What are our top tradeable assets really worth?

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 hours ago, JohnC said:

If Ryan Johnson is dealt how much better is he than Joki?

By the way John, this is where asset management comes in.  You don't trade Johnson and then keep Jokiharju.  Joki is going to cost about $4 mill per season for the next 3 to 4 years to keep.  Why would you trade away Johnson to keep another big contract, especially when I'm not sure Joki is really that much better than Johnson?  Joki is certainly not $3 mill better than Johnson.  

 

[nfreeman]

4 hours ago, tom webster said:

I think Krebs gets traded and I think people are surprised with the return

Interesting.  Parting with Krebs would be further evidence of desperation on KA’s part IMHO.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

15 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Interesting.  Parting with Krebs would be further evidence of desperation on KA’s part IMHO.  

Why?

Right now Krebs has been passed on the depth chart by Benson, JJP, Quinn and probably Savoie with Kulich hot on his heals.  Had he developed as hoped he'd be in line to replace Mitts when Mitts was traded.  Instead, he stunk in that role after the trade and now pretty much everyone agrees we need to bring in outside talent to replace Mitts.  

Where does that leave Krebs?  Either on the 4th line or in the pressbox.  If he still has value, trade him and give him a fresh start elsewhere before he becomes Asplund 2.0.

Edited June 8 by GASabresIUFAN

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Interesting.  Parting with Krebs would be further evidence of desperation on KA’s part IMHO.  

It's worse if, as I fear, he has him penciled in as 3C. 

[JohnC]

7 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

By the way John, this is where asset management comes in.  You don't trade Johnson and then keep Jokiharju.  Joki is going to cost about $4 mill per season for the next 3 to 4 years to keep.  Why would you trade away Johnson to keep another big contract, especially when I'm not sure Joki is really that much better than Johnson?  Joki is certainly not $3 mill better than Johnson.  

 

Sometimes when getting too fixated on asset management one can loses sight of the bigger issue: putting the best team together you can (including reserves. There comes a point where the actual performance is disregarded because of the so-called cost/benefit ratio. In this type of situation, the analytical tool becomes the end all and be all at the expense of the overall quality of the roster. 

On all teams, there is never a perfect calibration between salary and performance. There are simply too many variables that preclude being precise in that balancing act. For me, I'm not overly concerned with Joki's price tag. If his contract demands get too outsized, he will be dealt. If his contract demands fall within the standard range for someone of his experience and talent level, then he should be kept. 

Compare what our blueline group is today to what it was a few years ago. Maybe it could be a little better balanced on the muscular side compared to the finesse side, but overall, it appears to be an emerging unit. I'm more than satisfied with this group. The center of attention for the GM needs to be on reconstituting the lower lines and adding a 3C. 

I'm confident that I'm taking a minority view stating that we should keep Joki. He has an ability to be the B partner in all of the pairings (if need be) and will be a contributing player in the unit. That's not to say that I will preclude better options if they arise. 

 

 

[LGR4GM]

6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why?

Right now Krebs has been passed on the depth chart by Benson, JJP, Quinn and probably Savoie with Kulich hot on his heals.  Had he developed as hoped he'd be in line to replace Mitts when Mitts was traded.  Instead, he stunk in that role after the trade and now pretty much everyone agrees we need to bring in outside talent to replace Mitts.  

Where does that leave Krebs?  Either on the 4th line or in the pressbox.  If he still has value, trade him and give him a fresh start elsewhere before he becomes Asplund 2.0.

He's definitely being overtaken as a 23yr old guy with 26pts as his best season. He's about to do his 3rd full season and technically has 3 nhl seasons under his belt. He might be good eventually but what if we aren't the ones to take the chance? Why can't half a dozen ufas or draftees do what he does?

[GASabresIUFAN]

18 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

He's definitely being overtaken as a 23yr old guy with 26pts as his best season. He's about to do his 3rd full season and technically has 3 nhl seasons under his belt. He might be good eventually but what if we aren't the ones to take the chance? Why can't half a dozen ufas or draftees do what he does?

