Off-season Game Plan 2024

[Pimlach]

On 4/26/2024 at 8:51 AM, Weave said:

We are already super losers.  Record setters, FFS.  That’s why I don’t understand the angst over “what if prospect X becomes awesome somewhere else”.  I don’t give a damned about prospect X being good for someone else a few years down the line.  I care about this team right now playing its way back to respectability.

Exactly.   I care more about losing good players like ROR, Eichel, Reinhart, Montour, Ullmark, etc., and being stuck in rebuild mode.  

I am sick of losing, and sick of the acceptance of losing, and sick of the way 40 years of respectability have been washed away.  

Edited June 6 by Pimlach

[dudacek]

22 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 Greenway has a new C and a new W to help him make that "identity" line.)

I frequently see people pencilling Greenway in as a 4th-liner.

I struggle to think of many teams who have a player as strong as Greenway on their 4th line.

With the exception of the year he was in the doghouse and traded to Buffalo, Greenway was inarguably a 3rd-liner in Minnesota, part of what was considered one of the best 3rd lines in the game with Foligno and Ek.

In Buffalo last year, he was actually 4th in ice time among forwards at more than 17 minutes a game, ahead of Cozens, Skinner and Peterka.

Statistically, a 10-goal, 30-point player is a good 3rd-liner. His 28 points last year put him 64th among left wings.

Throw in the fact that he is strong defensively and a mammoth human being, I tend to think of him as almost a prototypical 3rd-liner.

[Pimlach]

On 6/4/2024 at 12:18 PM, thewookie1 said:

The Combine for the McDavid/Eichel draft was the last time.

Was downtown so I decided to slowly drive around the HarborCenter to see if I could spot a player I could recognize. So, with no one behind me, I went 20mph down Washington St. next to it. About half way down, McDavid, Marner, Strome and one other Canadian kid came out of the side door. McDavid, not paying attention walked directly off the curb into the road never even looking for traffic. Obviously my speed made it easy to stop but Marner grabbed McDavid by the sleeve and yanked him back onto the sidewalk. So that's the time I nearly hit a #1 slated prospect with my vehicle.

Headline:   Wookie maims Generational Talent at NHL Scouting Combine

 

[Archie Lee]

36 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I frequently see people pencilling Greenway in as a 4th-liner.

I struggle to think of many teams who have a player as strong as Greenway on their 4th line.

With the exception of the year he was in the doghouse and traded to Buffalo, Greenway was inarguably a 3rd-liner in Minnesota, part of what was considered one of the best 3rd lines in the game with Foligno and Ek.

In Buffalo last year, he was actually 4th in ice time among forwards at more than 17 minutes a game, ahead of Cozens, Skinner and Peterka.

Statistically, a 10-goal, 30-point player is a good 3rd-liner. His 28 points last year put him 64th among left wings.

Throw in the fact that he is strong defensively and a mammoth human being, I tend to think of him as almost a prototypical 3rd-liner.

I agree with your assessment of Greenway.  I don't think he will be on the 4th line.  

I think the reason fans move him to the 4th line in projections (I've done it) is less about him being a 4th line player than it is with us having nobody else who remotely fits a 4th line wing profile.  Fans are expecting that we will either upgrade the forward roster or add one of the prospects.  If that happens on the wing, then the house is full.  Barring a buyout or trade of a roster player, then Skinner, Tuch, Peterka, Quinn and Benson are locks for top 9 roles on the wing.  It's a bit of wish fulfillment. If Greenway is on line 4, then it means we have brought in an upgrade.   

Edited June 5 by Archie Lee

[GASabresIUFAN]

The more we discuss the various and infinite scenarios for this off-season, two decisions seem to be the linchpins of the offseason.

1) What to do with Skinner.  There are 4 options. 

A) Find a trade partner, assuming Skinner is willing to be traded.  Salary retention will be part of the equation, but better than the cap hit from option B.  If possible this could free up about $6 mill a year for the next 3 seasons.  This is the most unlikely option.

