3C - What is best course going forward?

[oddoublee]

20 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

Is Elias Lindholm an option?  

I believe he is, and I suspect the Sabres are going to call his agent. Most people are ignoring him based on the idea that we are 'set' at 1C and 2C. I don't think we are. Elias would be the team's theoretical #1 Center, allowing Tage and Cozens to avoid tough matchups against teams with extremely elite first lines (Toronto, Edmonton, etc...). 

Elias along with a player like Domi changes the look of lines 1 through 3 dramatically. However, assuming they don't buyout Skinner (they won't), they are going to have to go cheap at backup Goalie and Forward 13 and 14 - and roster Ryan Johnson as their 7th D instead of allowing him more time in Rochester. May also mean people will have to get used to the idea of Girgs and Robinson coming back on 3 million combined as part a 4th line with Krebs. 

[Pimlach]

12 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Bennett has no trade protection.  If traded here, he is coming unless he wants to sit out a year.  The one year left on his deal, may or may not be an issue depending on  whether or not managements think one of the prospects is ready to step up in 2025/26.  
 

Should they try Benson at center?

The problem is that Bennet could end up doing what other KA vets have done.   If we have yet another bad season then Bennett will ride it out for awhile and then march into KA's office prior to the trade deadline and request to be moved by telling KA he wants out.   

If Adams trades for a 1, 2 or 3C then he needs to have term left on a contract that we can handle.  Cirelli's contract will end up being a problem.  Bennett's term could end being a problem. 

What else you got?   And no, Benson is not a center.   I think you know that. 

[LGR4GM]

27 minutes ago, oddoublee said:

I believe he is, and I suspect the Sabres are going to call his agent. Most people are ignoring him based on the idea that we are 'set' at 1C and 2C. I don't think we are. Elias would be the team's theoretical #1 Center, allowing Tage and Cozens to avoid tough matchups against teams with extremely elite first lines (Toronto, Edmonton, etc...). 

Elias along with a player like Domi changes the look of lines 1 through 3 dramatically. However, assuming they don't buyout Skinner (they won't), they are going to have to go cheap at backup Goalie and Forward 13 and 14 - and roster Ryan Johnson as their 7th D instead of allowing him more time in Rochester. May also mean people will have to get used to the idea of Girgs and Robinson coming back on 3 million combined as part a 4th line with Krebs. 

I think it's delusional to think Adams is looking to add a 1 or 2c to this team, hence why I don't talk about any. 

[Archie Lee]

2 hours ago, GoPuckYourself said:

I think getting Chandler Stephenson to me would be the ideal 3rd line C for us, he offers everything that Krebs doesn't... Skill, toughness, grit, 52.6% on faceoffs. It's absolutely baffling to me what people see in Peyton Krebs at this point. He doesn't score, he doesn't fight, he has some toughness but is more or less just a guy who talks trash every now and again, only has 46.3% faceoff wins (Has over 400 less faceoff attempts as Stephenson and still not better at it). Stephenson is making 2.75M, bump it up to 3.75M per year for a 2 year deal? A nice million increase might entice him.

In 2016-17 when Stephenson was the age that Krebs was last season, he was putting up 38 points in 72 games as a Hershey Bear. It wasn’t until 2021-22, when he was age 27, that he had a breakout 64 point offensive season in the NHL. I get moving on from Krebs if the time for patience is over. But Stephenson wasn’t the Stephenson who you want, until he was a few years older than Krebs is now.  

[Ctaeth]

Tyson jost

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Doohickie said:

My point was the Mitts trade was dumb.  We really didn't need another high-talent, pretty-boy Dman (regardless of handedness) at the expense of a solid 2/3 C.  But Adams decided to invest in Tage and Cozens and walk away from Mitts.  I don't understand that.  I just don't. 

The gap created by trading Casey away is greater than any contribution Byram will make, imo.

