Around the NHL: PTO Season Becomes Waiver Season

Status
Not open for further replies.

TageGod

Registered User
Aug 31, 2022
2,462
1,658
Unless you can move out skinner to bring him in, Cap is not going to fly long term.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
58,922
40,028
Rochester, NY
Unless you can move out skinner to bring him in, Cap is not going to fly long term.
They do have flexibility with all the kids on ELCs coming up.

They also have $16.8M in UFAs coming off of the books after this season. So, next season should not be a huge issue. And if the cap does jump to $90+M in 2025-26, that would make things easier, as well.

Ultimately, the challenge becomes re-signing Tuch for 26-27 and beyond and then how to retain the kids that blow up in a good way. If Levi is who Adams hopes he is over the next two seasons, he is going to want a big jump in his second contract, for instance.
 

TageGod

Registered User
Aug 31, 2022
2,462
1,658
They do have flexibility with all the kids on ELCs coming up.

They also have $16.8M in UFAs coming off of the books after this season. So, next season should not be a huge issue. And if the cap does jump to $90+M in 2025-26, that would make things easier, as well.

Ultimately, the challenge becomes re-signing Tuch for 26-27 and beyond and then how to retain the kids that blow up in a good way. If Levi is who Adams hopes he is over the next two seasons, he is going to want a big jump in his second contract, for instance.
There is a lot of uncertainty within our own roster and how contracts might look in the next 3 years. Paying an outside player 10m is just not reasonable. Plus he is a center, there is just no reason for the Sabres to get another top 6 C. Sorry Dylan you were an excellent top 6C we drafted and developed you and you earned that spot. Now go play 3C for the next 7 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rowley Birkin

Doug Prishpreed

Registered User
May 1, 2013
11,086
7,537
Brooklyn
If Pettersson was truly available, the Sabres stockpile of forward prospects should be enough to get it done. I'd be willing to give up a lot. Getting a #1 center with his skillset doesn't come along often.
What's the reverse Eichel?

Tuch = Quinn/Mitts/JJP
Krebs = Kulich
1st = 2025 1st

The main problem is that we really don't have an equivalent to Tuch that we can give. I think other teams would beat the above.
 

OkimLom

Registered User
May 3, 2010
15,594
7,030
There is a lot of uncertainty within our own roster and how contracts might look in the next 3 years. Paying an outside player 10m is just not reasonable. Plus he is a center, there is just no reason for the Sabres to get another top 6 C. Sorry Dylan you were an excellent top 6C we drafted and developed you and you earned that spot. Now go play 3C for the next 7 years.
Who says you have to take Cozens out of the top 6? Cozens would be an effective option for a top 6 wing, and still be a bargain. You would have more options and flexibility, and help shore up spots if needed. Just because you have some spots locked up doesn't mean you shouldn't look to add talent. Having a lot of talent is never a bad thing. With a prospect pool development system possibly corrected (we'll see how quickly they feel they need to bring guys up), you can take shots now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brian_griffin

TageGod

Registered User
Aug 31, 2022
2,462
1,658
Who says you have to take Cozens out of the top 6? Cozens would be an effective option for a top 6 wing, and still be a bargain. You would have more options and flexibility, and help shore up spots if needed. Just because you have some spots locked up doesn't mean you shouldn't look to add talent. Having a lot of talent is never a bad thing. With a prospect pool development system possibly corrected (we'll see how quickly they feel they need to bring guys up), you can take shots now.
You don't spend massive amounts of money on a player that fits a spot you already have locked down. You are literally making Cozens less impactful by moving him off C. KA is looking at his roster and thinking I don't have to even think about top 6 centers for over half a decade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rowley Birkin

Der Jaeger

Generational EBUG
Feb 14, 2009
18,163
15,024
Cair Paravel
What's the reverse Eichel?

Tuch = Quinn/Mitts/JJP
Krebs = Kulich
1st = 2025 1st

The main problem is that we really don't have an equivalent to Tuch that we can give. I think other teams would beat the above.
I think it'll be more than that. Eichel was hurt and his trade value reduced. I think the Sabres would need to throw 4 x 1sts into the mix to land Pettersson. It'll hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doug Prishpreed

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
58,922
40,028
Rochester, NY
I think it'll be more than that. Eichel was hurt and his trade value reduced. I think the Sabres would need to throw 4 x 1sts into the mix to land Pettersson. It'll hurt.
It could be pretty close to Eichel given that Eichel was already under contract and EPete has a ton of leverage as he is entering the final year of his deal and is relatively close to UFA.

It might take one more piece. But, I wouldn't expect it to be a 4th 1st round equivalent.
 