B) Buyout.  This would leave a cap burden for the next 6 years.  It would save over 7.5 this coming season, 4.5 in 25/26, and only 2.5 in 26/27.  We then be on the hook for 3 more years at 2.45 per season.  Not a huge fan of this move, but is would help KA afford to make a big swing on a top6/top 2 pair skater.  I also doubt TP will sign off on paying $14.67 million to Skinner not to play for us.

C) Keep Skinner in the top 6.  Here his poor defense is least likely to harm the team and it would best utilize his skillset.  Playing him down the lineup is a mistake.  Leaving him in the top 4 might allow KA to focus on building a strong 2 way 3rd line featuring Benson and Greenway with a strong 2 way center like Wennberg, Kerfoot or Bennett.  This is turn might free up money to upgrade Jokiharju.

D) Play Skinner on the 3rd line.  If this is the plan, KA better find away to get someone like Karlsson, Duchene or Monahan to center the 3rd line or we'll be wasting Skinner's O talent and making his lack of a 2 way game more pronounced.  Spending big on a 3C, then also limits how much can we spent replacing Girgensons, Robinson and KO on the 4th line.  If we could some get Monahan or Karlsson, I'd be on board with this plan. but I think plan C is the most likely outcome.  

2) What to do with Jokiharju?  How do the Sabres really view Jokiharju's talent level?  Is he a bonfide top 4 D?  There are 3 options here as well.  The Sabresm without Joki already have 6 D under contract for next season

A) Re-sign him for a year or 2 to see if he continues to improve and becomes a bona fide top 4 D.  This would lower the cap hit some on the extension and allow Joki to serve as a bridge until Novikov and or Komarov are NHL ready.  AFP projects a 1 year deal at 3.328

B) Re-sign Joki to a long-term extension.  Please, please Adams don't do this. We can find better stay at home D to pair with Dahlin or Power for less than the AFP projections.  AFP projections his long-term deal at 3 years 4.016 

C) Trade him for other assets and players. I'm hopeful that this is the path they take.  Teams need R shot D and we don't need another long-term contract for a D on the books.  He just isn't worth it. 

These two decisions will ultimately determine how much cap KA has to work with over the summer and what positions on the roster need to filled by outside talent.

 

 

[Archie Lee]

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The more we discuss the various and infinite scenarios for this off-season, two decisions seem to be the linchpins of the offseason.

1) What to do with Skinner.  There are 4 options. 

A) Find a trade partner, assuming Skinner is willing to be traded.  Salary retention will be part of the equation, but better than the cap hit from option B.  If possible this could free up about $6 mill a year for the next 3 seasons.  This is the most unlikely option.

B) Buyout.  This would leave a cap burden for the next 6 years.  It would save over 7.5 this coming season, 4.5 in 25/26, and only 2.5 in 26/27.  We then be on the hook for 3 more years at 2.45 per season.  Not a huge fan of this move, but is would help KA afford to make a big swing on a top6/top 2 pair skater.  I also doubt TP will sign off on paying $14.67 million to Skinner not to play for us.

C) Keep Skinner in the top 6.  Here his poor defense is least likely to harm the team and it would best utilize his skillset.  Playing him down the lineup is a mistake.  Leaving him in the top 4 might allow KA to focus on building a strong 2 way 3rd line featuring Benson and Greenway with a strong 2 way center like Wennberg, Kerfoot or Bennett.  This is turn might free up money to upgrade Jokiharju.

D) Play Skinner on the 3rd line.  If this is the plan, KA better find away to get someone like Karlsson, Duchene or Monahan to center the 3rd line or we'll be wasting Skinner's O talent and making his lack of a 2 way game more pronounced.  Spending big on a 3C, then also limits how much can we spent replacing Girgensons, Robinson and KO on the 4th line.  If we could some get Monahan or Karlsson, I'd be on board with this plan. but I think plan C is the most likely outcome.  