The trade makes sense if the "window" for being true contenders opens 3 years from now and remains open for a few after that.  Around then, you've got Cozens or Savoie hopefully claiming the 1C, the other a very good 2C, Thompson either rolls to W or is the 3C and the wingers are Quinn, Peterka, Benson, Kulich/Thompson (with the other likely the 3C), Tuch on the 3rd line (maybe 4th by then).  Östlund or Rosen or possibly even Krebs or something one of those guys has been traded for as the 9th guy in the top 9.  Maybe Greenway's still here.  Or the guy they get at 11 is ready for that.

The D is likely set for a long time and will be entering its prime about then, as is/will be the GT.

With all the potential at F (3 years from now), Adams was willing to forego keeping Mittelstadt to have what he seems to believe is a locked in D.  As Clifton ages past his prime, they've got Novikov to step into the more physical role and Johnson should be good by then too.

Not a fan of that philosophy, pushing your all-in window out even further, but it actually makes that trade "make sense."

Everything (other than bringing in Ruff, who in almost all likelihood will be ready to step away from coaching by then; but he'll be ready for either a schmoozing job (as PoHO) or a cushy job (senior advisor to the PoHO) by then and even that kind of) seems to be on the "Levi timeline."

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:

In 2016-17 when Stephenson was the age that Krebs was last season, he was putting up 38 points in 72 games as a Hershey Bear. It wasn’t until 2021-22, when he was age 27, that he had a breakout 64 point offensive season in the NHL. I get moving on from Krebs if the time for patience is over. But Stephenson wasn’t the Stephenson who you want, until he was a few years older than Krebs is now.  

I'm not giving up on Krebs. But that doesn't mean that I'm counting on him to be our 3C this upcoming season. If he plays beyond our expectation, then good on him, and the team benefits. However, it would be a mistake not to bring in a credible 3C from the outside to address a major void on this team. Right now, it is more likely that Krebs is going to be slotted in the 4C role. If he plays above that role, then I will salute him and deal with an excess of talent on the roster. And that is a good problem to have. 

[mjd1001]

29 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'm not giving up on Krebs. But that doesn't mean that I'm counting on him to be our 3C this upcoming season. If he plays beyond our expectation, then good on him, and the team benefits. However, it would be a mistake not to bring in a credible 3C from the outside to address a major void on this team. Right now, it is more likely that Krebs is going to be slotted in the 4C role. If he plays above that role, then I will salute him and deal with an excess of talent on the roster. And that is a good problem to have. 

I agree with most of what you said.

When Krebs arrived here I was down on him more than most on this board, but now I think many have swung WAY too far the other direction, basically saying he is borderline useless and a bust. He MAY be, but its still too early in my opinion to judge that. He may turn into a pretty good player but it could happen this year, or it could happen in 2-3 years from now.  But, as you said, I want to give him a chance here, but don't want to COUNT on him.  If you bring someone else in for that role, that other person plays there. IF Krebs takes a huge leap forward, then sure you can slot Krebs into that slot, but I don't want that to be THE plan.

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I agree with most of what you said.

When Krebs arrived here I was down on him more than most on this board, but now I think many have swung WAY too far the other direction, basically saying he is borderline useless and a bust. He MAY be, but its still too early in my opinion to judge that. He may turn into a pretty good player but it could happen this year, or it could happen in 2-3 years from now.  But, as you said, I want to give him a chance here, but don't want to COUNT on him.  If you bring someone else in for that role, that other person plays there. IF Krebs takes a huge leap forward, then sure you can slot Krebs into that slot, but I don't want that to be THE plan.

Based on he played last year, it seems that his style of play is more suitable to the fourth line. My sense is that we should be able to determine what the upper limits of his game will be this year. To be honest, I've been disappointed in him. I thought he had more offensive bandwidth. He plays with energy and grit with not much offensive production. The best approach to take with him is put the onus on him to "show us". 