Exactly.  There are at least a dozen UFAs that can give us what Krebs does but are more suited for a depth role.  Guys like Amadio, Carrier, Blueger, Trenin etc…  We don’t have the patience anymore to continue to wait for guys to develop.  Mitts and TNT were lucky that they were here when we started from scratch and we had the time and inclination to let them develop slowly.  We don’t have that luxury anymore.  How long are we supposed to wait on Krebs to make the meaningful contribution when the playoffs are the objective now?  Krebs reminds me of another 17th overall pick and that is Curtis Lazar.

Not only can we find UFAs to replace Krebs more suited for a depth role.  We also have a stockpile of prospects like Savoie, Rosen and Kulich who can come in and give us more than we got from Krebs.  Savoie’s NHLe on his WHL season was 41 points.  Kulich’s was 31 points and Rosen’s 30.  

[sabresparaavida]

14 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Exactly.  There are at least a dozen UFAs that can give us what Krebs does but are more suited for a depth role.  Guys like Amadio, Carrier, Blueger, Trenin etc…  We don’t have the patience anymore to continue to wait for guys to develop.  Mitts and TNT were lucky that they were here when we started from scratch and we had the time and inclination to let them develop slowly.  We don’t have that luxury anymore.  How long are we supposed to wait on Krebs to make the meaningful contribution when the playoffs are the objective now?  Krebs reminds me of another 17th overall pick and that is Curtis Lazar.

Not only can we find UFAs to replace Krebs more suited for a depth role.  We also have a stockpile of prospects like Savoie, Rosen and Kulich who can come in and give us more than we got from Krebs.  Savoie’s NHLe on his WHL season was 41 points.  Kulich’s was 31 points and Rosen’s 30.  

Fwiw, Krebs’ last season in the WHL had an NHLE of 44 points. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

11 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

Fwiw, Krebs’ last season in the WHL had an NHLE of 44 points. 

I looked that up as well.  Sadly he hasn't built on that promise.  

[JohnC]

8 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Interesting.  Parting with Krebs would be further evidence of desperation on KA’s part IMHO.  

I'm not invested in keeping him or not. But based on his play and projecting his upside, I just don't see any decision being made about him will turn out to be consequential. As others ( @LGR4GM and @GASabresIUFAN) have said, what he currently provides as a player or even projecting some upside, there are a sufficient supply of players in this league that can easily replace him. 

I have no problem bringing him into camp. But it would be a mistake to count on him for even a 4C role without bringing in a better option. As it stands, I don't see him as a 3C, at best he is a replaceable 4C.

[GoPuckYourself]

Trade 11, Rosen and Jokijarju for the best top line winger we can get in here. IMO neither Skinner or Tuch should be 1st line players.

 

[stinky finger]

On 6/7/2024 at 8:21 AM, GASabresIUFAN said:

Florida acquired Bennett when still as RFA for a 2nd and a former 2nd rd prospect.

While he might be a better 2 way player today, an acquiring team only gets one year and no control.  

This is why I created this thread.  John wants to throw in the kitchen sink to get Bennett, while I see considerably less value.  I might do our 2nd and Rosen, but nothing more for a rental. 

My fear is Adams is desperate to win this season.  Other GMs will smell the blood in the water and demand higher prices from Adams than they would from others.  We have seen this in the past with the proposed Chychrun trade.  Adams was correct to say no then, but will he be so disciplined now with his job on the line? 

My fear is Adams lack of desperation. 

[stinky finger]

21 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Dahlin should bring a nice haul.

[Stoner]

Just now, stinky finger said:

Dahlin is gone. Does your imagination not allow you to see a Sabres franchise that is better? Or one that is about the same? Why would the wheels fall off (wheels? what wheels?)? Why are we married to Rasmus Dahlin? I honestly don't get it.

[stinky finger]

5 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Dahlin is gone. Does your imagination not allow you to see a Sabres franchise that is better? Or one that is about the same? Why would the wheels fall off (wheels? what wheels?)? Why are we married to Rasmus Dahlin? I honestly don't get it.