2) What to do with Jokiharju?  How do the Sabres really view Jokiharju's talent level?  Is he a bonfide top 4 D?  There are 3 options here as well.  The Sabresm without Joki already have 6 D under contract for next season

A) Re-sign him for a year or 2 to see if he continues to improve and becomes a bona fide top 4 D.  This would lower the cap hit some on the extension and allow Joki to serve as a bridge until Novikov and or Komarov are NHL ready.  AFP projects a 1 year deal at 3.328

B) Re-sign Joki to a long-term extension.  Please, please Adams don't do this. We can find better stay at home D to pair with Dahlin or Power for less than the AFP projections.  AFP projections his long-term deal at 3 years 4.016 

C) Trade him for other assets and players. I'm hopeful that this is the path they take.  Teams need R shot D and we don't need another long-term contract for a D on the books.  He just isn't worth it. 

These two decisions will ultimately determine how much cap KA has to work with over the summer and what positions on the roster need to filled by outside talent.

 

 

With regards to Skinner, I think it will almost certainly be a combo of C&D. We won't get through the year with the same 4 wingers in the top 6, so Skinner will see some time on the 1st two lines and if he plays well and produces he may stay there.  I don't think we will ever see 22/23 Skinner again, but I think a return to 21/22 Skinner is possible, if a bit unlikely.  On the actual $$$ cost of a buyout, I think on principle alone Pegula might refuse to pay Skinner to play for someone else. However, from a practical standpoint (and someone who understands the cap, and math better than me can correct this if it's wrong), I don't think a buyout costs more money.  The actual buyout cost (not cap hit) is $2.44 million per season x 6, or $14.67 total, as you state.  But this is more than offset by the cap-penalty over 6 seasons (dead cap, or money that can't be spent).  If we intend to spend to the cap ceiling, a buyout would not cost more actual $$$ (there are other factors that could come into play down the line with bonuses, LTIR, etc.).  In my view, the only reason to not buy him out now is if you actually think you can get 3 useful seasons out of him relative to a $9 million cap hit.  If that isn't realistic, and in my view it isn't, then the best thing to do is take advantage of the $7.55 million in savings with a buyout in 2024 and chart an entire new course for your forwards. 

Re: Joker, I think it will be 3 years at under $4 million, likely in the $3.5 million range.  I can live with this.  Next year, when Byram needs a new deal they can choose between:

1.) Trading Byram for a pick/prospect to keep the pipeline stocked, and promote Johnson/Novikov: or

2.) Trade Clifton or Joker for (much) less, promote Johnson/Novikov, and use the savings to re-sign Byram.  

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I frequently see people pencilling Greenway in as a 4th-liner.

I struggle to think of many teams who have a player as strong as Greenway on their 4th line.

With the exception of the year he was in the doghouse and traded to Buffalo, Greenway was inarguably a 3rd-liner in Minnesota, part of what was considered one of the best 3rd lines in the game with Foligno and Ek.

In Buffalo last year, he was actually 4th in ice time among forwards at more than 17 minutes a game, ahead of Cozens, Skinner and Peterka.

Statistically, a 10-goal, 30-point player is a good 3rd-liner. His 28 points last year put him 64th among left wings.

Throw in the fact that he is strong defensively and a mammoth human being, I tend to think of him as almost a prototypical 3rd-liner.

Yeah, in an ideal world, where there is a new 2W and a new 3C brought it, Greenway deploys at the beginning of the game as a 4W.  But see him getting more ice time than the typical 4th liner as he can slide up onto any of the other lines as situations dictate.  Also, see him (and the bottom 6C they bring is) as the primary PKer.

At the age of 19, Benson could see his ice time diminish in critical situations as could Peterka and Skinner.  

But, also remember, when he can do so, Ruff likes rolling 4 lines.  It's a heck of a lot easier to do that when Greenway is the driver of the 4th line than when last year's Krebs is that driver.  And also expect that whomever they bring in for that open C role (whether it be 3 or 4), that Krebs will be given every opportunity to take that 3C role away from the new guy and that the new guy could be a big chunk of that "identity line." 

Lastly, depending on who that C is and the other 4th line W is, the "4th line" might very well be the 3rd line in terms of ice time and deployment while Krebs-Skinner-Benson/new W end up with the title of 3rd line but actually getting 4th line usage and minutes.

Don't get too caught up in who's on the "4th line."  Personally, find it more interesting to see who he's deployed with.

