What would you trade for Elias Petterson?

[Crusader1969]

26 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Where do you stand with the 

Byram / Power and Cozens for EP? 

[Sabres73]

On 1/4/2025 at 5:02 PM, mjd1001 said:

I agree with you on being good or better NOW rather than later.

Byram I would love to keep here, but does he want to stay for a reasonable contract?  If they can keep him here I'd much rather have him rather than trading him.

Cozens I'm just about done with. He is on the verge of being 'addition by subtraction'.  Not quite, but, as flawed as this team is, I think of Cozens, Tuch, Zucker...and I can say "at times they are the reason the team wins games'.  My bottom 6 I don't need that from as much. Cozens has to be a top 6 guy on this team...but I don't ever see him as a reason they win games. He is not much more than a 3rd line level scorer. He doesn't set up or make is linemates better in my eyes. He is a liability defensively with his decision making. Even when he does score, he might be the 'least clutch' guy on the team (How many game winners do you remember him scoring or setting up?)  And he is awful on the PP (he's out there for ever Powerplay but has a total of 11 pp goals over his 5 year career).   I guess I'm 100% ready to move on from him, I do not see him helping the team hardly ever, and I do see him make critical mistakes that help them lose on occasion.

Cozens made a nice play on a big goal tonight. I'm not giving up on him this early, he's being playing well lately.

[Crusader1969]

Just now, Sabres73 said:

Cozens made a nice play on a big goal tonight. I'm not giving up on him this early, he's being playing well lately.

Sure. But if you can get a legit #1 Centre for him you have to do it   Maybe we should say for a guy like EP who has played like a true #1 in the past and is young enough to think he will get back to that level 

the question to me Cozens + what? 
I don't like the idea of giving up Power or Byram unless you know Byram is gone in 2 or 3 years regardless of what you would pay him 

 

 

 

 

[dudacek]

Elias Petersson is a very talented hockey player, among the best in the league,

He is also the embodiment of the ‘soft, lacking in fire’ approach this board despises.

He is on the market because the Canucks have decided they can’t be the team they want to be with him making $11m at the top of their depth chart.

At the right price he makes any team better.

Just be careful what you wish for.

Edited January 10 by dudacek

[mjd1001]

34 minutes ago, Sabres73 said:

Cozens made a nice play on a big goal tonight. I'm not giving up on him this early, he's being playing well lately.

In the past 2-4 weeks, I have thought he has played 'better' without the puck. Still not good, but there have been less glaring and costly errors.

Still, he is in his 5th year now and making $7m.  He has 3 goals and 5 assists in his last 11 games and is a -6 in those games.  BETTER than the beginning of the year, but still not good enough.  

He's gone from being, in my opinion, one of the worst forward without the puck in the league to now someone who is just average. That is a big improvement for him.  He either has to keep getting better, or he has to start scoring more.  If he was 20 or 21 years old and in his 2nd or 3rd season, I'd be OK with 9 goals and 20 points in half a season with. But hes in his 5th season and turning 24 next month.  It certainly is not "early". And his play lately has been better, but its been better than "bad".  Other than a particular game here or there, I would not describe his play as "good" or use words like "well".

If he is going to be here fine, but he still has to improve a LOT.

[mjd1001]

48 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

Sure. But if you can get a legit #1 Centre for him you have to do it   Maybe we should say for a guy like EP who has played like a true #1 in the past and is young enough to think he will get back to that level 

the question to me Cozens + what? 
I don't like the idea of giving up Power or Byram unless you know Byram is gone in 2 or 3 years regardless of what you would pay him 

 

 

 

 

Pettersson is not a perfect player.  He hasn't played like an $11m player since he signed his extension.

But he is a big time playmaker who can score also. When you watch him play, he can skate through traffic with his head up, he sees the entire offensive zone, he knows where his teamates are and is great at setting them up. He has 137 assists over the past 2.5 seasons. The BEST player on the Sabres over that time has 89 assists. Cozens has played more games than Pettersson and only has 78.

