Nazem Kadri -- Should the Sabres Pursue Him?

[Sabres73]

Read a rumour a few minutes ago about a proposed trade with the Flames: Kadri for Krebs, Rosen and our 2025 1st round pick. The Flames would retain $2 million of his $7 million cap hit. He would have to waive his no trade. I don't know if this is real, but I think I would pull the trigger on it. Whaddya think?

Edited September 3 by Sabres73

[inkman]

I’m sure it’s not real but I’d do it yesterday. Just the kind of prick this team needs. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

9 minutes ago, Sabres73 said:

Read a rumour a few minutes ago about a proposed trade with the Flames: Kadri for Krebs, Rosen and our 2025 1st round pick. The Flames would retain $2 million of his $7 million cap hit. He would have to waive his no trade. I don't know if this is real, but I think I would pull the trigger on it. Whaddya think?

I hate the guy, but he'd be a solid acquisition.  He would make the Sabres harder to play against and he'd make the top 6 better.  IMHO I would move Cozens to the wing and drop Benson to the 3rd line.  

The biggest issue is having his $7 mil on the books for the next 4 years and he is already 33.  The suggested trade seems a little much for a 33 year old player who would be 37 when his contract is up. Still I like the general principle.  

[mjd1001]

I think Kadri has really good production the last 3 seasons, but he is going to be 34 at the start of the season and has a LOT of miles on him. I'm not sure when he hits the 'age wall' but it could be any day, literally.

Would he make the team better right now? Yeah, I think he would but my worry is for how long?  I don't think all that long. Plus he is a pretty slow (below average) skater, the team seems to be moving away from that, and he's sure not getting any faster as he gets older.

3 years ago with him at 31 I would consider it, but I'm not trading much for a guy that age with 5 years left on his deal.

Apparently he want to move back 'east', seeing he is from London, ON, I think Detroit might be one to watch. If Pittsburgh is bringing the 'old' band back this year and want to make one run at the playoffs, maybe them? (but they have no prospects to offer for him).

Did he leave Toronto on good terms? He is also the kind of player they can use for sure.  If Toronto offered their 2026 first...Robertson (who asked to be traded), and something to make the cap work until Tavares comes off the books or can be resigned at a lower deal, I think that would REALLY help the leafs.

As for the price...Krebs? Sure.  A future first (assuming lotter protected)...eh...Its not that I value it for using it next year, but I wonder as the season goes on if it might be better used on someone else?  And Rosen....he certainly is not untouchable at all, but many on here seem to think he's entering Bust territory already...yet I think he might actually become a very good 2-way 3rd liner (a guy who gets you 10-20 goals eventually WITH a good 2 way game).

Edited September 4 by mjd1001

[mjd1001]

12 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The biggest issue is having his $7 mil on the books for the next 4 years and he is already 33.  The suggested trade seems a little much for a 33 year old player who would be 37 when his contract is up. Still I like the general principle.  

I'll have to double check, but I think he is turning 34 next month, which means when his deal is up, he'll be 38...about 4-5 months from turning 39.

[JoeSchmoe]

If it's $2M kept, you gotta do it, but top 10 protect the 1st.

[GoPuckYourself]

I'm not sure how I'd feel about this, he's a tough player to play against but he has so much tread on his tires.Would he even be ok playing at LW?

[PerreaultForever]

I wanted him before so of course I'd do this. I doubt it's real though. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Kadri had 29g 46a last season at 33.  

Skinner had 24g 22a last season at 31.  

Kadri plays 200 feet, plays center and wing and if Calg retains we could be playing him 7 mill.  

Skinner doesn’t play defense, isn’t a table setter for anyone else and was being paid 9 mill.  

Krebs, Rosen and a second.  Take the risk KA.  

[PerreaultForever]

32 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Kadri had 29g 46a last season at 33.  

Skinner had 24g 22a last season at 31.  

Kadri plays 200 feet, plays center and wing and if Calg retains we could be playing him 7 mill.  

Skinner doesn’t play defense, isn’t a table setter for anyone else and was being paid 9 mill.  