[dudacek]

18 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Yeah, in an ideal world, where there is a new 2W and a new 3C brought it, Greenway deploys at the beginning of the game as a 4W.  But see him getting more ice time than the typical 4th liner as he can slide up onto any of the other lines as situations dictate.  Also, see him (and the bottom 6C they bring is) as the primary PKer.

At the age of 19, Benson could see his ice time diminish in critical situations as could Peterka and Skinner.  

But, also remember, when he can do so, Ruff likes rolling 4 lines.  It's a heck of a lot easier to do that when Greenway is the driver of the 4th line than when last year's Krebs is that driver.  And also expect that whomever they bring in for that open C role (whether it be 3 or 4), that Krebs will be given every opportunity to take that 3C role away from the new guy and that the new guy could be a big chunk of that "identity line." 

Lastly, depending on who that C is and the other 4th line W is, the "4th line" might very well be the 3rd line in terms of ice time and deployment while Krebs-Skinner-Benson/new W end up with the title of 3rd line but actually getting 4th line usage and minutes.

Don't get too caught up in who's on the "4th line."  Personally, find it more interesting to see who he's deployed with.

So Gaustad, minus the faceoffs?

For me, he's more the Grier: size and defensive conscience in a top 9 role.

[Taro T]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

So Gaustad, minus the faceoffs?

For me, he's more the Grier: size and defensive conscience in a top 9 role.

Well, if they don't end up bringing in say a Patrick Kane to play in the "top 9," then, yeah, Greenway likely stays in the "top 9."  But this team would be a lot better if they can roll a 4th line through.

[LGR4GM]

30 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Yeah, in an ideal world, where there is a new 2W and a new 3C brought it, Greenway deploys at the beginning of the game as a 4W.  But see him getting more ice time than the typical 4th liner as he can slide up onto any of the other lines as situations dictate.  Also, see him (and the bottom 6C they bring is) as the primary PKer.

At the age of 19, Benson could see his ice time diminish in critical situations as could Peterka and Skinner.  

But, also remember, when he can do so, Ruff likes rolling 4 lines.  It's a heck of a lot easier to do that when Greenway is the driver of the 4th line than when last year's Krebs is that driver.  And also expect that whomever they bring in for that open C role (whether it be 3 or 4), that Krebs will be given every opportunity to take that 3C role away from the new guy and that the new guy could be a big chunk of that "identity line." 

Lastly, depending on who that C is and the other 4th line W is, the "4th line" might very well be the 3rd line in terms of ice time and deployment while Krebs-Skinner-Benson/new W end up with the title of 3rd line but actually getting 4th line usage and minutes.

Don't get too caught up in who's on the "4th line."  Personally, find it more interesting to see who he's deployed with.

Unless one is part of a trade going out, I don't see how the Sabres bring in a 2W. Where would they play? Are you demoting Skinner, Benson, JJP, Quinn, or Tuch? Actually, which 2 are you putting on the 3rd line, keeping in mind the chances of Zach Benson being worse in 2024 are basically 0. 

Adams could surprise us with a blockbuster trade, I just haven't seen him be motivated to do that since he decided on his core. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

But this team would be a lot better if they can roll a 4th line through.

No question this should be the objective this summer.  The better we can make the 3rd and 4th lines the harder it will be to defend the team.  Since we don't have any superstar forwards, beating teams with relentless pressure through 4 capable lines should be the objective.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

No question this should be the objective this summer.  The better we can make the 3rd and 4th lines the harder it will be to defend the team.  Since we don't have any superstar forwards, beating teams with relentless pressure through 4 capable lines should be the objective.

Oh, I wouldn't quite say that. We may not, but I wouldn't say that in June. 

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Unless one is part of a trade going out, I don't see how the Sabres bring in a 2W. Where would they play? Are you demoting Skinner, Benson, JJP, Quinn, or Tuch? Actually, which 2 are you putting on the 3rd line, keeping in mind the chances of Zach Benson being worse in 2024 are basically 0. 

Isn't he saying the new guy and those 5 are the top 9 wingers, Greenway is knocked down?

