Peterka’s next contract; trade, bridge or lock-up long-term?

[Pimlach]

3 hours ago, tom webster said:

Only in Buffalo does anyone think Power won’t outperform his deal. Cozens was a good bet that lost but was replaced by a guy I think is worth his deal and neither deal is so egregious that it prevents anything.

Muel I would agree was pre-mature and the potential savings didn’t justify the timing.

Every team has bad contracts. The Sabres won’t lose anyone or be unable to sign anyone because of any of these contracts. It will all come down to whether ownership will change their commitment.

Only in Buffalo are there hockey fans that see all of Power’s games.  He is expected to outperform his deal, that is a reasonable expectation.   We shall see.   

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Again, we have about $24M to work with - more than half the league.

You’re looking at this through extremely rigid parameters. The solution is obviously trades and we have cap flexibility to make them.

We don’t have to keep any of the free agents, we don’t have to keep any of the already signed players. Qualifying offers for the 7 RFAs total something like $10-12M. Only Byram and McLeod have arbitration rights. Yes, we are vulnerable to offer sheets, but only if our GM lets it get to that point.

The only way we have “no money to work with” if we sign our RFAs to big long-term deals and roll back the same roster.

This is precisely my point.  The run it back option would be a mistake.  However to create flexibility,  some current Sabres with high or potentially high cap hits need to go.   The Samuelsson buy out is probably the easiest decision, but after who do you move to free up money to fix the roster issues? 

Do you trade Byram or Power or try to keep both? Is your most productive young forward on the block (JJP) or do you move Quinn, a recent top 10 pick or do you trade the 3c who you traded Savoie for? 

If I was the GM, I wouldn’t mess too much with the forwards.  We need to re-sign JJP and McLeod.  Guys like Lafferty or Krebs would be on my chopping block in favor of playing Kozak.  

My changes start with the defense.  Moving on from Clifton, Power (or Byram) and Samuelsson creates potentially $16 mill in cap space to get veteran stay at home D to replace them.
 

 

Edited yesterday at 02:10 AM by GASabresIUFAN

[dudacek]

8 hours ago, CallawaySabres said:

I would say Power, Muel and Cozens were pretty terrible contracts that were way premature. Not only were they undeserving, the optics are terrible, especially now that Peterka, and others will be coming up soon.

Passing definitive judgment on a 7-year contract one year into said contract is kinda silly IMO.

The entire point from the team’s perspective is you pay more than you have to now in order to get more than you paid for later.

And given the status of the Sabres organization in terms attracting and retaining talent, locking up premier homegrown talent you believe in long-term and early seems to be a prudent strategy to me in general terms. I wish it was what we had done with Sam Reinhart.

Easy to jump on those particular deals in hindsight. Just like it is easy to say in hindsight the Thompson extension was a great one. Given the pedigree and trajectory of Cozens and Power at the time of those deals, I have no argument with Adams making those bets. We’ll see how they look in 2029.

Given the pedigree and trajectory of Samuelsson, that one was poorly conceived from the get-go. There was no need for it. I shrugged at the time because I liked Samuelsson, but it was clearly coming from a place of hubris. Kudos to those who called it out for what it was at the time.

Edited Monday at 11:53 PM by dudacek

[dudacek]

4 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This is precisely my point.  The run it back option would be a mistake.  However to create flexibility,  some current Sabres with high or potentially high cap hits need to go.   The Samuelsson buy out is probably the easiest decision, but after who do you move to free up money to fix the roster issues? 

Do you trade Byram or Power or try to keep both? Is your most productive young forward on the block (JJP) or do you move Quinn, a recent top 10 pick or do you trade the 3c who you traded Savoie for? 

If I was the GM, I wouldn’t mess too much with the forwards.  We need to re-sign JJP and McLeod.  Guys like Lafferty or Krebs would be on my chopping block in favor of playing Kozak.  

My changes start with the defense.  Moving on from Clifton, Power (or Byram) and Samuelsson creates potentially $16 mill in cap space to get veteran stay at home D to replace them.

.
 

 

i said it in more detail up-thread: I add 2 top 6 F and 2 top 4 D by moving any required pieces not named Dahlin and Thompson

[Archie Lee]

3 hours ago, tom webster said:

Unless politics destroys the Canadian dollar thus blowing up the cap, the Power and Tage contracts are going to be huge bargains relative to cap percentage.

The Sabres have plenty of cap flexibilty  if they want to add whatever they want.

Also, I will be shocked if Bryam is with the team next year.

