What will be the Sabres approach at the trade deadline?

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

Some might disagree, but Nick Jensen is a good NHL player.  I agree with your post in principle, but it isn't like they traded Joker or Bryson and a 3rd for Chychrun.  Frankly, we could use a couple of Nick Jensen's.  

He's a soldi defenseman who was replaced by a first pairing defenseman. I would make that exchange any time. It's not as much of a major challenge to procure a solid defenseman to replace the departed player. It is a big task to acquire a first pairing defenseman. 

[DarthEbriate]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Last year, Washington made a deal with Ottawa to acquire Chychrun for a third round pick in 2026 and Jensen, a middling defenseman. They then were able to sign him to an extension. The end result is they got a first pairing defenseman for basically nothing. No high-end prospects, good NHL players or high draft picks were required to consummate this deal. 

The Washington Caps and Buffalo were in the same strata not that long ago. Their front office made a number of smart deals that upgraded the roster. Compare that to how our howdy doody GM has managed the hockey operation?

If the rumors/swirlings of the NHL insiders and this board were to be believed, when Chychrun was being shopped from Arizona, the reason Adams didn't pull the trigger was that he didn't want to include Savoie in the deal. Fast forward, the Sabres move Mitts for Byram and Savoie does get traded, but instead of for a top-pairing D, he's moved for a 3C.

The underlying problem is that Chychrun is still an offense-first LHD, just like Byram, and his numbers on the Sabres would be worse because he'd still be behind Dahlin (naturally) and Power (because he's 1st overall and has the contract) for PP time. And there still wouldn't be the veteran top-4 RHD for Power.

[Archie Lee]

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

He's a soldi defenseman who was replaced by a first pairing defenseman. I would make that exchange any time. It's not as much of a major challenge to procure a solid defenseman to replace the departed player. It is a big task to acquire a first pairing defenseman. 

Again, I agree in principle with your point re: making astute moves to improve a team.  You are undervaluing Jensen though, when you refer to him as middling, solid, or as not "good".  Jensen has played with Chabot in Ottawa this year on their first pairing.  They are by far and away Ottawa's most common D pairing. Jensen is exactly the type of veteran D-man we needed (still need) to bring in to pair with Power.   

[GASabresIUFAN]

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

On 1/30/2025 at 1:46 PM, Thorner said:

Reinhart for Levi is a disaster as of right now for sure, it doesn’t matter if there was a better package or not we didn’t have to trade him.

The Sabres received Kulich (28th overall in 2022) and Levi for Reinhart.  I wish as you do that we had signed Reinhart long-term, but the emergence of Kulich this season is a very good development.  I doubt Kulich will ever put up Reinhart numbers, but he is rapidly developing into a top 6 forward who plays with grit.  

No trade for picks and prospects ever favors the team selling the established talent, but this trade is finally showing some value to the Sabres.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

5 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

Jensen is exactly the type of veteran D-man we needed (still need) to bring in to pair with Power.   

Amen brother, although I'd pair him with Byram after trading Power.  

[Thorner]

46 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The Sabres received Kulich (28th overall in 2022) and Levi for Reinhart.  I wish as you do that we had signed Reinhart long-term, but the emergence of Kulich this season is a very good development.  I doubt Kulich will ever put up Reinhart numbers, but he is rapidly developing into a top 6 forward who plays with grit.  

No trade for picks and prospects ever favors the team selling the established talent, but this trade is finally showing some value to the Sabres.  

It’s a complete disaster. Look at the results of the players since the trade - not just hypothesized peak performance  

In addition, one removes the results of the team from the equation when you just focus on what Kulich might do at his best. Complete disregard for the variable of time 

For the construction of a roster and how this hampered ALL the other players, too. It’s not just about the raw peak peformance, that’s an exceptionally 2 dimensional look at it 

- - - 

And let’s look at it two dimensionally, as well. Why not.

We traded Reinhart four years ago. Reinhart has 54 points this year. Kulich has 14.

Top 6?! Cause Cozen sucks? Kulich hasn’t emerged, isn’t currently emerging as anything. No more than Jack Quinn did last season 

To even less of a degree, production wise 

- - - 

So, no, Levi being unable to find footing in the NHL at all, and Kulich registering 14 points 4 years after the deal, all the while Reinhart had been an mvp level player or close to, leaves us with nothing but a definitive fleecing - I need not hear about emerging “value” when I mention how bad the trade was

The statement stands on it owns: the trade was and remains a debacle of the highest trade order 

Edited 9 hours ago by Thorner

[Stoner]

17 minutes ago, Thorner said:

It’s a complete disaster. Look at the results of the players since the trade - not just hypothesized peak performance  

In addition, one removes the results of the team from the equation when you just focus on what Kulich might do at his best. Complete disregard for the variable of time 

For the construction of a roster and how this hampered ALL the other players, too. It’s not just about the raw peak peformance, that’s an exceptionally 2 dimensional look at it 

- - - 

And let’s look at it two dimensionally, as well. Why not.

