UFAs Sabres may want to sign

[7+6=13]

I'm hoping there's some UFA's that have played for Ruff and liked playing for him.  

[Cityo'Rasmii]

42 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

I'm hoping there's some UFA's that have played for Ruff and liked playing for him.  

Indeed. And hopefully Lindy has a say in roster construction as well.

[dudacek]

Think he’s been mentioned on here somewhere, but if the Sabres are looking for defensively strong, veteran defensive forechecking winger, I don’t know if there’s a better fit than Jordan martinook.

Great forechecker, kills penalties.

He’s basically a better Girgensons.

[PerreaultForever]

On 6/3/2024 at 11:44 AM, msw2112 said:

This is in reference to Dakota Joshua on the Canucks.  I don't follow the NHL a ton outside of the Sabres, but I do enjoy having playoff games on while I am doing stuff around the house in the evenings.  I saw parts of several Vancouver games in the first couple of rounds and this guy Joshua definitely stood out.  He's an aggressive forward who plays a gritty, physical game and he scored some key goals in the playoffs.  He seems like the exact type of player the Sabres lack and need more of in the middle-to-bottom-6.  Prior to this year's playoffs, I was not familiar with this player at all.

Certainly he'd be a good add and if I'm Adams I make him an offer, but I suspect the Canucks will try hard to re-sign him. He's quite popular out here. 

[JohnC]

On 6/3/2024 at 2:44 PM, msw2112 said:

This is in reference to Dakota Joshua on the Canucks.  I don't follow the NHL a ton outside of the Sabres, but I do enjoy having playoff games on while I am doing stuff around the house in the evenings.  I saw parts of several Vancouver games in the first couple of rounds and this guy Joshua definitely stood out.  He's an aggressive forward who plays a gritty, physical game and he scored some key goals in the playoffs.  He seems like the exact type of player the Sabres lack and need more of in the middle-to-bottom-6.  Prior to this year's playoffs, I was not familiar with this player at all.

You make a good observation about the type of player that needs to be added to this roster. Regular season play is dramatically different from the way the game is played in the playoffs. Playoff hockey is a lot tighter and rugged. Even in the regular season our more finesse style of play is noticeably less physical than most of the better teams in the league. As it has been said by many: Our roster is currently too imbalanced leaning toward finesse play. The bottom half of the roster needs to be bolstered and bulked up with the type of Canuck player that you noted. Getting a few of those players who fit that lower line profile is very doable, especially considering the abundant assets we have in the system. 

[Sabres73]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You make a good observation about the type of player that needs to be added to this roster. Regular season play is dramatically different from the way the game is played in the playoffs. Playoff hockey is a lot tighter and rugged. Even in the regular season our more finesse style of play is noticeably less physical than most of the better teams in the league. As it has been said by many: Our roster is currently too imbalanced leaning toward finesse play. The bottom half of the roster needs to be bolstered and bulked up with the type of Canuck player that you noted. Getting a few of those players who fit that lower line profile is very doable, especially considering the abundant assets we have in the system. 

The Canucks love Joshua, but don't want to overpay on a player looking for his first and likely only big contract so will likely move on from the player. If Buffalo wants him, they'll have to overpay as well. Do we really want to?

[JohnC]

23 minutes ago, Sabres73 said:

The Canucks love Joshua, but don't want to overpay on a player looking for his first and likely only big contract so will likely move on from the player. If Buffalo wants him, they'll have to overpay as well. Do we really want to?

From a contract standpoint, the question very often goes beyond how much to pay for the team in question. The payment rate varies for every franchise. Paying someone at a particular price might not make sense for a franchise that is cap squeezed and has to address other impending contracts. For a team that has more cap room and a desire to be more competitive that payment schedule might be more expansive. I'm not arguing to overpay for a player with a particular level of talent. The issue for me for a franchise that has struggled has to show more flexibility and creativity when making judgments on players and pay scales. 

[shrader]

I’m still convinced that they keep reading Joshua’s name backwards. 

[Taro T]

32 minutes ago, shrader said:

I’m still convinced that they keep reading Joshua’s name backwards. 

It's really Auhsoj?

 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, Sabres73 said:

The Canucks love Joshua, but don't want to overpay on a player looking for his first and likely only big contract so will likely move on from the player. If Buffalo wants him, they'll have to overpay as well. Do we really want to?

Yes. We will have to "overpay" for anybody we want in free agency that's actually worth getting. Absolutely nobody will make Buffalo their first choice (with a small aside for Kane IF he cares about the Buffalo thing which I doubt but maybe).