I'd be worried about his contract and his drop in production recently, but I would be SO interested to see this current team with a legit playmaker/distributor at center unlike anyone we have seen in at least a few years.

 

Edited January 10 by mjd1001

[Crusader1969]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Elias Petersson is a very talented hockey player, among the best in the league,

He is also the embodiment of the ‘soft, lacking in fire’ approach this board despises.

He is on the market because the Canucks have decided they can’t be the team they want to be with him making $11m at the top of their depth chart.

At the right price he makes any team better.

Just be careful what you wish for.

Yep and completely disappeared in the playoffs.  
but he can help get you there for sure 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Elias Petersson is a very talented hockey player, among the best in the league,

He is also the embodiment of the ‘soft, lacking in fire’ approach this board despises.

He is on the market because the Canucks have decided they can’t be the team they want to be with him making $11m at the top of their depth chart.

At the right price he makes any team better.

Just be careful what you wish for.

While much of this is true,  I’d still make the deal.  100 pt scorers don’t become available very often and a good GM can add the right players around him to limit the issues with his “soft” play.

I trade Powers and his $8 for him right now.  Our Mr. Softie with a big contract for yours and we are only $3 “worse” off.

I also think we are one of the few teams with the ability to add his contract that have shooters that would thrive with him and can skate with him.  JJP, Quinn, TNT, and Kulich all have lethal shots.  I’d love to see how they’d do getting feeds from an elite playmaker like Petterson.  

This isn’t happening however since our gelding of a GM would never take the risk.  

Edited January 10 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, dudacek said:

Elias Petersson is a very talented hockey player, among the best in the league,

He is also the embodiment of the ‘soft, lacking in fire’ approach this board despises.

He is on the market because the Canucks have decided they can’t be the team they want to be with him making $11m at the top of their depth chart.

At the right price he makes any team better.

Just be careful what you wish for.

Your cogent comment on his style of play suggests that he doesn't fit with how the organization is trying to construct the team. I would rather add another Zucker and Greenway type of player instead. It would be less costly and more doable. 

[Weave]

10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Your cogent comment on his style of play suggests that he doesn't fit with how the organization is trying to construct the team. I would rather add another Zucker and Greenway type of player instead. It would be less costly and more doable. 

I would rather add a bonafide elite hockey player AND add another Zucker type.

It can be both, and there is room on the Sabres for an elite level talent.

[LETSTUCHINGO]

On 1/10/2025 at 2:36 AM, GASabresIUFAN said:

While much of this is true,  I’d still make the deal.  100 pt scorers don’t become available very often and a good GM can add the right players around him to limit the issues with his “soft” play.

I trade Powers and his $8 for him right now.  Our Mr. Softie with a big contract for yours and we are only $3 “worse” off.

I also think we are one of the few teams with the ability to add his contract that have shooters that would thrive with him and can skate with him.  JJP, Quinn, TNT, and Kulich all have lethal shots.  I’d love to see how they’d do getting feeds from an elite playmaker like Petterson.  

This isn’t happening however since our gelding of a GM would never take the risk.  

So he scores 102 pts once is his career and he's a 100 pt scorer?? Since coming into the league he has had 66, 66, 21 (hurt), 68, 102, 89 and currently has 28 pts. He got his huge contract and is back to being what he is; a mentally soft, 70 pt. cupcake with an attitude problem!! Oh and he is being paid 11.6 million for the next 7 years! He definitely seems like a perfect fit for a team already filled with mentally fragile, young, and potentially over paid players! What?????

Edited January 13 by LETSTUCHINGO

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

I would rather add a bonafide elite hockey player AND add another Zucker type.

It can be both, and there is room on the Sabres for an elite level talent.

I would also like to add a bona fide elite hockey player to the roster. However, I just don't see our timid GM making such a bold move. The challenge of acquiring an elite player is the likely quantity of young players and assets required to consummate such a deal. I'm with you that I would be ecstatic if we can add a Zucker like talent to our roster. That seems more doable. The issue now with Zucker is whether we can retain him. I really hope so. Also, I would love to be able to retain Greenway. Both players add an element of toughness that this roster lacks. 