[French Collection]

19 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

If you bring someone else in for that role, that other person plays there. IF Krebs takes a huge leap forward, then sure you can slot Krebs into that slot, but I don't want that to be THE plan.

Right on the money.

If he plays like he can handle 3C then you have two guys capable of a 3C role. When injuries happen, one can move to 2C and 3C is well taken care of.

If the cap becomes an issue then the more expensive guy gets moved out.

[GoPuckYourself]

3 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

In 2016-17 when Stephenson was the age that Krebs was last season, he was putting up 38 points in 72 games as a Hershey Bear. It wasn’t until 2021-22, when he was age 27, that he had a breakout 64 point offensive season in the NHL. I get moving on from Krebs if the time for patience is over. But Stephenson wasn’t the Stephenson who you want, until he was a few years older than Krebs is now.  

But the Stephenson now is who we need on this roster, I dont want to wait around for Krebs to possibly be Stephenson in 2-3 years time down the road because there's a good possibility he never will be also. 

5 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Did you see the projection above of 5 years at 5.162?  The last 3 seasons he's had 64, 65 and 51 points.  He isn't taking less than 5 per season.  His age and not as stellar play last season may limit the term to 4 years, but he isn't coming here on a 2 year deal. 

I doubt a team is signing him at 5 years 5.1M, maybe they will I truly suck at NHL projections but that seems high. 

Edited May 29 by GoPuckYourself

[Archie Lee]

1 hour ago, GoPuckYourself said:

But the Stephenson now is who we need on this roster, I dont want to wait around for Krebs to possibly be Stephenson in 2-3 years time down the road because there's a good possibility he never will be also. 

I doubt a team is signing him at 5 years 5.1M, maybe they will I truly suck at NHL projections but that seems high. 

I think he will get that and would be thrilled if it was from us. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

5 hours ago, Pimlach said:

The problem is that Bennet could end up doing what other KA vets have done.   If we have yet another bad season then Bennett will ride it out for awhile and then march into KA's office prior to the trade deadline and request to be moved by telling KA he wants out.   

 

....and if the Sabres are in a playoff position?  He'll march into KA's office and ask for an extension.  The truth is, if the Sabres are bad again next season, I doubt KA is still the GM when the trade deadline comes around.  He has to get it right this off-season and the team must play well from the get go next fall.  

Bennett is the perfect player for that scenario.  He is playing for a new contract.  That should be all the incentive he needs to play his best for the Sabres.  

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, Doohickie said:

My point was the Mitts trade was dumb.  We really didn't need another high-talent, pretty-boy Dman (regardless of handedness) at the expense of a solid 2/3 C.  But Adams decided to invest in Tage and Cozens and walk away from Mitts.  I don't understand that.  I just don't. 

The gap created by trading Casey away is greater than any contribution Byram will make, imo.

Oh I totally don't disagree with that. I don't think Byram was the type of guy we needed and the 3C hole is a problem for sure. 

[Stoner]

9 hours ago, JohnC said:

Who are you pursuing as one of our top two or three Cs?

George Seifert.

[SabreFinn]

29 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Oh I totally don't disagree with that. I don't think Byram was the type of guy we needed and the 3C hole is a problem for sure. 

Agree on that also. I understand moving on from Mitts but I would not have done it at trade deadline and not for a same type defender we already have. I have not changed my mind on trading Byram for a player that get a balanced roster. Or at least takes us a step closer to that.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, SabreFinn said:

Agree on that also. I understand moving on from Mitts but I would not have done it at trade deadline and not for a same type defender we already have. I have not changed my mind on trading Byram for a player that get a balanced roster. Or at least takes us a step closer to that.

Won't happen though. GMs rarely flip the guy they picked up, it makes them look bad. If he trades a D man it's more likely to be one of JBots. 

 

But I don't think they will trade any of the D they have now. I think that's it. 

Edited May 29 by PerreaultForever

[SabreFinn]

51 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Won't happen though. GMs rarely flip the guy they picked up, it makes them look bad. If he trades a D man it's more likely to be one of JBots. 