[tom webster]

27 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Yes. We will have to "overpay" for anybody we want in free agency that's actually worth getting. Absolutely nobody will make Buffalo their first choice (with a small aside for Kane IF he cares about the Buffalo thing which I doubt but maybe).

Again with the absolutes. You have no idea what will motivate all of the free agents available. The players they want might not make Buffalo their first choice but there will be a player or two, probably more that want to come to Buffalo.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

Again with the absolutes. You have no idea what will motivate all of the free agents available. The players they want might not make Buffalo their first choice but there will be a player or two, probably more that want to come to Buffalo.

As you point out, players certainly have preferences as to where they want to play. It shouldn't be surprising that not every player on the market wants to play for Buffalo, Columbus, in New York, Edmonton, Calgary etc. That's always been the case. The reality is that pro sports is a business. If a player can garner a better contract or opportunity to play in Buffalo, he will be receptive to coming here. I'm confident the pool of players we can draw from will be more than sufficient. 

[shrader]

3 hours ago, Taro T said:

It's really Auhsoj?

 

He has a last name for a first name and a first name for a last name. 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, shrader said:

He has a last name for a first name and a first name for a last name. 

Dakota Fanning disagrees with this take.  🤪

[shrader]

25 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Dakota Fanning disagrees with this take.  🤪

So does Dakota North. 

[Taro T]

15 minutes ago, shrader said:

So does Dakota North. 

It actually would make more sense were the Dakota's to be divided into East & West Dakota rather than North & South.  (In both states, ranching is bigger in the east and mining bigger in the west.)

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, tom webster said:

Again with the absolutes. You have no idea what will motivate all of the free agents available. The players they want might not make Buffalo their first choice but there will be a player or two, probably more that want to come to Buffalo.

Pure conjecture and wishful thinking on your part. 

Simply put yourself in the mind of an NHL free agent. You are motivated by big money, a prime location, cup winning possibilities, somewhere your wife wants to be, tax concerns (related to the money) and/or some sort of attachment to a franchise or a desire to be in a certain place maybe with other players you know personally. (Did I forget anything?)

Now, for just about all of them, does Buffalo fit those criteria? No it does not. Right now it'll take big money. Maybe if we break the losing and make the playoffs it'll change, but try to see it objectively. It's simply not a desirable location at this point in time. It just isn't. 

[tom webster]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Pure conjecture and wishful thinking on your part. 

Simply put yourself in the mind of an NHL free agent. You are motivated by big money, a prime location, cup winning possibilities, somewhere your wife wants to be, tax concerns (related to the money) and/or some sort of attachment to a franchise or a desire to be in a certain place maybe with other players you know personally. (Did I forget anything?)

Now, for just about all of them, does Buffalo fit those criteria? No it does not. Right now it'll take big money. Maybe if we break the losing and make the playoffs it'll change, but try to see it objectively. It's simply not a desirable location at this point in time. It just isn't. 

Again, you have no idea what motivates every single person. Mario Williams signed with the Bills because he saw a deer in Jim Kelly’s back yard. People are motivated by a myriad of things.

[shrader]

4 hours ago, tom webster said:

Again, you have no idea what motivates every single person. Mario Williams signed with the Bills because he saw a deer in Jim Kelly’s back yard. People are motivated by a myriad of things.

And southern Ontario has not produced a single NHL player.  So there is no draw there.

[LTS]

21 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Yes. We will have to "overpay" for anybody we want in free agency that's actually worth getting. Absolutely nobody will make Buffalo their first choice (with a small aside for Kane IF he cares about the Buffalo thing which I doubt but maybe).

Definitely not applicable to all free agents.  No blanket statement.  There are certainly those who go UFA with the sights set on a big pay day. They also want to win I assume.  So getting paid more to not win isn't always possible either.

That said, overpaying for a UFA is ill advised in every scenario. There is no end to the number of teams that have given UFAs big contracts where it never worked out. Then to add onto that saying the Sabres would have to pay more?  That's even worse.  First, it's bad economics for running a team.  Second, I can only imagine the fans take on here when it happens and then again in the middle of next season when that player is not playing up to their already overpriced contract.

If players don't want to come here without a premium, then let it be.

 

[dudacek]

11 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Pure conjecture and wishful thinking on your part. 

Simply put yourself in the mind of an NHL free agent. You are motivated by big money, a prime location, cup winning possibilities, somewhere your wife wants to be, tax concerns (related to the money) and/or some sort of attachment to a franchise or a desire to be in a certain place maybe with other players you know personally. (Did I forget anything?)