[Archie Lee]

26 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I would also like to add a bona fide elite hockey player to the roster. However, I just don't see our timid GM making such a bold move. The challenge of acquiring an elite player is the likely quantity of young players and assets required to consummate such a deal. I'm with you that I would be ecstatic if we can add a Zucker like talent to our roster. That seems more doable. The issue now with Zucker is whether we can retain him. I really hope so. Also, I would love to be able to retain Greenway. Both players add an element of toughness that this roster lacks. 

I agree. I would like to keep Zucker and Greenway and add another player that fits age and skill wise somewhere in the Greenway-McLeod-Zucker universe. But where do they play?  Those are middle-6 players, maybe top-6 on occasion. We have Thompson, Tuck, Peterka, Cozens, Benson, Quinn, and now Kulich. None are, strictly speaking, 4th line suitable for a variety of reasons. I’m not demanding you play GM, but this is the dilemma. Getting more experienced and, presumably, better in the short-term, means one or two players need to go. Who goes and to whom and for what?

[WhenWillItEnd66]

2 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I agree. I would like to keep Zucker and Greenway and add another player that fits age and skill wise somewhere in the Greenway-McLeod-Zucker universe. But where do they play?  Those are middle-6 players, maybe top-6 on occasion. We have Thompson, Tuck, Peterka, Cozens, Benson, Quinn, and now Kulich. None are, strictly speaking, 4th line suitable for a variety of reasons. I’m not demanding you play GM, but this is the dilemma. Getting more experienced and, presumably, better in the short-term, means one or two players need to go. Who goes and to whom and for what?

I do agree we need to give to get. Just my quick thoughts..... Cozens and Byram (Or Power) for a vet center (#1 or 2) and a top 4 DEFENSIVE PHYSICAL defenseman. That should be attainable with maybe a pick or lower prospect thrown in. Will it happen? Nope. Zero faith in KA.

[JohnC]

36 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I agree. I would like to keep Zucker and Greenway and add another player that fits age and skill wise somewhere in the Greenway-McLeod-Zucker universe. But where do they play?  Those are middle-6 players, maybe top-6 on occasion. We have Thompson, Tuck, Peterka, Cozens, Benson, Quinn, and now Kulich. None are, strictly speaking, 4th line suitable for a variety of reasons. I’m not demanding you play GM, but this is the dilemma. Getting more experienced and, presumably, better in the short-term, means one or two players need to go. Who goes and to whom and for what?

It isn't a dilemma or a problem to have what in the short term might be an excess in talent and capable players to form multiple good lines. Players such as Thompson, Cozens, Kulich and Zucker etc. can play both the wing and center spot. Also, injuries are an inescapable part of the game. Not only do players get knocked out of games due to injuries but sometimes they play with an injury where moving a player to wing makes sense. Thompson and Cozens are an example of that position flexibility. 

When you have an adequate supply of players that allows you to assemble not only two top lines but gives you the benefit of assembling a good third line that will provide you more secondary scoring. And that is a good thing. 

[Big Guava]

Nothing. 

[Pimlach]

On 1/9/2025 at 9:49 PM, Crusader1969 said:

Sure. But if you can get a legit #1 Centre for him you have to do it   Maybe we should say for a guy like EP who has played like a true #1 in the past and is young enough to think he will get back to that level 

the question to me Cozens + what? 
I don't like the idea of giving up Power or Byram unless you know Byram is gone in 2 or 3 years regardless of what you would pay him 

 

 

 

 

Power/Byram  + Cozens for EP is a joke.  
 

Power > EP , no deal can be made on an even trade 

Byram = EP , straight up  

Cozens + mid level prospect = EP 

Edited January 11 by Pimlach

[JohnC]

On 1/9/2025 at 11:34 PM, mjd1001 said:

Pettersson is not a perfect player.  He hasn't played like an $11m player since he signed his extension.