Power isn’t going anywhere unless they get the first pick in the draft and then trade Power for a number one center.

Fully agreed on Thompson.  His contract already is a huge bargain.  Thompson is 13th in the entire league in goals since the start of 21-22.  He is one of the best offensive players in hockey.  None of the 12 players who have scored more than Thompson, make less. Kyle Connor has the exact same AAV, but is a UFA in 26-27 and will be getting a big raise.  Of the top 25 goal scorers in this period, only Hyman and Brock Nelson make less, and Nelson is a UFA who will likely get a contract exceeding Thompson's.  It may be that Thompson's deal is the best bargain contract in the league.

I still very much believe in Power.  I'm not opposed to including him in the right deal.  But, as you suggest, the right deal is a legit #1 centre under 28 with years of team control. If St. Louis wants to trade us Robert Thomas for Power, I'm in. I don't think that is happening though.  

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Passing definitive judgment on a 7-year contract one year into said contract is kinda silly IMO.

You think this is bad you should go look at how Bruins fans are talking about Swayman's deal. 

This is probably the only amusement hockey related things are giving me right now. Bruins fans don't have the experience and/or numbness that Sabres fans do. They really don't know how to handle a losing team. It's quite funny. 

[shrader]

4 hours ago, tom webster said:

Like I said, Bryam won’t be back plus a forward or two will be gone. They are not running this team back,

If it does happen, it’ll be interesting to see how the return compares to being paired with a 2nd round pick and a prospect for one more year of Charlie Coyle and a 5th round pick. 

[Wyldnwoody44]

But but, have you seen his body language... We want happy smiling faces. Jack had some poor posture and was shipped out to win a cup! We can't let this malfeasance continue here. Buffalo is a HAPPY place 

[SwampD]

11 hours ago, dudacek said:

i said it in more detail up-thread: I add 2 top 6 F and 2 top 4 D by moving any required pieces not named Dahlin and Thompson

I love your posts, duda, but how would that ever be possible? The Sabres are not getting 2 top 6 Fs and 2 top 4 D with whatever they have to offer in return, I mean, maybe if they use the top five pick they have this year (which I would totally be for). The only way the Sabres get that is if one of each comes up from their own system.

I also don’t like how that number has increased in recent years. It used be that people would say we only need one F and one D to be a decent team. Now it’s two of each. Oof. 

[SabreFinn]

A 5x7milj AAV contract is as high as I would go.

[GASabresIUFAN]

13 hours ago, dudacek said:

i said it in more detail up-thread: I add 2 top 6 F and 2 top 4 D by moving any required pieces not named Dahlin and Thompson

Given who they have re-signed and Adams statements, I don’t think any new top 6 forwards are in the cards.  Norris, Tuch, TNT and now JJP are core top 6 forwards.  They just re-signed Zucker and Greenway.  The McLeod acquisition was a big move from this season and has worked.  He’ll be re-signed.  That’s 7/9 of the top 9 forwards next season.  

The remaining slots are going to 2 of Benson, Kulich or Quinn.  Benson and Kulich are our top young forwards not named Peterka and both play the right way.  Management is likely counting on a big jump in production from both next season and their ELC’s help stay cap compliant.  

As much as I’d like to see a top 6 playmaker added to this group, I don’t see it in the cards at this point.  

I do agree on two top 4 veteran D.  I’ve only been asking for them for 3 years.  
 

Getting back on topic for a minute, I’ve been debating a 3 yr deal vs a 7 yr deal.  The more I think about it, maybe a 5 yr 6.5 per season contract would work for both.  This would give JJP another FA contract before turning 29, while giving the Sabres a core piece for most of his prime.  

Edited 15 hours ago by GASabresIUFAN

[Archie Lee]

2 hours ago, SwampD said:

I love your posts, duda, but how would that ever be possible? The Sabres are not getting 2 top 6 Fs and 2 top 4 D with whatever they have to offer in return, I mean, maybe if they use the top five pick they have this year (which I would totally be for). The only way the Sabres get that is if one of each comes up from their own system.

I also don’t like how that number has increased in recent years. It used be that people would say we only need one F and one D to be a decent team. Now it’s two of each. Oof. 

I think it largely depends how you define a top 6 forward and a top 4 D.  If you look at the depth charts of the top teams in the NHL, you find that Adam Lowry, Mason Appleton, Brett Howden, Cody Ceci, and Mikko Mikkola (and many more such players) fill these roles for contending teams. Good coaching, structure, experience, roster construction, are as important. We have none of those things. 