Now, for just about all of them, does Buffalo fit those criteria? No it does not. Right now it'll take big money. Maybe if we break the losing and make the playoffs it'll change, but try to see it objectively. It's simply not a desirable location at this point in time. It just isn't. 

I'd add opportunity: a chance to play a bigger role and advance your career.

But all Webster is saying is most of those things — particularly the bold — are personal and vary dramatically from player to player.

Running through the list myself:

Money matters, but I'll take less to be where I want to be.

Location is important: San Jose, Seattle and Vancouver are close to home and my kind of climate, geography and personality. I'd take Edmonton and Calgary for being adjacent, Western Canadian and smaller hockey towns. Buffalo for my affinity to the franchise and being a smaller hockey town. No way to Winnipeg despite being similar. Too much in the middle of nowhere and crappy geography. L.A., Toronto, Dallas and New York? Keep me as far away from the giant, noisy, self-important cities as possible. Florida likely the same, but I'd look at Tampa and Anaheim. I like the character of Montreal and Ottawa. Carolina seems like a comfortable fit. Not going to go through the league

Wife? Fortunately her roots and comfort zone is similar to mine. But she could push me on or off the fence on a few places.

Taxes aren't a consideration for me now and wouldn't be as an NHL player either. I pay them when they're owed and grumble when doing it, don't think about them much otherwise.

I want to be on a team that I think will win, but it's less about "who has the best chance of winning it all this year" and more about "what direction is this team going and what part can I play?" I would have been far more interested in being a Senator last year than I would this year. And even bigger, how do I fit on the roster? I'm a net-front top-6 LW. I want to play on a team with 2 good top six centres and a lack of scoring on the wings. I'm not interested at all in playing for a roster loaded with good wingers and weak at centre.

And the people part is huge: do I want to play with these guys and/or for that coach? Do I trust the GM? What are people I trust saying about the organization?

I suspect Johnson picked Buffalo last summer largely because of Okposo, the $ and the fact the team needed a big, veteran RHD who could kill penalties. Those things superceded the fact the team has been bad and Buffalo is cold. Kane was very interested in Buffalo but ultimately didn't come. I suspect that was not because of money or location, but because he didn't feel good about the organization and/or team's chances of winning.

We don't really know, but the point is the decision process is far too complex to make sweeping statements.

Edited June 7 by dudacek

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I'd add opportunity: a chance to play a bigger role and advance your career.

But all Webster is saying is most of those things — particularly the bold — are personal and vary dramatically from player to player.

Running through the list myself:

Money matters, but I'll take less to be where I want to be.

Location is important: San Jose, Seattle and Vancouver are close to home and my kind of climate, geography and personality. I'd take Edmonton and Calgary for being adjacent, Western Canadian and smaller hockey towns. Buffalo for my affinity to the franchise and being a smaller hockey town. No way to Winnipeg despite being similar. Too much in the middle of nowhere and crappy geography. L.A., Toronto, Dallas and New York? Keep me as far away from the giant, noisy, self-important cities as possible. Florida likely the same, but I'd look at Tampa and Anaheim. I like the character of Montreal and Ottawa. Carolina seems like a comfortable fit. Not going to go through the league

Wife? Fortunately her roots and comfort zone is similar to mine. But she could push me on or off the fence on a few places.

Taxes aren't a consideration for me now and wouldn't be as an NHL player either. I pay them when they're owed and grumble when doing it, don't think about them much otherwise.

I want to be on a team that I think will win, but it's less about "who has the best chance of winning it all this year" and more about "what direction is this team going and what part can I play?" I would have been far more interested in being a Senator last year than I would this year. And even bigger, how do I fit on the roster? I'm a net-front top-6 LW. I want to play on a team with 2 good top six centres and a lack of scoring on the wings. I'm not interested at all in playing for a roster loaded with good wingers and weak at centre.

And the people part is huge: do I want to play with these guys and/or for that coach? Do I trust the GM? What are people I trust saying about the organization?

I suspect Johnson picked Buffalo last summer largely because of Okposo, the $ and the fact the team needed a big, veteran RHD who could kill penalties. Those things superceded the fact the team has been bad and Buffalo is cold. Kane was very interested in Buffalo but ultimately didn't come. I suspect that was not because of money or location, but because he didn't feel good about the organization and/or team's chances of winning.

We don't really know, but the point is the decision process is far too complex to make sweeping statements.

Agree with all that, PLUS if a guy is from S. Ont.  Buffalo is about as close to home as they're going to get presuming they don't end up in what @Sabres Fan in NS likes to call the Great Satan.  For guys that want to be in/near Canada (particularly the Ont. version of said), well Canada is just over the river.