But he is a big time playmaker who can score also. When you watch him play, he can skate through traffic with his head up, he sees the entire offensive zone, he knows where his teamates are and is great at setting them up. He has 137 assists over the past 2.5 seasons. The BEST player on the Sabres over that time has 89 assists. Cozens has played more games than Pettersson and only has 78.

I'd be worried about his contract and his drop in production recently, but I would be SO interested to see this current team with a legit playmaker/distributor at center unlike anyone we have seen in at least a few years.

 

Would you be willing to exchange Quinn, Cozens and a high-end prospect for him? I wouldn't. And adding on his high salary would also limit future player options. And @dudacek made a persuasive point that although he is an elite player, his style of play isn't the style of play that Ruff is trying to establish here. I would rather add a Zucker and Greenway type players to better round out and toughen out the roster. 

[mjd1001]

7 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Would you be willing to exchange Quinn, Cozens and a high-end prospect for him? I wouldn't. And adding on his high salary would also limit future player options. And @dudacek made a persuasive point that although he is an elite player, his style of play isn't the style of play that Ruff is trying to establish here. I would rather add a Zucker and Greenway type players to better round out and toughen out the roster. 

That proposal is tough. It depends on what the 'high end prospect' is.  

I personally do not value Cozens much at all. I think his ceiling as a player is alot lower than many others on this board value him at. Quinn though? I still don't know what his ceiling is.  

So, I probably wouldn't make that trade.  I DO think that trade makes the Sabres better right NOW though.  Its just for that package, I would rather trade Cozens alone (for a lesser return but see what you can get) while keeping Quinn and the prospect, or see what else I could get for Quinn and that prospect.

To me, its not just a matter of "is this package worth it for the return?" yes or no.  Its "what else might I be able to get for that package" as the deadline approaches.

I don't know, and I do doubt there will be any one player better than Pettersson available this year for trade. Its just what is Pettersson worth attached to that $11m deal?

Edited January 11 by mjd1001

[Weave]

This is “you can’t win with / there is no room for Kovalchuk” all over again.

He would be an instant, and significant upgrade to our top 6.  For those who believe Tage Thompson is a 1C, there is a realistic possibility that we suddenly have two good 1C’s on the roster.

I like the concept of Cozens, but there is enough history to suggest that it might be just concept.  If I can move a 2/3C and a 3D to get an elite skill 1C that seems to need a change of scenery, I think it is a gamble worth taking.

Fatten the deal with one of our prospects and see if we can get a vet stay at home D included in the package.

This team needs a bold, room changing move.  A serious shake up.  Moving a couple of kids for an elite talent shakes things up considerably and shows the others that it’s time to win now, and management is providing the tools.

[JohnC]

Just now, mjd1001 said:

That proposal is tough. It depends on what the 'high end prospect' is.  

I personally do not value Cozens much at all. I think his ceiling as a player is alot lower than many others on this board value him at. Quinn though? I still don't know what his ceiling is.  

So, I probably wouldn't make that trade.  I DO think that trade makes the Sabres better right NOW though.  Its just for that package, I would rather trade Cozens alone (for a lesser return but see what you can get) while keeping Quinn and the prospect, or see what else I could get for Quinn and that prospect.

To me, its not just a matter of "is this package worth it for the return?" yes or no.  Its "what else might I be able to get for that package" as the deadline approaches.

I'm not devaluing Cozens as much as others. No question, that he has been disappointing relative to most of our expectations. But I have noticed an uptick in his play with him playing on a line with better players. My general philosophy with this roster is that I would rather add players such as Zucker and Greenway to not only better balance out the roster but also make it a tougher team to play. My approach leans toward not shipping players out and thinning out the roster for a prize player. I would rather have a thicker and tougher lineup. 

[DarthEbriate]

24 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Power/Byram  + Cozens for EP is a joke.  
 

Power > EP , no deal can be made  

This is more to my thinking. Pettersson is very good, but his ceiling is not Power's ceiling.