Not married, wildly infatuated.

There are many issues on this team. Dahlin being the least of them. 
 

What type of deal would you propose?I’m willing to listen. 

 

 

 

[Pimlach]

14 hours ago, tom webster said:

I think Krebs gets traded and I think people are surprised with the return

Interesting take.   I would be surprised if Krebs alone brings in a pleasant surprise, I want you to be right on this.  I still see him as a guy that gets packaged in a trade.  

[Pimlach]

5 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Dahlin is gone. Does your imagination not allow you to see a Sabres franchise that is better? Or one that is about the same? Why would the wheels fall off (wheels? what wheels?)? Why are we married to Rasmus Dahlin? I honestly don't get it.

Way back when I was not at all sad to see Turgeon traded.  Why?   Even though he could put up points but I did not like his game and he seemed to disappear in the playoffs.  I was happy to see him traded for LaFontaine who was both skilled and plucky.  

You have been on record for a long time as questioning Dahlin's ability to be great.   Trade Dahlin?  We could maybe get a great 1C and a few other good players and hope for Power and Byram to full the void. 

I know you have never really cared for Dahlin but what is it about his game that is bothering you?   

Edited June 8 by Pimlach

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Tage would get the Sabres a 1st.  Lotto protected .. pick 16 and lower, but a first.

I am not saying the Sabres should trade him (to be clearer - I don't think they should trade him), but the question in the OP is what do we think they are worth.  

Dahlin would get the Sabres a 1st +.

Trouble with trading Krebs is the return will be another prospect unless there is a bigger package and Krebs is a piece, but not the main piece.

I am not sure if the Sabres got equal value in return for Mitts - time will tell, but right now I'd say no.

[nfreeman]

10 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why?

Right now Krebs has been passed on the depth chart by Benson, JJP, Quinn and probably Savoie with Kulich hot on his heals.  Had he developed as hoped he'd be in line to replace Mitts when Mitts was traded.  Instead, he stunk in that role after the trade and now pretty much everyone agrees we need to bring in outside talent to replace Mitts.  

Where does that leave Krebs?  Either on the 4th line or in the pressbox.  If he still has value, trade him and give him a fresh start elsewhere before he becomes Asplund 2.0.

I agree that Krebs hasn't seized the opportunity he's been given repeatedly here, and that there's really no reason to be confident he'll ever amount to much.  My point is simply that Krebs was one of the key pieces in the return for Eichel.  GMs typically don't like to give up on a guy in that situation -- and if KA does, it will be because he knows he doesn't have the luxury of "letting the kids develop for another year and seeing how it goes" -- i.e. it will be because his feet are being held to the fire, as they should be.

 

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It's worse if, as I fear, he has him penciled in as 3C. 

I doubt anyone has Krebs penciled in as 3C.  I'd guess that if he's here, he's penciled in as 4C with the hope that he develops into a 3C.

[Archie Lee]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I looked that up as well.  Sadly he hasn't built on that promise.  

I'm not disputing this is true.  But, the situation is a bit unusual in that for reasons that aren't entirely clear or obvious we decided to promote him to the NHL when we had no spot for him to play his projected natural position in the lineup. In 35 AHL games Krebs produced 36 points.  We had no spot for him in the top 9 on promotion, so he ends up playing 4th line with Okposo/Girgs/Robinson. That's not a knock against those players, but Krebs's production is not out of line with what 4th liners produce.  Florida's 4th line C for much of the year has been Kevin Stenlund, who had 15 points in 81 regular season games and has 1 point in 17 playoff games.  It just seems to me that we want Krebs to produce at a level that warrants his place in the Eichel trade while he gets the same sort of minutes and line-mates that the Kevin Stenlunds of the NHL get. I think Krebs could have produced 40+ points had he the opportunity to play the season with two of Tuch, Quinn, Peterka, Cozens, Thompson.  