We traded Reinhart four years ago. Reinhart has 54 points this year. Kulich has 14.

Top 6?! Cause Cozen sucks? Kulich hasn’t emerged, isn’t currently emerging as anything. No more than Jack Quinn did last season 

To even less of a degree, production wise 

- - - 

So, no, Levi being unable to find footing in the NHL at all, and Kulich registering 14 points 4 years after the deal, all the while Reinhart had been an mvp level player or close to, leaves us with nothing but a definitive fleecing - I need not hear about emerging “value” when I mention how bad the trade was

The statement stands on it owns: the trade was and remains a debacle of the highest trade order 

I could kiss you.

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 hours ago, Thorner said:

It’s a complete disaster. Look at the results of the players since the trade - not just hypothesized peak performance  

In addition, one removes the results of the team from the equation when you just focus on what Kulich might do at his best. Complete disregard for the variable of time 

For the construction of a roster and how this hampered ALL the other players, too. It’s not just about the raw peak peformance, that’s an exceptionally 2 dimensional look at it 

Talk about spilt milk.  Yes the Sabre blew the rebuild now 3 times.  As I said before, the team that trades the established player for picks and prospects always losses the deal.  

We lost the ROR deal, lost the Eichel deal and lost the Reinhart deal.  FYI They did have to trade Reinhart as he was a year from UFA status and wouldn’t re-sign with the Sabres.

We are trying to move forward and yes Kulich is emerging.  Reinhart had 42 pts (23g) as a 20 year old rookie in his first full season.  Kulich, also 20, now has 11g 5a in his first 37 games.  That translates to 24g and 36 pts over a full season and Kulich’s scoring has been accelerating with 7 points in his last 6 games.

No one is saying that this team doesn’t suck or that the roster hasn’t been mismanaged, but it’s wrong to say we got nothing for Reinhart.  It’s like saying we got nothing for ROR.  Last I looked TNT is a very good NHL forward.  
 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by GASabresIUFAN

[GASabresIUFAN]

Wouldn’t that be that be an interesting development.  I don’t count on it happening, but as I mentioned up thread, re-signing both guys would be a major step forward in how this team is managed.

[Thorner]

18 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Talk about spilt milk.  Yes the Sabre blew the rebuild now 3 times.  As I said before, the team that trades the established player for picks and prospects always losses the deal.  

We lost the ROR deal, lost the Eichel deal and lost the Reinhart deal.  FYI They did have to trade Reinhart as he was a year from UFA status and wouldn’t re-sign with the Sabres.

We are trying to move forward and yes Kulich is emerging.  Reinhart had 42 pts (23g) as a 20 year old rookie in his first full season.  Kulich, also 20, now has 11g 5a in his first 37 games.  That translates to 24g and 36 pts over a full season and Kulich’s scoring has been accelerating with 7 points in his last 6 games.

No one is saying that this team doesn’t suck or that the roster hasn’t been mismanaged, but it’s wrong to say we got nothing for Reinhart.  It’s like saying we got nothing for ROR.  Last I looked TNT is a very good NHL forward.  
 

 

I cannot believe this is still coming up: no, we did not have to trade Reinhart. Adams bridged him. Reinhart is on record saying he was open to a LT deal at the time 

I like how in the conversation you’ve taken on the role of defending, to use your name, GM howdy doody. And for what, to cling to your original point that the trade is “showing value”? I truly do not care. The trade was awful. We didn’t have to trade him 

you want me to concede we didnt “get nothing” for Reinhart. I didn’t say we got nothing. I said the trade was a disaster, and it was. The disaster has *already happened*, I think you are missing this aspect of my point 

Edited 2 hours ago by Thorner

[Thorner]

16 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Talk about spilt milk.  Yes the Sabre blew the rebuild now 3 times.  As I said before, the team that trades the established player for picks and prospects always losses the deal.  

We lost the ROR deal, lost the Eichel deal and lost the Reinhart deal.  FYI They did have to trade Reinhart as he was a year from UFA status and wouldn’t re-sign with the Sabres.

We are trying to move forward and yes Kulich is emerging.  Reinhart had 42 pts (23g) as a 20 year old rookie in his first full season.  Kulich, also 20, now has 11g 5a in his first 37 games.  That translates to 24g and 36 pts over a full season and Kulich’s scoring has been accelerating with 7 points in his last 6 games.

No one is saying that this team doesn’t suck or that the roster hasn’t been mismanaged, but it’s wrong to say we got nothing for Reinhart.  It’s like saying we got nothing for ROR.  Last I looked TNT is a very good NHL forward.  
 

 

I BEG you to extrapolate out Quinn’s numbers from last year. Go look at the projections for this season. How many times do we need to see the same thing play out? 

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 minutes ago, Thorner said:

I cannot believe this is still coming up: no, we did not have to trade Reinhart. Adams bridged him. Reinhart is on record saying he was open to a LT deal at the time 

I like how in the conversation you’ve taken on the role of defending, to use your name, GM howdy doody. And for what, to cling to your original point that the trade is “showing value”? I truly do not care. The trade was awful. We didn’t have to trade him 

I’m not defending Adams.  I’m pointing out that we did get something for Reinhart.  FYI Kulich’s 9 goals since 12/1 leads all rookies and his 11 EV goals is tied with Celebrini.  
 