Personally, I don't trade for EP from the Sabres perspective because he's yet another easier-than-average-to-play-against forward, if capable of 1 point/game on a top line and PP1 time. So are Skinner/TNT/Tuch.

But, if it were to happen, I think it requires a 3-team trade, because moving Power or Byram to Vancouver puts them in the same spot they are with the Sabres, which is behind Hugues who is going to play every waking moment on the powerplay.

EP to Sabres, Power to team #3, and another center from #3 to VAN. Then, do the add-ins for cap and balancing.

[mjd1001]

On 1/11/2025 at 9:23 AM, Weave said:

This is “you can’t win with / there is no room for Kovalchuk” all over again.

He would be an instant, and significant upgrade to our top 6.  For those who believe Tage Thompson is a 1C, there is a realistic possibility that we suddenly have two good 1C’s on the roster.

I like the concept of Cozens, but there is enough history to suggest that it might be just concept.  If I can move a 2/3C and a 3D to get an elite skill 1C that seems to need a change of scenery, I think it is a gamble worth taking.

Fatten the deal with one of our prospects and see if we can get a vet stay at home D included in the package.

This team needs a bold, room changing move.  A serious shake up.  Moving a couple of kids for an elite talent shakes things up considerably and shows the others that it’s time to win now, and management is providing the tools.

I know this thread isn't just about Cozens, but the question I cannot solve is...What IS the concept of Cozens? What makes him so valuable that we think he contributes to this teams long term success?

I see a player who might have the worst hockey IQ/situational awareness on the team.  Someone who hurts your defense by making bad decisions all the time. Someone who is average at best (maybe below average) with making his wingers better (he has little sense of when to pass vs shoot).  I see a guy who is a streaky shooter, but by streaky that ceiling is at most 30-35 goals per year, but the floor is 15 goals per yet.  He also drags your powerplay into an abyss every time he is out there.

I know I'm repeating my Cozens bashing from many threads before, but I see a guy that LONG TERM is going to be below average defensively, below average setting up his wingers, and will average 20-22 goals per year (some years in the teens, maybe some years close to 30).

He's almost 24 and in his 5th year, so the excuse of "he's young, give him time" is quickly running out.  So again, I'm not taking shots at him for the sake of it, but just what is the concept of Cozens that people don't want to let go of?

Edited January 13 by mjd1001

[Pimlach]

11 minutes ago, Weave said:

This is “you can’t win with / there is no room for Kovalchuk” all over again.

He would be an instant, and significant upgrade to our top 6.  For those who believe Tage Thompson is a 1C, there is a realistic possibility that we suddenly have two good 1C’s on the roster.

I like the concept of Cozens, but there is enough history to suggest that it might be just concept.  If I can move a 2/3C and a 3D to get an elite skill 1C that seems to need a change of scenery, I think it is a gamble worth taking.

Fatten the deal with one of our prospects and see if we can get a vet stay at home D included in the package.

This team needs a bold, room changing move.  A serious shake up.  Moving a couple of kids for an elite talent shakes things up considerably and shows the others that it’s time to win now, and management is providing the tools.

But who is EP? 

A playmaking 1C capable of 100 points, or a soft floater that doesn’t show up every night and gives you 60 points?  
 

 

 

[mjd1001]

14 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

But who is EP? 

A playmaking 1C capable of 100 points, or a soft floater that doesn’t show up every night and gives you 60 points?  
 

 

 

Not only 'capable' of 100 points but he has done it already. 40 goals and 100 points while being a +16 (technically 39 goals but he missed a couple of games)

The question is WHY has his game changed since he signed that contract?

He signed that deal last spring.

The season before he signed it: 39g, 63 assists, 102 points

Last year before he signed: 63 games played, 29g, 46 assists (82 game pace of 38 goals, 60 assists, 98 points)

SINCE signing his new deal (including playoffs): 67 games played  16goals  32assists (82 game pace of 20 goals, 39 assists, 59 points)

Edited January 11 by mjd1001