For some, that's a draw.  For others, not so much.

But the biggest factor on whether a guy (that has legit NHL talent, rather than a tweener) will want to come to a team is does he think it'll be in the mix during the bulk of the time he's on that contract and will he fit in with the room.  If the answer to both is 'yes,' well, you've got a shot to sign him.  And hopefully bringing in Ruff will cause players to believe that 1st answer is 'yes.'  Remains to be seen if it will help, but it has to be better than having replaced Granato with another 1st time HC.

[PerreaultForever]

8 hours ago, tom webster said:

Again, you have no idea what motivates every single person. Mario Williams signed with the Bills because he saw a deer in Jim Kelly’s back yard. People are motivated by a myriad of things.

So? What's your point? Nobody here knows much of anything. We're all just fans speculating, hoping, wishing. Some of us just have a better grip on reality and a little more objectivity. But carry on, just diminish and attack with no added value. If it makes you feel better to post that my post is no good have at it. The Bills aren't the Sabres. The Bills are a contender. 

Nobody wants to come here. If you believe otherwise, you are like a deer in the headlights, in whoever's back yard. 

3 hours ago, LTS said:

If players don't want to come here without a premium, then let it be.

 

and then you miss the playoffs forever. 

Consider just drafting. How many players do you get? How many years does that take? By the time you have enough, you are losing free agents. It won't work. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

I'd add opportunity: a chance to play a bigger role and advance your career.

But all Webster is saying is most of those things — particularly the bold — are personal and vary dramatically from player to player.

Running through the list myself:

Money matters, but I'll take less to be where I want to be.

Location is important: San Jose, Seattle and Vancouver are close to home and my kind of climate, geography and personality. I'd take Edmonton and Calgary for being adjacent, Western Canadian and smaller hockey towns. Buffalo for my affinity to the franchise and being a smaller hockey town. No way to Winnipeg despite being similar. Too much in the middle of nowhere and crappy geography. L.A., Toronto, Dallas and New York? Keep me as far away from the giant, noisy, self-important cities as possible. Florida likely the same, but I'd look at Tampa and Anaheim. I like the character of Montreal and Ottawa. Carolina seems like a comfortable fit. Not going to go through the league

Wife? Fortunately her roots and comfort zone is similar to mine. But she could push me on or off the fence on a few places.

Taxes aren't a consideration for me now and wouldn't be as an NHL player either. I pay them when they're owed and grumble when doing it, don't think about them much otherwise.

I want to be on a team that I think will win, but it's less about "who has the best chance of winning it all this year" and more about "what direction is this team going and what part can I play?" I would have been far more interested in being a Senator last year than I would this year. And even bigger, how do I fit on the roster? I'm a net-front top-6 LW. I want to play on a team with 2 good top six centres and a lack of scoring on the wings. I'm not interested at all in playing for a roster loaded with good wingers and weak at centre.

And the people part is huge: do I want to play with these guys and/or for that coach? Do I trust the GM? What are people I trust saying about the organization?

I suspect Johnson picked Buffalo last summer largely because of Okposo, the $ and the fact the team needed a big, veteran RHD who could kill penalties. Those things superceded the fact the team has been bad and Buffalo is cold. Kane was very interested in Buffalo but ultimately didn't come. I suspect that was not because of money or location, but because he didn't feel good about the organization and/or team's chances of winning.

We don't really know, but the point is the decision process is far too complex to make sweeping statements.

You actually agreed with me despite laying out a critique of it being sweeping. The reasons can be multiple hence the and/or but those are the reasons. Bigger role to advance career could be an added piece if you like and I'd say Johnson chose Buffalo because he felt he could crack the lineup. You might get some players like that, but most of them won't be that good or anything that will move the needle. Look how we had to overpay Clifton as an example. 

The tax issue matters in that you have to compete with these states like Florida. When you are talking millions of dollars that can shift the dollar value and the cap number and hence you, for example, have to offer Stamkos more to leave Florida than Tampa has to offer to keep him in money terms only. 

You can believe what you want, but there's no evidence to back it up. We won't be a free agent destination until we are a winning team. This is why Adams chose the path he did because he knows it. This is why getting someone like Kane would matter. It signals a shift. But without something like that, it'll be difficult to make the step needed. 

You can call this sweeping and generalized, but it's also a fact. We are on a lot of NTCs and we are not a high demand free agent destination. We may have trouble attracting anybody worth having. 

[dudacek]

If your point is simply that the Sabres have factors against them when it comes to attracting free agents, nobody has or will disagree with that.