[nfreeman]

3 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I'm not disputing this is true.  But, the situation is a bit unusual in that for reasons that aren't entirely clear or obvious we decided to promote him to the NHL when we had no spot for him to play his projected natural position in the lineup. In 35 AHL games Krebs produced 36 points.  We had no spot for him in the top 9 on promotion, so he ends up playing 4th line with Okposo/Girgs/Robinson. That's not a knock against those players, but Krebs's production is not out of line with what 4th liners produce.  Florida's 4th line C for much of the year has been Kevin Stenlund, who had 15 points in 81 regular season games and has 1 point in 17 playoff games.  It just seems to me that we want Krebs to produce at a level that warrants his place in the Eichel trade while he gets the same sort of minutes and line-mates that the Kevin Stenlunds of the NHL get. I think Krebs could have produced 40+ points had he the opportunity to play the season with two of Tuch, Quinn, Peterka, Cozens, Thompson.  

Good stuff here.  For a bit more context, I'd note that Krebs's first full NHL season was 2022-23, when the Sabres had a good offense.  He had 26 pts in 74 games that year, which is a 29-pt pace.  That's not bad for an aspiring 3C in his 1st full NHL season at age 22.  Then, like most of the roster, he was pretty disappointing this past season when the wheels fell off.

[French Collection]

15 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Good stuff here.  For a bit more context, I'd note that Krebs's first full NHL season was 2022-23, when the Sabres had a good offense.  He had 26 pts in 74 games that year, which is a 29-pt pace.  That's not bad for an aspiring 3C in his 1st full NHL season at age 22.  Then, like most of the roster, he was pretty disappointing this past season when the wheels fell off.

Like a few others I am not ready to give up on him, unless he is packaged in a deal bringing back a bonafide 3C. He should be told that 3C is possible but to embrace the 4C role. Showing what he can do when elevated in the lineup will determine whether he can be a 3C in Buffalo and get some special teams time.

Savoie, Kulich and Östlund are not looking like 4C types and could leapfrog him in a year.

Embrace the role and become the best damn 4C in the league!

[Believer]

8 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Good stuff here.  For a bit more context, I'd note that Krebs's first full NHL season was 2022-23, when the Sabres had a good offense.  He had 26 pts in 74 games that year, which is a 29-pt pace.  That's not bad for an aspiring 3C in his 1st full NHL season at age 22.  Then, like most of the roster, he was pretty disappointing this past season when the wheels fell off.

Like Thompson and Cozens, Krebs production was affected by Granato’s pivot to D play. Moving to the checking line impacted his point production as well.

Beyond scoring, there is the intangible of his impact in practice, the locker room, and bench.

Every time the camera catches him on the bench he is talking to mates with a big smile on his face. Can’t train enthusiasm and it is infectious. 

If he survives a trade, he will get a qualifying offer at least. If he performs for Ruff and Ruff wants him, he gets a new contract, imo.

Big year for the 23 year old, regardless.

[JohnC]

13 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

By the way John, this is where asset management comes in.  You don't trade Johnson and then keep Jokiharju.  Joki is going to cost about $4 mill per season for the next 3 to 4 years to keep.  Why would you trade away Johnson to keep another big contract, especially when I'm not sure Joki is really that much better than Johnson?  Joki is certainly not $3 mill better than Johnson.  

 

Are you sure that Joki is going to attain the salary that you project him at? What if his contract turns out to be lower? Pick a figure and tell me at what price you would find it worth keeping? I do like Johnson. He did impress me in his stint with Buffalo. And I'm not going to scoff at having depth on the blueline, even if it means that Johnson starts the season in Rochester. 

[stinky finger]

3 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Way back when I was not at all sad to see Turgeon traded.  Why?   Even though he could put up points but I did not like his game and he seemed to disappear in the playoffs.  I was happy to see him traded for LaFontaine who was both skilled and plucky.  

You have been on record for a long time as questioning Dahlin's ability to be great.   Trade Dahlin?  We could maybe get a great 1C and a few other good players and hope for Power and Byram to full the void. 

I know you have never really cared for Dahlin but what about is it exactly about his game that is bothering you?   

Perhaps he wants something else to worry about?