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, SwampD said:

I love your posts, duda, but how would that ever be possible? The Sabres are not getting 2 top 6 Fs and 2 top 4 D with whatever they have to offer in return, I mean, maybe if they use the top five pick they have this year (which I would totally be for). The only way the Sabres get that is if one of each comes up from their own system.

I also don’t like how that number has increased in recent years. It used be that people would say we only need one F and one D to be a decent team. Now it’s two of each. Oof. 

 

1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:

I think it largely depends how you define a top 6 forward and a top 4 D.  If you look at the depth charts of the top teams in the NHL, you find that Adam Lowry, Mason Appleton, Brett Howden, Cody Ceci, and Mikko Mikkola (and many more such players) fill these roles for contending teams. Good coaching, structure, experience, roster construction, are as important. We have none of those things. 

Yep, don't read that as 4 stars, and don't read it as in addition to what we have now.

Don't focus on the exact trades here; I'm not even sure I'd make these moves, it's just a rough illustration

Three moves:

• Peterka and Samuelsson to the Rangers for Will Cuylle and K'Andre Miller.
• Byram to Calgary for Rasmus Andersson
• Sign John Tavares 3 years $7.5M

Don't get bogged down on the moves themselves. I'm not trying to make you like these particular deals. It's really more about proposals that aren't outlandish: the types of players we might be looking for, approximate values our pieces might return, and changing the identity. The trades are kinda modelled on Cozens for Norris — good players who come with question marks. Let the GMs figure out the sweeteners. If we've got one thing it's the throw-ins pieces to complete a deal.

Cap's not a worry. These moves leave you with about $16M to re-sign McLeod, Miller and Cuylle and to add pieces around the edges. To round out the lineup, you could plug Benson in as the final top 6 forward, shop Quinn for another blueliner, and make Kulich wait his turn, or force his way past the rest like Krebs did this year.

You've got Norris, Tavares, Cuylle, Andersson and Miller instead of Cozens, Quinn Peterka, Byram and Samuelsson.

Can't guarantee this improves the overall talent level of the roster, but it significantly changes the identity.

I'm just trying to show Swamp the possibilities, assuming we've got a GM who can identify what might actually be the right moves, then execute them.

Edited 13 hours ago by dudacek

[thewookie1]

22 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Yep, don't read that as 4 stars, and don't read it as in addition to what we have now.

Don't focus on the exact trades here; I'm not even sure I'd make these moves, it's just a rough illustration

Three moves:

• Peterka and Samuelsson to the Rangers for Will Cuylle and K'Andre Miller.
• Byram to Calgary for Rasmus Andersson
• Sign John Tavares 3 years $7.5M

Don't get bogged down on the moves themselves. I'm not trying to make you like these particular deals. It's really more about proposals that aren't outlandish: the types of players we might be looking for, approximate values our pieces might return, and changing the identity. The trades are kinda modelled on Cozens for Norris — good players who come with question marks. Let the GMs figure out the sweeteners. If we've got one thing it's the throw-ins pieces to complete a deal.

Cap's not a worry. These moves leave you with about $16M to re-sign McLeod, Miller and Cuylle and to add pieces around the edges. To round out the lineup, you could plug Benson in as the final top 6 forward, shop Quinn for another blueliner, and make Kulich wait his turn, or force his way past the rest like Krebs did this year.

You've got Norris, Tavares, Cuylle, Andersson and Miller instead of Cozens, Quinn Peterka, Byram and Samuelsson.

Can't guarantee this improves the overall talent level of the roster, but it significantly changes the identity.

I'm just trying to show Swamp the possibilities, assuming we've got a GM who can identify what might actually be the right moves, then execute them.

It isn't too bad; I'd change the Peterka Muel trade though for two reasons. 1. I don't Peterka playing for the Rangers or lighting up the East plus I hate how Rangers' fans seem to feel entitled to any player they want. 2. K'Andre Miller doesn't impress me whatsoever, he's neither a shutdown Dman nor a value adder on a good contract. 

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, SwampD said:

I love your posts, duda, but how would that ever be possible? The Sabres are not getting 2 top 6 Fs and 2 top 4 D with whatever they have to offer in return, I mean, maybe if they use the top five pick they have this year (which I would totally be for). The only way the Sabres get that is if one of each comes up from their own system.

I also don’t like how that number has increased in recent years. It used be that people would say we only need one F and one D to be a decent team. Now it’s two of each. Oof. 

