Taro T Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said: Ruff is most definitely not going to put players where Adams thinks they should go. I'd say all preconceptions are off and who plays where, with who, and how much, will depend on who adapts to Lindy's style and system the quickest and works the hardest to earn and keep his spot. My guess will be anybody who does not fit in to that or adapt well will be top of the trade list. At least that's what I hope, but I do not see Lindy as a yes man to Adams. The conversation was whether Byram was considered a core piece or not. That Adams brought him in to partner with Dahlin would indicate he is, at least from Adams perspective. The post you responsed to in no way shape or form was indicative of how the D-pairings will be deployed. And, ftr, Ruff is on record as indicating he expects Dahlin's primary partners to be Power and Samuelsson.
Porous Five Hole Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 Getzlaf to DOPS This seems Iike an odd hire… 1
dudacek Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said: . However, the money doesn’t work long-term. Quinn, JJP, McLeod and Levi will need new contracts and then Benson and Tuch after them. There won’t be enough cap room after that to pay Byram big $ as well. . If there isn’t enough room to pay Byram, how are they going to afford that impact forward you’re calling for? 1
Thorner Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 (edited) 3 hours ago, dudacek said: So when Adams says this team has enough offence he’s blowing smoke, and deep down inside he doesn’t think they can contend without a Necas-level player? There’s a difference between improving the roster and adding to your core. And just so we’re on the same page when we’re talking “core”, how would you fill in the blank in this sentence with a number: “if he was traded to Buffalo, Martin Necas would be the Sabres —— most important forward.” There’s also a difference between whether you “can” contend and your liklihood of actually doing it. Your thoughts on the matter are part and parcel with the Adams mindset: “Look, it MIGHT work. I mean, you can’t rule it out”. The rub is that we are supposed to be miles past that being an acceptable line of thinking. Yes. Maybe we have enough to make the playoffs. The fact we are sitting on a “well, it’s feasible” going into year 5 is what’s absurd. You often fight the “it’s realistically possible” battle when we are 2/3 years passed that being a reasonable situation to enter into a season under. If playoffs don’t look a near certainty headed into a year 5, you are playing a risky, risky game of poker. The truth is that Adams can’t know either way whether his core is good enough. When you add a player like Necas, it’s another bite at the apple. (apple) Cores don’t get typed out and printed on Sabrespace at 5:08 on a Wednesday summer evening: they are ever changing and continuously evolving “Set core” jargon should head to the sabrespace meme thread tbh Edited August 14 by Thorny 1
Thorner Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 (edited) 2 hours ago, dudacek said: Adams Never disagreed that Byram wasn’t bad at defence over his last 10 or so games in Buffalo. Prior to this year, he’s never given me any reason to question his ability to play defence. And he’s never given me any reason to question his commitment. The kid is a stud talent and a competitor. I’m going to bet ability + commitment + coaching produces a player who makes you happy to be wrong. You can bet on it, but it only matters if you are right THIS year Casey already is Edited August 14 by Thorny
dudacek Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 18 minutes ago, Thorny said: There’s also a difference between whether you “can” contend and your liklihood of actually doing it. Your thoughts on the matter are part and parcel with the Adams mindset: “Look, it MIGHT work. I mean, you can’t rule it out”. The rub is that we are supposed to be miles past that being an acceptable line of thinking. Yes. Maybe we have enough to make the playoffs. The fact we are sitting on a “well, it’s feasible” going into year 5 is what’s absurd. You often fight the “it’s realistically possible” battle when we are 2/3 years passed that being a reasonable situation to enter into a season under. If playoffs don’t look a near certainty headed into a year 5, you are playing a risky, risky game of poker. The truth is that Adams can’t know either way whether his core is good enough. When you add a player like Necas, it’s another bite at the apple. (apple) Cores don’t get typed out and printed on Sabrespace at 5:08 on a Wednesday summer evening: they are ever changing and continuously evolving “Set core” jargon should head to the sabrespace meme thread tbh I don’t think Adams is at “well, it’s feasible” I think Adams believes this group is a playoff team, not a bubble team. I think he’s bet his job on it. I wish I shared his confidence. 2
GASabresIUFAN Posted August 14 Report Posted August 14 1 hour ago, dudacek said: If there isn’t enough room to pay Byram, how are they going to afford that impact forward you’re calling for? Great question and I think the answer is KA was looking for a guy with just a couple of years on his deal. Zegras has 2 years left on his deal for example. Ultimately I think there is enough cap space for a player to get a guy on a short-term upgrade, but not enough to commit to another long-term deal, especially if the Sabres are again on the outside looking in on the playoffs. The hope is that the upgrade is a bridge until Benson, Helenius, Östlund, Wahlberg, or Kulich is ready for a bigger role.