Krebs, Rosen and a second.  Take the risk KA.  

I really cannot believe that would get it done.

There is no risk. Would instantly make us competitive. Kadri would become 2C imo and Cozens could move to his wing or play 3C depending on what Ruff wants. Kadri ages down to 3C as we (hopefully) improve each year. Truculence, nastiness and 2 way play. No brainer imo. 

[Big Guava]

I don't want dudes who are fading out age wise still being paid like they are 26.

The quickest way to obscurity for any sports team is to pay for past performance with players past their prime instead of letting them go.

And paying those players for a team like us isn't smart, IMHO.

 

Edited September 4 by Big Guava

[mjd1001]

11 minutes ago, Big Guava said:

I don't want dudes who are fading out age wise still being paid like they are 26.

The quickest way to obscurity for any sports team is to pay for past performance with players past their prime instead of letting them go.

And paying those players for a team like us isn't smart, IMHO.

 

I agree.

I understand all the points that the post above are making for why he would fit on this team, but again, when he is starting the season at 34, he can/might/ hit that wall really quick. 2 years from now? Next year? A month into this season?  None of that would surprise me. You very well could be getting someone what you have 3/4 of this board wanting to buy out the remaining 4 years of a deal.

You can criticize this team, and Adams for not making enough "win now" moves. For not bringing in enough 26-30 year old vets who  ":know how to win'.  Bringing in a 34 year old guy on a big contract who is signed for years and years is just overcompensating.

Edited September 4 by mjd1001

[JohnC]

12 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I hate the guy, but he'd be a solid acquisition.  He would make the Sabres harder to play against and he'd make the top 6 better.  IMHO I would move Cozens to the wing and drop Benson to the 3rd line.  

The biggest issue is having his $7 mil on the books for the next 4 years and he is already 33.  The suggested trade seems a little much for a 33 year old player who would be 37 when his contract is up. Still I like the general principle.  

A definite no for me. As you point out, the age issue is what makes this proposed deal very unappealing. In addition, young players such as Quinn and JJP will soon be getting richer new contracts. So I would rather not be squeezed for funds because of a player on his downside. A Kadri deal would have made a lot of sense a few years ago, but not now. The timeline for this deal has passed by. Would I like to see a winger added for the second line? Yes. However,I don't see our GM inclined to make such an aggressive move. 

Edited September 4 by JohnC

[GoPuckYourself]

1 hour ago, mjd1001 said:

I agree.

I understand all the points that the post above are making for why he would fit on this team, but again, when he is starting the season at 34, he can/might/ hit that wall really quick. 2 years from now? Next year? A month into this season?  None of that would surprise me. You very well could be getting someone what you have 3/4 of this board wanting to buy out the remaining 4 years of a deal.

You can criticize this team, and Adams for not making enough "win now" moves. For not bringing in enough 26-30 year old vets who  ":know how to win'.  Bringing in a 34 year old guy on a big contract who is signed for years and years is just overcompensating.

Yeah this is how I feel about it also which sucks because he's the exact player I want the Sabres to go after just the age at 34+ to go along with the 7M its like the Skinner deal all over again. But if they said they'd retain half his salary (very unlikely) then I'd be a player.

Edited September 4 by GoPuckYourself

[GASabresIUFAN]

 5 years at 7 is top much to swallow.  It’s a terrible contract.  To make the deal even harder, Calg is only 2 mill above the cap floor.  To get a deal done, the Flames would have to eat a minimum of 2 mill of his deal per season plus take someone like Greenway or Joki back.

For the Sabres to make the money work  long-term and for Calg to maximize their compensation the Flames would need to take at least 3 mill per season.  At 4 mill per season, I think the Sabres would get at least 1 good year followed by 2 decent years out of the deal.  The remaining two year could be bought out or he could be traded again to a team needing a veteran player and some cap.  His trade protection ends in a couple of years.  

At 4-5 mill per season, I think the Sabres could make this work.

[SabreFinn]

I am more interested in Rasmus Andersson, but if Calgary would retain 3 milj. per year I would take Kadri.