 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I’m not defending Adams.  I’m pointing out that we did get something for Reinhart.  FYI Kulich’s 9 goals since 12/1 leads all rookies and his 11 EV goals is tied with Celebrini.  
 

 

I did not say we got nothing for Reinhart. I said the trade was terrible 

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, Thorner said:

I did not say we got nothing for Reinhart. I said the trade was terrible 

I definitely am not getting my central point across or you aren’t reading it: it’s not about peak production. That’s a tiny aspect. Our evaluation metrics are truly warped, after all this time. The trade was disastrous *for the course of the team*, first and foremost 

if Kulich scores 40 goals next year I’ll sit here and say the same thing: awful trade

- - - 

Our avatars are so similar now! 

Edited 2 hours ago by Thorner

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 minutes ago, Thorner said:

I BEG you to extrapolate out Quinn’s numbers from last year. Go look at the projections for this season. How many times do we need to see the same thing play out? 

Of all people you know that development isn’t linear.  Go look at Mitts and TNT.   

Admittedly I’m a big believer in Kulich.  I did write off Thompson and was proven wrong.  I’m not writing off Quinn either.  In Quinn’s first 24 games this season he had 5 pts.  He’s had 14 pts in his last 19.  He’s far from perfect, but his play of late is much closer to the player who had 19 pts in 27 games last season.  

Other than Cozens which major forward prospect has fallen on his face? Mitts, Thompson, JJP all improved.  Quinn has suffered through injuries, but finally is coming back around as I noted above.  

The issue with this team is team defense.  Our blueliners are terrible defensively across the board and the forwards don’t do enough.  Fix the defense and this is a playoff team.  

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Of all people you know that development isn’t linear.  Go look at Mitts and TNT.   

Admittedly I’m a big believer in Kulich.  I did write off Thompson and was proven wrong.  I’m not writing off Quinn either.  In Quinn’s first 24 games this season he had 5 pts.  He’s had 14 pts in his last 19.  He’s far from perfect, but his play of late is much closer to the player who had 19 pts in 27 games last season.  

Other than Cozens which major forward prospect has fallen on his face? Mitts, Thompson, JJP all improved.  Quinn has suffered through injuries, but finally is coming back around as I noted above.  

The issue with this team is team defense.  Our blueliners are terrible defensively across the board and the forwards don’t do enough.  Fix the defense and this is a playoff team.  

Dude I KNOW development isn’t linear - that’s a key aspect of what I’m trying to say. I haven’t given up on Quinn at all. Learned my lesson with Reinhart. I do think Kulich would be good 

but the way KA tends to operate… look, if we pencil in Kulich for 2C next year, we *aren’t planning and allowing for non-linear development* if the mandate is playoffs! As only with linear dev would Kulich provide the necessary play. We’d be counting on him to AVOID common development pitfalls. 

we need to look at these players *by way of contribution to a team that makes the playoffs*

You are analyzing as if the goal is to farm players. That’s not the goal. The goal is to make the playoffs 

Edited 2 hours ago by Thorner

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 minutes ago, Thorner said:

Dude I KNOW development isn’t linear - that’s a key aspect of what I’m trying to say. I haven’t given up on Quinn at all. Learned my lesson with Reinhart. I do think Kulich would be good 

but the way KA tends to operate… look, if we pencil in Kulich for 2C next year, we aren’t planning and allowing for non-linear development if the mandate is playoffs! As only with linear dev would Kulich provide the necessary play 

we need to look at these players *by way of contribution to a new that makes the playoffs*

I fully agree that Adams “plan” has put to much on players not ready for that responsibility.   Cozens, Mitts, Power, Levi, Krebs, and even Quinn.  Kulich could easily be the next victim.   I even started a thread saying Adams is already penciling in Kulich and Kozak next season.  

As I have also said in this and other threads, the Sabres still need a top 6 playmaking center.   Nothing about Kulich’s development changes that fact, especially with TNT moving to RW.  

The Playoff mandate was a lie.  It was GM bs to get people to buy tickets.  Unless and until management gets defenders who actually play defense this team isn’t making the playoffs no matter how many young forwards develop into NHLers.

 

Edited 2 hours ago by GASabresIUFAN

[Archie Lee]

To your last paragraph, I think it is giving Adams too much credit. It wasn’t a lie. He thought this was a playoff team, or at least close to it. A GM could not misjudge the potential of a team that he put together, more than Adams misjudged this team. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

5 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

To your last paragraph, I think it is giving Adams too much credit. It wasn’t a lie. He thought this was a playoff team, or at least close to it. A GM could not misjudge the potential of a team that he put together, more than Adams misjudged this team. 

I think you’re being overly generous.  There is no way he looked the D group he brought back in its entirety with their terrible metrics and thought that was a playoff caliber D group.