collection]

Offer sheet Mitts.

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

Realize your comments are generalized, but you picked the wrong post to complain about too little patience for Cozens or that he's the guy that should be the 3rd line C.  Every lineup this kid has come up with for this upcoming season has him at 2C with Quinn stapled to his side.

And, while it's likely that Krebs is the 4C this coming season, he very well could be next year's Jost.  (IMHO, it's more likely he's the 4C than the 3C, but that's in the mix too.)  By next year's Jost mean the 13th F who slots in pretty much anywhere in the bottom 6 when an injury hits.  He really needs to be working his butt off this off-season because there is an opportunity there for him to grab the 3C role or he could Asplund his way right out of town or he could be any of several things on the 4th line.

Again, Pat Kane can be on a bonus laden 1 year deal.  Meaning he can come it at $1-2MM officially on a contract that would give him a good shot at getting $6MM this year.  If the Sabres end up under the cap w/ that bonus, great; there are no cap ramifications the following season.  If they don't stay under the cap, that overage gets taken off next year's cap.  Which is why having Kane pretty much forces their hand to dump Skinner NEXT off-season provided Kane doesn't hit the proverbial wall this year.

We KNOW there was interest on both sides for a deal but it didn't happen when the Sabres started the year as basketcases.  From what Adams has said he's looking for this off-season, expect he would fit the W role to a T.  He just needs to convince him that the Sabres have their heads out of their you know whats.

So, no, their remaining cap doesn't keep them from making "two bigger $$ additions."

I didn't. It merged my posts.

[Broken Ankles]

5 hours ago, French Collection said:

ROR made the Avs as an 18 year old after being drafted 33rd. Not sure how many more have done it.

@Taro T  And Cole Sillinger for Columbus. We had better hope that Benson sees an O’Reilly like progression, as Sillinger had the same points this year as his first as an 18 year old.  

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/sillico01.html

 

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, Broken Ankles said:

@Taro T  And Cole Sillinger for Columbus. We had better hope that Benson sees an O’Reilly like progression, as Sillinger had the same points this year as his first as an 18 year old.  

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/sillico01.html

 

Benson just had the 19th-best 18-year-old season since the 2006 lockout.

It looks even better when you look at the top 30.

Sillinger is an outlier. Most of these guys are studs.

https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/nhl/stats/all-time-season?age=u19&from=2005-2006&to=2023-2024

Edited May 26 by dudacek

[Flashsabre]

Start up the rumour mill and mock trades😜

[nfreeman]

46 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Start up the rumour mill and mock trades😜

Just so everyone is clear:  you're not getting Tkachuk without giving up Power or Quinn plus one of #11, Savoie, Kulich, Rosen or Östlund.  And I would make that deal in a heartbeat.

@thewookie1 is of course free to propose Rosen and a #2 (the pick, not the other #2, I think), but that isn't getting you anywhere except getting hung up on.

[thewookie1]

12 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Just so everyone is clear:  you're not getting Tkachuk without giving up Power or Quinn plus one of #11, Savoie, Kulich, Rosen or Östlund.  And I would make that deal in a heartbeat.

@thewookie1 is of course free to propose Rosen and a #2 (the pick, not the other #2, I think), but that isn't getting you anywhere except getting hung up on.

 

Well, Power would be a non-starter to me

I'd offer 11, Kulich and a mid tier prospect; he has character concerns that worry me.

[JohnC]

48 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Just so everyone is clear:  you're not getting Tkachuk without giving up Power or Quinn plus one of #11, Savoie, Kulich, Rosen or Östlund.  And I would make that deal in a heartbeat.

@thewookie1 is of course free to propose Rosen and a #2 (the pick, not the other #2, I think), but that isn't getting you anywhere except getting hung up on.

If I have to give up either Power or Quinn plus our top pick and Savoie, my response would be absolute not. I'm not diminishing the talent of Tkachuk and the toughness he would add to this roster. My main issue with trading either Power or Quinn in such a deal is that both of these players have a lot more upside. I'm not opposed to giving up our first pick plus any of the prospects in the system. 

Our GM will have a number of options to add players to improve and better round out this roster. We don't need to make a blockbuster deal that depletes our roster for one player. Again, for your trade proposal, I firmly say no.  

[Archie Lee]

39 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If I have to give up either Power or Quinn plus our top pick and Savoie, my response would be absolute not. I'm not diminishing the talent of Tkachuk and the toughness he would add to this roster. My main issue with trading either Power or Quinn in such a deal is that both of these players have a lot more upside. I'm not opposed to giving up our first pick plus any of the prospects in the system. 

Our GM will have a number of options to add players to improve and better round out this roster. We don't need to make a blockbuster deal that depletes our roster for one player. Again, for your trade proposal, I firmly say no.  

I think that is more than the initial poster is suggesting.  It was two assets:  1.) Quinn or Power, and  2). 11 OA or one of our top prospects.  

Power and Quinn are not in the same category in my view.  Power's value as a recent #1 OA who has the potential to be a #1 d-man, is orders of magnitude greater than Quinn's.  Power for Tkachuk straight up is likely fair.  Power probably has longer term value, but Tkachuk simply brings elements to a team that it seems every team wants (and that we don't have).  