PerreaultForever Posted August 15 Report Posted August 15 10 hours ago, dudacek said: Can’t recall Lindy ever playing power games with his GM. From would I’ve observed from both men, I’d be shocked if their relationship is anything other than collaborative. I’d also be shocked if the bold isn’t the case. Tying this in to my conversation with @GASabresIUFAN, Byram strikes me as very much a Lindy guy: plays fast, attacks the game at both ends, competes hard, pushes back: he’s a Western Leaguer to the core. Real curious about what kind of summer he’s had. He’s better talent than the player he was traded for. If he finds his game the way Casey did at his age, he’s going to be a real asset. I'm not saying Lindy will "play power games" with him, just that Lindy won't do what he wants or play a player just because Adams wanted that player last year. Lindy will do Lindy. As far as collaboration goes, I'm sure they'll be on the same page initially and will stay on that page if all goes well, but I don't see Lindy asking Adams for his opinion on any of the players. Lindy will decide that for himself. Adams is the one more likely to ask Lindy about a player before a trade if anything. Lindy is the senior statesman. Lindy has much more experience and hockey knowledge. No way is Adams going to be advising Lindy. He might fire him one day, but he won't be giving him advice. 1
PerreaultForever Posted August 15 Report Posted August 15 9 hours ago, Taro T said: The conversation was whether Byram was considered a core piece or not. That Adams brought him in to partner with Dahlin would indicate he is, at least from Adams perspective. The post you responsed to in no way shape or form was indicative of how the D-pairings will be deployed. And, ftr, Ruff is on record as indicating he expects Dahlin's primary partners to be Power and Samuelsson. Which makes sense to me. I'd definitely try Power there and see how it looks and if Power isn't ready then go with Samuelsson. I have no idea how to fit Byram in properly. I didn't think it was a good trade and don't think he was or is what we need but he's there so we shall see where Ruff puts him. He is most definitely NOT "core". 7 hours ago, dudacek said: I don’t think Adams is at “well, it’s feasible” I think Adams believes this group is a playoff team, not a bubble team. I think he’s bet his job on it. I wish I shared his confidence. Did he have a choice in this? My guess would be no. This is why he went with Ruff rather than a risky unknown commodity. It was the best sure thing coaching option available. I think he knows he's on the hotseat, as he should be.
ponokasabre Posted August 15 Report Posted August 15 With the Edmonton Offer Sheets, they clearly need to move salary. Would there be any appetite for a Kulak for Joki Swap? Kulak has 2 years left at 2.75 Million I beleive Joki 1 year left at 3.1 Million The trade would be: Kulak for Joki 50% retained And maybe we can get a draft pick out of Edmonton for doing this as they need to shed salary really bad. Edmonton adds a relatively young defensman to replace Broberg that can play now, at a fraction of his cost. We take Kulak who is more the type of defensman we need right now. Joki only has the one year left so Edmonton can let him walk if needed next year. We get the cost controlled asset of Kulak for one more year. If the top 4 is some combination of Power, Dahlin, Sammy, and Byram then Kulak on the third pair is great! He is a lefty and we love those right? Plays extremely physical and tough and could slide up and down the line up as needed. Is this something you guys would entertain? Is it something the team would entertain? Clearly UPL and Joki are good friends would they still trade him knowing he is liked off the ice? Mitts was traded and he was Dahlins best friend so the precedent is there for a move like this. Usually I would not entertain moving a 24 year old defensman for 30 year old but Kulak fits us so much better then Joki. This would be a no-brainer for me and would fit a lot more along our idea of winning now and filling out the roster and making it complete