 

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

No question this should be the objective this summer.  The better we can make the 3rd and 4th lines the harder it will be to defend the team.  Since we don't have any superstar forwards, beating teams with relentless pressure through 4 capable lines should be the objective.

Not disagreeing at all, but the heart of this team's offensive philosophy will be driven by its back end.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Well, if they don't end up bringing in say a Patrick Kane to play in the "top 9," then, yeah, Greenway likely stays in the "top 9."  But this team would be a lot better if they can roll a 4th line through.

Greenway on his offhand in the top 9 doesn’t inspire much confidence 

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Isn't he saying the new guy and those 5 are the top 9 wingers, Greenway is knocked down?

 

I am asking how you and who you move from line 2 to line 3. Benson and Skinner? 

[GASabresIUFAN]

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Isn't he saying the new guy and those 5 are the top 9 wingers, Greenway is knocked down?

 

I think he is saying sign Kane and acquire a 3C, and then combine them with JJP, Quinn, TNT, Tuch, Cozens, Skinner and Benson to form the top 9.  This potentially creates the foundations of a very good 4th line with Greenway and Krebs.

I suggested up thread you can accomplish the same thing with a top 3C like Karlsson, promoting Savoie to the third line with Skinner and Karlsson.  This then also pushes Greenway and Krebs to the 4th line and leaves money left over to sign Blueger to center the 4th line.

Edited June 5 by GASabresIUFAN

[Thorner]

Ya I mean there’s nothing wrong with aiming for Greenaway to be “too good” for the 4th line if that’s the goal we can achieve, when our 1 and 2 c tallied 51 points each last year on average between the 2 of them. There’s assuredly ground we’ll need to make up elsewhere. 

If the top 6 is set, it’s not set amongst the best in the league. Gaining advantage down the forward ranks is a place to make it up 

Edited June 5 by Thorny

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Greenway on his offhand in the top 9 doesn’t inspire much confidence 

Why not? 

Is he significantly worse than Corey Perry and Dylan Holloway, currently playing top 9 in the Stanley Cup final

19 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I am asking how you and who you move from line 2 to line 3. Benson and Skinner? 

I’m not the kind of guy to build my lineup on a hierarchy system. The lines would depend more on role or chemistry.

But in terms of ice time, I’d be giving Quinn and Tuch the most and Peterka Benson Skinner Greenway and new guy similar counts based on play and situation.

Who were the 3rd liners out of Dumont, Hecht, Grier, Kotalik, Vanek, Afinogenov, Pominville and whichever of Connelly and Roy wasn’t playing centre?

[Thorner]

Just as a rough exercise, detailed is the ranking of each hypothetical top 6 forward by way of points by position league wide, with a breakdown of lineup fit based on output:

LW Peterka 29th (low-level first line)

C Thompson 52nd (mid-to-lower tier second liner) 

RW  Tuch 17th (mid-tier first liner)

Line average: 33 (top range second-line production)

 

LW Skinner 33rd (great second line production)

C Cozens 62nd (2nd/3rd line tweener)

RW Benson 48th (mid-tier second liner)

 

Line average: 48 (mid-tier second line)

 

I know we hope for upswings and returns to “form”, but if similar to last year we could be in a situation where we are running more less 2 2nd lines if we see the sort of outputs we saw repeat. (Yes I know I took all data all situations it’s just a rough estimate)

But it seems to line up: we may very well not have a great or even average top 6, i’d supplement in the bottom 6 if at all possible 

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Why not? 

Is he significantly worse than Corey Perry and Dylan Holloway, currently playing top 9 in the Stanley Cup final

I’m not the kind of guy to build my lineup on a hierarchy system. The lines would depend more on role or chemistry.

But in terms of ice time, I’d be giving Quinn and Tuch the most and Peterka Benson Skinner Greenway and new guy similar counts based on play and situation.

Who were the 3rd liners out of Dumont, Hecht, Grier, Kotalik, Vanek, Afinogenov, Pominville and whichever of Connelly and Roy wasn’t playing centre?