Edited September 4 by SabreFinn

[mjd1001]

20 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 5 years at 7 is top much to swallow.  It’s a terrible contract.  To make the deal even harder, Calg is only 2 mill above the cap floor.  To get a deal done, the Flames would have to eat a minimum of 2 mill of his deal per season plus take someone like Greenway or Joki back.

For the Sabres to make the money work  long-term and for Calg to maximize their compensation the Flames would need to take at least 3 mill per season.  At 4 mill per season, I think the Sabres would get at least 1 good year followed by 2 decent years out of the deal.  The remaining two year could be bought out or he could be traded again to a team needing a veteran player and some cap.  His trade protection ends in a couple of years.  

At 4-5 mill per season, I think the Sabres could make this work.

I have thought about this a lot. I really like the player he has been the last few years and that is the type of player the Sabres need. But I can't get by the fact that anytime, maybe right now, he'll not be the same player because of age and overall workload he has been though.

Even if Calgary kept $2m or even $3m for the entire length of the deal, what you may be trading for is a guy that is worth his contract for 1 year, and someone you are stuck with for 3 or 4 years that you totally regret.

I thought for a minute the 35+ rule would be a way around this regarding a buyout, but it appears the deal must be SIGNED at age 35 or later. Kadri signed this deal before he was 35, so the preferential buyout rules to age 35+ would not apply to him.

Remember in 2 years from now, Skinner's buyout hits them hard ($4.4 million in dead money in 2025-26 and $6.4 million in dead money in 2026-2027). If you trade for Kadri, you might be paying him $7m (even $5m if Calgary retained) for a guy vastly declining who is 35 years old in one of those years and 36 years old in another.  I'm not sure I want $11.4 million and $13.4 million tied up with Dead cap Skinner money AND an older Kadri...right at a time that the current crop of young guys is going to need to get paid.

Forget about the higher Skinner cap hit in 26/27, just look at 25/27.  You will have an aging Kadri, and between Skinners Buyout and him, plus you have Thompson, Cozens, Tuch, Dahlin, Power, Samuelson, Clifton, and UPL Signed. That is over $60m already, with less than half the roster signed and how do you pay for a new Deal for Quinn? Peterka? Possibly Byram and Levi? And fill out the rest of the roster?  And then of course it gets that much worse the following year when Skinner counts more against the Cap, Kadri is one year older even, and Benson will need a new deal.

I know it is likely Kadri would help this year, but for how much he would help this year, I don't think its close to worth it for what he does to your roster/cap/signing ability the next 4 years.

Edited September 4 by mjd1001

[Flashsabre]

Read a rumor where?

[mjd1001]

4 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Read a rumor where?

Places I have seen it so far....

Seems to be legit Calgary wants to trade him AND he wants to come east. The Buffalo part, more of a rumor or a 'mock trade' by someone.

https://www.nhltraderumor.com/nazem-kadri-buffalo-sabres-trade-rumor/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nhl/report-flames-open-to-nazem-kadri-trade-amid-rebuild/ar-AA1pYHcU?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Edited September 4 by mjd1001

[Mustache of God]

14 hours ago, Sabres73 said:

Read a rumour a few minutes ago about a proposed trade with the Flames: Kadri for Krebs, Rosen and our 2025 1st round pick. The Flames would retain $2 million of his $7 million cap hit. He would have to waive his no trade. I don't know if this is real, but I think I would pull the trigger on it. Whaddya think?

Why would Kadri give up one of the strongest pieces of leverage he has over his contract? I could be wrong but I recall reading that if a player waives the NTC to go to another team, they lose the no trade clause for the remainder of the contract - meaning the Sabres could turn around and ship him off to a cap-strapped team in two years or so. Players negotiate for NTCs so they have a sense of stability and know they won't have to uproot their lives.

Is there a list of players in the past 20 years who have agreed to waive their NTC to facilitate a trade? I imagine it would be a very small list. 

[Huckleberry]

If the cap goes up like they say, I think its going to be a cheap deal for us, certainly if calgary retains 2 mill.