thewookie1 Posted August 15 Report Posted August 15 37 minutes ago, ponokasabre said: With the Edmonton Offer Sheets, they clearly need to move salary. Would there be any appetite for a Kulak for Joki Swap? Kulak has 2 years left at 2.75 Million I beleive Joki 1 year left at 3.1 Million The trade would be: Kulak for Joki 50% retained And maybe we can get a draft pick out of Edmonton for doing this as they need to shed salary really bad. Edmonton adds a relatively young defensman to replace Broberg that can play now, at a fraction of his cost. We take Kulak who is more the type of defensman we need right now. Joki only has the one year left so Edmonton can let him walk if needed next year. We get the cost controlled asset of Kulak for one more year. If the top 4 is some combination of Power, Dahlin, Sammy, and Byram then Kulak on the third pair is great! He is a lefty and we love those right? Plays extremely physical and tough and could slide up and down the line up as needed. Is this something you guys would entertain? Is it something the team would entertain? Clearly UPL and Joki are good friends would they still trade him knowing he is liked off the ice? Mitts was traded and he was Dahlins best friend so the precedent is there for a move like this. Usually I would not entertain moving a 24 year old defensman for 30 year old but Kulak fits us so much better then Joki. This would be a no-brainer for me and would fit a lot more along our idea of winning now and filling out the roster and making it complete Easy no, Kulak is another LHD and we already have 7 LHDs capable of fulfilling the 3 spots and we have 1 playing on the Roght due to that stock already
Demoted Posted August 17 Report Posted August 17 22 hours ago, LGR4GM said: Wanna go dumpster diving? What's crazy is at least one of those players would probably refuse to come here. Dumpster diving from one dumpster to another.
thewookie1 Posted August 18 Report Posted August 18 8 minutes ago, Brawndo said: That would tell me Holloway is a goner. They just acquired his replacement.
Brawndo Posted August 19 Report Posted August 19 (edited) This frees up cap space for them to possibly match both deals. With Ceci gone and Kane on LTIR they would have 149k remaining in space Edited August 19 by Brawndo
thewookie1 Posted August 19 Report Posted August 19 7 minutes ago, Brawndo said: This frees up cap space for them to possibly match both deals. With Ceci gone and Kane on LTIR they would have 149k remaining in space Come on SJS you should of stuck it to them harder than that
dudacek Posted August 19 Report Posted August 19 4 hours ago, Brawndo said: Podkolzin was the 10th overall pick just 5 years ago. Holtz was the #7 four years ago and was traded for not much more. Neither had impressed but neither was a confirmed bust yet either. I guess “only a third” for Holloway is not as much of a good deal as I thought in today’s market, and a 2nd and more than $4M for Broberg (pick 8 in 2018) seems hefty considering an argument could be made that all 4 players are at a similar level. Puts a different light on the Savoie trade. The market for prospects is shifting.
Taro T Posted August 19 Report Posted August 19 (edited) 8 hours ago, dudacek said: Podkolzin was the 10th overall pick just 5 years ago. Holtz was the #7 four years ago and was traded for not much more. Neither had impressed but neither was a confirmed bust yet either. I guess “only a third” for Holloway is not as much of a good deal as I thought in today’s market, and a 2nd and more than $4M for Broberg (pick 8 in 2018) seems hefty considering an argument could be made that all 4 players are at a similar level. Puts a different light on the Savoie trade. The market for prospects is shifting. And once again the Sabres timing stinks. They have a full cupboard of prospects to get those 1-2 remaining pieces they need but they actually seem to have recessionary values in a high inflation (cap finally going up significantly) world. No use crying over spilled milk, but it still remains maddenly frustrating that the Sabres never weaponized any of their stupidly huge cap space from the Granato era. If prospects are only valued at 60 cents on the dollar, it sure would be nice to have 5 tradeable pieces rather than just 3. Edited August 19 by Taro T 1 2
mjd1001 Posted August 19 Report Posted August 19 16 hours ago, Brawndo said: I was going to make a point I thought made a lot of sense, but it actually turns out I was wrong..... What I was going to post......Edmonton really needs to NOT have a terrible start like they did. McDavid and Draisatl were battered, worn out, and injured by the end of the playoffs. Their start was SO bad last year and they had to play 'catch up' for much of the season and wore those 2 out during the regular season.... That is the point I WANTED to make, but looking back at stats, they both had LESS ice time last season than they had in most of the previous few years before last year. McDavid actually averaged UNDER 20 minutes per game over the last 10 games of the regular season.
Recommended Posts