How do their top 6s look compared to ours 

Edited June 5 by Thorny

[Taro T]

59 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Unless one is part of a trade going out, I don't see how the Sabres bring in a 2W. Where would they play? Are you demoting Skinner, Benson, JJP, Quinn, or Tuch? Actually, which 2 are you putting on the 3rd line, keeping in mind the chances of Zach Benson being worse in 2024 are basically 0. 

Adams could surprise us with a blockbuster trade, I just haven't seen him be motivated to do that since he decided on his core. 

Until Patrick Kane is re-signed in Detroit or ends up elsewhere, am expecting he is still high on Adams radar.

Would expect the top 3 lines to look something like:

Peterka - Thompson - Tuch

Quinn - Cozens - Kane

Skinner - New Guy - Benson

Those 2 top lines would both be good to very good and would allow that 3rd line to absolutely feast much like the RAV line feasted back when Briere and Drury were here.  (Honestly, that 1B line might be better than the 1A line.)  Make that 4th line something truly difficult to play against, and it already wouldn't be a picnic with Greenway there and that is a forward lineup that can the them into the playoffs.

And 100% would have Skinner (should he be back, and expect he will be) on that 3rd line on day 1.  And if he wants to get back onto the top line, let him show he can play within whatever system Ruff determines will work best with this bunch and earn his way back.  

[Thorner]

13 hours ago, Taro T said:

Until Patrick Kane is re-signed in Detroit or ends up elsewhere, am expecting he is still high on Adams radar.

Would expect the top 3 lines to look something like:

Peterka - Thompson - Tuch

Quinn - Cozens - Kane

Skinner - New Guy - Benson

Those 2 top lines would both be good to very good and would allow that 3rd line to absolutely feast much like the RAV line feasted back when Briere and Drury were here.  (Honestly, that 1B line might be better than the 1A line.)  Make that 4th line something truly difficult to play against, and it already wouldn't be a picnic with Greenway there and that is a forward lineup that can the them into the playoffs.

And 100% would have Skinner (should he be back, and expect he will be) on that 3rd line on day 1.  And if he wants to get back onto the top line, let him show he can play within whatever system Ruff determines will work best with this bunch and earn his way back.  

Quinn has pretty consistently lined up on the right, which is sort of interesting because looking into it, while Benson played a lot on the left he also did play on his off hand a lot too on the right. So depends on the player I guess. 

Edited June 6 by Thorny

[Flashsabre]

Seattle just seems like a good trading partner. They have several pieces that seem to fit what Buffalo should be looking at: Gourde, Tanev, Larsson, Borgen. Tanev, Larsson and Borgen are all on expiring contracts.

Dahlin-Larsson would be a nice balanced top pairing.

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

Quinn has pretty consistently lined up on the right, which is sort of interesting because looking into it, while Benson played a lot on the left he also did play on his off hand a lot too on the right. So depends on the player I guess. 

Quinn does line up most often on his strong side, but it always seemed he was at his most effective when he'd slide over to his off-hand side (especially when playing with Peterka, the chemistry of those 2 seemed to skyrocket when they'd swap spots during play) so wouldn't be overly concerned about which side he played on especially if he's playing on a line with Kane.

Would expect Benson playing with Skinner would result in a fair amount of him freelancing to his strong side as well as Skinner tends to head towards the right post when he does go low in the zone.

Besides, both are smart enough players that they should be able to handle the point inside their own zone on the wrong boards.  Skinner definitely can't do that; and not sure how Peterka would handle it.

[Pimlach]

20 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I agree with your assessment of Greenway.  I don't think he will be on the 4th line.  

I think the reason fans move him to the 4th line in projections (I've done it) is less about him being a 4th line player than it is with us having nobody else who remotely fits a 4th line wing profile.  Fans are expecting that we will either upgrade the forward roster or add one of the prospects.  If that happens on the wing, then the house is full.  Barring a buyout or trade of a roster player, then Skinner, Tuch, Peterka, Quinn and Benson are locks for top 9 roles on the wing.  It's a bit of wish fulfillment. If Greenway is on line 4, then it means we have brought in an upgrade.   

It is also a sign of a strong top 9.  Nothing wrong with 4th lines, the better teams roll them a lot.  He could be 4th line and first PK and be effective.