[GASabresIUFAN]

54 minutes ago, Mustache of God said:

Why would Kadri give up one of the strongest pieces of leverage he has over his contract? I could be wrong but I recall reading that if a player waives the NTC to go to another team, they lose the no trade clause for the remainder of the contract - meaning the Sabres could turn around and ship him off to a cap-strapped team in two years or so. Players negotiate for NTCs so they have a sense of stability and know they won't have to uproot their lives.

Is there a list of players in the past 20 years who have agreed to waive their NTC to facilitate a trade? I imagine it would be a very small list. 

This is incorrect.  https://puckpedia.com/salary-cap/no-trademovement-clauses

Quote

 

Clauses after Trades

If a player is traded before a NTC or NMC starts, the clause is removed unless the acquiring team agrees to keep it, which is rare.

If a player has a Modified NTC or NMC in effect, and a player is traded to a team that is permitted based on the list (no waiving of the clause is required), the clause remains in effect after the trade. 

If a player waives a clause for a trade, they generally agree to waive it only for the purposes of that specific trade, so the acquiring team agrees to put it back in place.

 

They only lose the clause if they are traded before the clause goes into effect. For example Cozens’ M-NTC goes into effect after the 26/27 season.  If the Sabres trade him before the start of the 27/28 hockey calendar, the clause disappears.

 In Kadri’s case, the clause already exists.  If he waives it and comes to Buffalo, he is only waiving the clause for that specific trade and the NTC remains in effect after the trade.  

[SHAAAUGHT!!!]

16 hours ago, Sabres73 said:

Read a rumour a few minutes ago about a proposed trade with the Flames: Kadri for Krebs, Rosen and our 2025 1st round pick. The Flames would retain $2 million of his $7 million cap hit. He would have to waive his no trade. I don't know if this is real, but I think I would pull the trigger on it. Whaddya think?

Rivet and Peters spent a lot of time talking about a Flames-Sabres trade a couple months ago that would send Kadri and Weeger to Buffalo and Krebs, Power, and another piece to Calgary.  A trade like this makes a lot of sense (vs a trade for Kadri only) as Weeger is exactly the type of defensemen the Sabres need in the line-up, he's signed to an 8 year $6.25AAV deal, and he wants to play in Buffalo.  Weegar is Rivet's cousin so I take Rivets statement about wanting to play in Buffalo at face value.  Kadri is an overpay but also would do great in a 3rd line vet role that can move around the lineup as needed.

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

If the cap goes up like they say, I think its going to be a cheap deal for us, certainly if calgary retains 2 mill.

People love to debate the risks of adding him and Kadri falling off, but aren’t weighing the risk of not doing so 

There’s risk on both sides. Adding Kadri apparently sets us up potentially for “obscurity.”

Failing to add him or taking the risk of adding guys like him has left us in obscurity to a certainty 

[mjd1001]

14 minutes ago, Thorny said:

People love to debate the risks of adding him and Kadri falling off, but aren’t weighing the risk of not doing so 

I'm not sure how to debate 'not doing so', as that simply is the status quo.  

And status quo this year is a lot different than most other recent years around here. A considerably different bottom 6. A new head coach.  A defense unit and goaltender that are young but one year older and played considerably better the last 50 games of last season than they did before that.  For some of us, the 'risk' of adding a 34 year old this year, who will be on the books until he is almost 39 just isn't worth it until we 'see' just how much progress the status quo has made.

But to answer your post more directly....I guess the debate is getting a legit #3 center (not Krebs or whatever else comes out of camp), having that guy be a #3 center for a year (some people's opinion) to a few years (others opinions)....VS the long term cap cost and what that may allow you to do/not due with your young guys up for contract in the next year or two.

I know some want the very good/great #3 center now.  I'd personally take the latter and pass on him.

I think Krebs at #3 Center and Cozens at #2 center, if that is what we have, is the weakness of this team.  I'm just not sold on Kadri being anything more than a temporary, and costly, bandaid for that.

Edited September 4 by mjd1001