I would trade one of our young wingers (Quinn, Peterka or Benson) and #11, for Tkachuk.  I think it would take more though.  I think if you went to every team in the league and said you can have either Tkachuk or #11 in this draft plus Quinn AND Savoie, that the vast majority of teams take Tkachuk without the slightest hesitation.  

One point though, without a Skinner buyout, any such trade for a high-priced player leaves us pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel for an entire 4th line.

Edited May 27 by Archie Lee

[Flashsabre]

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/complete-b-s-sens-gm-steve-staios-swats-down-rumours-team-is-looking-to-trade-brady-tkachuk-1.2126920
 

Looks like it is BS anyways

[Flashsabre]

God Peters and Rivet have become a complete joke

Edited May 27 by Flashsabre

[JohnC]

24 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I think that is more than the initial poster is suggesting.  It was two assets:  1.) Quinn or Power, and  2). 11 OA or one of our top prospects.  

Power and Quinn are not in the same category in my view.  Power's value as a recent #1 OA who has the potential to be a #1 d-man, is orders of magnitude greater than Quinn's.  Power for Tkachuk straight up is likely fair.  Power probably has longer term value, but Tkachuk simply brings elements to a team that it seems every team wants (and that we don't have).  

I would trade one of our young wingers (Quinn, Peterka or Benson) and #11, for Tkachuk.  I think it would take more though.  I think if you went to every team in the league and said you can have either Tkachuk or #11 in this draft plus Quinn AND Savoie, that the vast majority of teams take Tkachuk without the slightest hesitation.  

One point though, without a Skinner buyout, any such trade for a high-priced player leaves us pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel for an entire 4th line.

I would not be agreeable to any deal for the irascible Tkachuk that would include either Quinn or Power. I don't care how any deal is configured for the Ottawa player. If either one of these two young players were being dealt, I would give a concrete hardened rejection to it. In my view, both Quinn and Power are going to be very good players for a long time.  It seems that I'm higher on Quinn than you are. 

[dudacek]

Friedman is saying Tanner Jeannot is a player to watch after a brutal season in Tampa.

No idea what happened to this guy, but at $2.6M for one year, I’m definitely kicking those tires.

[JohnC]

32 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Friedman is saying Tanner Jeannot is a player to watch after a brutal season in Tampa.

No idea what happened to this guy, but at $2.6M for one year, I’m definitely kicking those tires.

What would you give up for him? 

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

What would you give up for him? 

Tampa fans are saying a 3rd or a 4th — to them he's basically a cap dump.

Given how easily I'd pay that, I'd say it's got to be more. GMs will remember what he was in Nashville.

But given his play the past 2 years on a good team, maybe not much more?

Tampa paid pretty much an entire draft (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and Cal Foote) to acquire him.

[Flashsabre]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Tampa fans are saying a 3rd or a 4th — to them he's basically a cap dump.

Given how easily I'd pay that, I'd say it's got to be more. GMs will remember what he was in Nashville.

But given his play the past 2 years on a good team, maybe not much more?

Tampa paid pretty much an entire draft (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and Cal Foote) to acquire him.

One of the worst deals ever.

[Taro T]

55 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Tampa fans are saying a 3rd or a 4th — to them he's basically a cap dump.

Given how easily I'd pay that, I'd say it's got to be more. GMs will remember what he was in Nashville.

But given his play the past 2 years on a good team, maybe not much more?

Tampa paid pretty much an entire draft (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and Cal Foote) to acquire him.

Would be nice if for once the Sabres were the team doing the "buy low" shopping rather than their usual "sell low" merchandising.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Tampa fans are saying a 3rd or a 4th — to them he's basically a cap dump.

Given how easily I'd pay that, I'd say it's got to be more. GMs will remember what he was in Nashville.

But given his play the past 2 years on a good team, maybe not much more?

Tampa paid pretty much an entire draft (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and Cal Foote) to acquire him.

I’m really curious about what the market for him is now.  I wouldn’t hate giving up one of our AHL forward prospects for him.  He has a game that is an obvious hole in our roster.

[French Collection]

18 minutes ago, Weave said:

I’m really curious about what the market for him is now.  I wouldn’t hate giving up one of our AHL forward prospects for him.  He has a game that is an obvious hole in our roster.

They need cap space so you never know how cheaply he can be had.

[Taro T]

14 minutes ago, French Collection said:

They need cap space so you never know how cheaply he can be had.

Comes down to how badly they need cap space and ALSO how much somebody else bidding for him would offer.  Anybody recall the other teams that were in the mix for him when Tampa gave up nearly an entire draft for him?

[Scottysabres]

4 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

God Peters and Rivet have become a complete joke

Yikes.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Outside of his great year, Jeannot is Girgensons 2.0.  I’d give a 4th for him at most.  His last 2 seasons are 18 pts and 14 pts. 

[dudacek]

Am I the only one who thinks it unlikely that Jacob Bryson receives his qualifying offer?

I think he rehabilitated his game quite nicely last year and is a serviceable 7, but his QO of $1.9 is far too much for a spare defenceman, especially with what the Sabres are paying their top 5 (or 6 if Henri comes back).

I think the Sabres and Bryson like each other, but I think the only way he’s back is if he agrees to a pay cut. Which he might, because no team is going to give him $1.9M.