It depends on the players. If they added just Marner and ran back the rest, I’d probably be excited. If they added more guys like this:

4 times over, i’d roll my eyes 

Edited 12 hours ago by Thorner

[Jorcus]

I would still focus on our 2 weak points which is 2nd line right wing and top 4 right handed D. Would Washington give up Aliaksei Protus and Trevor Van Riemsdyk for Byram? Maybe not alone but it would be a place to start. Get those two you have the money to resign Peterka and McCloud and 2 big holes are filled in for now. 

[DarthEbriate]

4 minutes ago, Jorcus said:

I would still focus on our 2 weak points which is 2nd line right wing and top 4 right handed D. Would Washington give up Aliaksei Protus and Trevor Van Riemsdyk for Byram? Maybe not alone but it would be a place to start. Get those two you have the money to resign Peterka and McCloud and 2 big holes are filled in for now. 

To the bolded: I don't see them wanting Byram at all. Their left side is set with Chychrun and Sandin (cheaper than Byram will be and been excellent for them), and Carlson still has a couple seasons of elite PP play left in him I'd imagine. 

When Kulich/Norris are in the lineup, lately TNT is RW1 and Tuch is RW2. I don't think that's a weakness.

[SwampD]

58 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Yep, don't read that as 4 stars, and don't read it as in addition to what we have now.

Don't focus on the exact trades here; I'm not even sure I'd make these moves, it's just a rough illustration

Three moves:

• Peterka and Samuelsson to the Rangers for Will Cuylle and K'Andre Miller.
• Byram to Calgary for Rasmus Andersson
• Sign John Tavares 3 years $7.5M

Don't get bogged down on the moves themselves. I'm not trying to make you like these particular deals. It's really more about proposals that aren't outlandish: the types of players we might be looking for, approximate values our pieces might return, and changing the identity. The trades are kinda modelled on Cozens for Norris — good players who come with question marks. Let the GMs figure out the sweeteners. If we've got one thing it's the throw-ins pieces to complete a deal.

Cap's not a worry. These moves leave you with about $16M to re-sign McLeod, Miller and Cuylle and to add pieces around the edges. To round out the lineup, you could plug Benson in as the final top 6 forward, shop Quinn for another blueliner, and make Kulich wait his turn, or force his way past the rest like Krebs did this year.

You've got Norris, Tavares, Cuylle, Andersson and Miller instead of Cozens, Quinn Peterka, Byram and Samuelsson.

Can't guarantee this improves the overall talent level of the roster, but it significantly changes the identity.

I'm just trying to show Swamp the possibilities, assuming we've got a GM who can identify what might actually be the right moves, then execute them.

How else am I supposed to read that?

I have always hated the “all we need is x Fs and x Ds…” Just say we need to improve 2 forwards and 2 defensemen, but, isn’t that how far away every team is?! And If the Sabres did do that, those guys would be stars, not elite superstars but still stars.

TW is right, until there is a real commitment from the owner, I think we’re screwed. We are going to have to rely on luck that someone comes out of nowhere from the system.

[Thorner]

I go with right wing being an area of need because the chances of us finding a legitimate top 6 C this summer would be near zero. Wingers are more attainable / more likely we can get a difference maker there. It’s not that Thompson and Tuch can’t be the wingers, but a top 6 with Kulich and Norris as 1/2C is in need of help regardless of the wings. 

I think Thompson ends up back at C both because of necessity, and because he’s great at it. Norris can have a shot at 2C knowing McLeod is an ok fall back. IF we are upgrading in the top 6: and with Thompson at C that can come at RW. I’m also not opposed to Benson in the top 6 only because he’s defensively responsible: again contingent on a true impact addition at RW 

Peterka - Thompson - XXX

Benson - Norris - Tuch

Kulich - McLeod - Zucker 

 

..4th line will be fine. Greenway LW (if he’s not up on L3 for Kulich). I’d be trying for a vet 4C add in place of Krebs. Not giving up on Quinn unless it’s a good now hockey trade…Malenstyn an option…

..they need the big top line/top 6 add to rejuvenate things. An actual impact player that buoys the whole unit. That’s far more needed when you are a low 70s point team. Especially on the verge of 15 years missed, next year. That would be much more apt than tweaking and plugging holes as if we haven’t taken on a ton of water, as if we were some sort of playoff mainstay and not a team that should be scratching and clawing for any point it can get 

+ a partner for Power. Probably stuck with goalies we have.

Those are the 2 key additions. I sort of expect a big swing. If we are merely granted an axing of the assistant coaches and a few tweaks, there’s no hope 

*bridge Byram unless we need his cap space for the winger add 

Edited 11 hours ago by Thorner