 

But I don't think they will trade any of the D they have now. I think that's it. 

Probably. There has not been any talk of the defensemen and upgrades what I have read of so you are probably right. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 minute ago, SabreFinn said:

Probably. There has not been any talk of the defensemen and upgrades what I have read of so you are probably right. 

I'm going by what he says here:

 

[oddoublee]

15 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I think it's delusional to think Adams is looking to add a 1 or 2c to this team, hence why I don't talk about any. 

delusions of grandeur I guess. how is your sabres memorabilia collection coming along?

[Pimlach]

9 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

....and if the Sabres are in a playoff position?  He'll march into KA's office and ask for an extension.  The truth is, if the Sabres are bad again next season, I doubt KA is still the GM when the trade deadline comes around.  He has to get it right this off-season and the team must play well from the get go next fall.  

Bennett is the perfect player for that scenario.  He is playing for a new contract.  That should be all the incentive he needs to play his best for the Sabres.  

Bennett would be a great addition but I just don’t see it.   It’s weird to think that Adams didn’t extend Reinhart, but then he later trades for and extends Bennett.  
 

If the Sabres fail again next season I am still not sure Adams gets fired.  Pegula doesn’t trust anyone else, or so it seems.  

[Archie Lee]

10 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Bennett would be a great addition but I just don’t see it.   It’s weird to think that Adams didn’t extend Reinhart, but then he later trades for and extends Bennett.  
 

If the Sabres fail again next season I am still not sure Adams gets fired.  Pegula doesn’t trust anyone else, or so it seems.  

I suspect Pegula will see a difference between missing by a point or two and missing by 15. If we are in it until the end but miss, then I don’t see a scenario where the Adams/Ruff combo doesn’t get a 2nd year. If they are out of it by the deadline then I think changes might occur. Personally, with the exception of hypothetical extreme outcomes, I will need to see how the year plays out before I opine on whether Adams should be fired

[Pimlach]

18 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I suspect Pegula will see a difference between missing by a point or two and missing by 15. If we are in it until the end but miss, then I don’t see a scenario where the Adams/Ruff combo doesn’t get a 2nd year. If they are out of it by the deadline then I think changes might occur. Personally, with the exception of hypothetical extreme outcomes, I will need to see how the year plays out before I opine on whether Adams should be fired

I would have fired him by now, but I also would not have had him operate with such heavy restrictions either. 

I think the Covid restrictions cost us Reinhart, Montour and Ullmark.  I think Risto needed to go, and Eichel wanted out with his injury the key to accommodate that.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

42 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Bennett would be a great addition but I just don’t see it.   It’s weird to think that Adams didn’t extend Reinhart, but then he later trades for and extends Bennett.

I'm not sure I follow.  Trading Reinhart and the rest of the "old core" was the plan Adams sold Pegula or that Pegula mandated (as we all know that Adams is a yes man).  Eichel, Reinhart, Ristolainen, Montour, Staal and Hall were all traded from 3/26/21 to 11/4/21.  For them we have net received Tuch, Krebs, Östlund, Levi, Kulich, Rosen, Wahlberg, Kisakov, Marjala, Sardarian, Gustav Karlsson, and Riley Stillman. 

Now we are in win now mode.  Acquiring and possibly extending a 3C like Bennett is what the GM is supposed to do at this stage of the plan.  He is supposed to back fill his roster holes with outside talent where there is no internal candidate.

Edited May 29 by GASabresIUFAN

[Weave]

4 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

I would have fired him by now, but I also would not have had him operate with such heavy restrictions either. 

I think the Covid restrictions cost us Reinhart, Montour and Ullmark.  I think Risto needed to go, and Eichel wanted out with his injury the key to accommodate that.  

I think the updated timeline presented by KA cost us all those players. Some wanted no part of another reset, others didn’t fit the new timeline, and some were both.