OkimLom

Registered User
May 3, 2010
15,594
7,030
You don't spend massive amounts of money on a player that fits a spot you already have locked down. You are literally making Cozens less impactful by moving him off C. KA is looking at his roster and thinking I don't have to even think about top 6 centers for over half a decade.
You're not making him less impactful. With guys like EP and Cozens they are guys you can be flexible with, and you won't lose any value or impact from either guy in either roles. If either player gets injured, the roster doesn't get impacted as badly, because either guy can slide to the open spot if required. Flexibility + Highly Talented players are always a win to build around.
 

Der Jaeger

Generational EBUG
Feb 14, 2009
18,163
15,024
Cair Paravel
It could be pretty close to Eichel given that Eichel was already under contract and EPete has a ton of leverage as he is entering the final year of his deal and is relatively close to UFA.

It might take one more piece. But, I wouldn't expect it to be a 4th 1st round equivalent.
I think if a team trades for him, it'll be with a long term deal in mind.

I'd part with this type of package:

2024 1st
Kulich
Ostlund
Peterka

I think it'll hurt.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
58,922
40,028
Rochester, NY
I think if a team trades for him, it'll be with a long term deal in mind.

I'd part with this type of package:

2024 1st
Kulich
Ostlund
Peterka

I think it'll hurt.
I doubt it would take that much with regards to futures. I also wouldn't be shocked if they wanted Mitts or Krebs as an NHL C in the deal.
 

TageGod

Registered User
Aug 31, 2022
2,462
1,658
You're not making him less impactful. With guys like EP and Cozens they are guys you can be flexible with, and you won't lose any value or impact from either guy in either roles. If either player gets injured, the roster doesn't get impacted as badly, because either guy can slide to the open spot if required. Flexibility + Highly Talented players are always a win to build around.
Taking a player off of their best position is literally losing value. This isn't EA sports, you don't just acquire them for the sake of it. You think Petterson even wants to be a #2 center, or worse a #2 winger? Thompson is not going to excel at winger so can't move him over.

Sabres will not be in any meaningful conversation about acquiring him unless something significantly changes after this season. We still need a top 4 D, a top 6W and a G moving forward. You can acquire two of those NEEDs for the price and $ of just Petersson
I think if a team trades for him, it'll be with a long term deal in mind.

I'd part with this type of package:

2024 1st
Kulich
Ostlund
Peterka

I think it'll hurt.
The fact that he has all the leverage means the team has none. Which means the team won't get nearly what they want for him. No one ever gets the full sign and trade value anyways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rowley Birkin

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,786
8,044
In the Panderverse
There is a lot of uncertainty within our own roster and how contracts might look in the next 3 years. Paying an outside player 10m is just not reasonable. Plus he is a center, there is just no reason for the Sabres to get another top 6 C. Sorry Dylan you were an excellent top 6C we drafted and developed you and you earned that spot. Now go play 3C for the next 7 years.
Contrarily, many Cup winners have had top-tier, deep center spines. Other than a goalie somehow turning Hasek-mode, a deep and talented center spine seems like the next likely way to get a playoff team to a Cup final.

I'm sure Ryan O'Reilly had no qualms about his position on the depth chart as he was hoisting two pieces of hardware after the final game of the season in June.

Hall of Famer Bryan Trottier won his 5th and 6th Cups as a depth center on the Lemieux-Jagr-Stevens Penguins. There are similar examples.

I'm sure both Cozens and Elias P. would play any damn position they were asked to if it meant a ticket to the conference final / Cup final for several of those 7 years.
Taking a player off of their best position is literally losing value. This isn't EA sports, you don't just acquire them for the sake of it. You think Petterson even wants to be a #2 center, or worse a #2 winger? Thompson is not going to excel at winger so can't move him over.

Sabres will not be in any meaningful conversation about acquiring him unless something significantly changes after this season. We still need a top 4 D, a top 6W and a G moving forward. You can acquire two of those NEEDs for the price and $ of just Petersson

The fact that he has all the leverage means the team has none. Which means the team won't get nearly what they want for him. No one ever gets the full sign and trade value anyways.
I do, however, agree with you on the bolded and doubt BUF will be in on Elias Petterson.
 

Der Jaeger

Generational EBUG
Feb 14, 2009
18,163
15,024
Cair Paravel
I doubt it would take that much with regards to futures. I also wouldn't be shocked if they wanted Mitts or Krebs as an NHL C in the deal.

Taking a player off of their best position is literally losing value. This isn't EA sports, you don't just acquire them for the sake of it. You think Petterson even wants to be a #2 center, or worse a #2 winger? Thompson is not going to excel at winger so can't move him over.

Sabres will not be in any meaningful conversation about acquiring him unless something significantly changes after this season. We still need a top 4 D, a top 6W and a G moving forward. You can acquire two of those NEEDs for the price and $ of just Petersson

The fact that he has all the leverage means the team has none. Which means the team won't get nearly what they want for him. No one ever gets the full sign and trade value anyways.
I think it’ll hurt more. Even if Pettersson is disgruntled, he’s only an RFA. He’s no threat to walk.

He’s a legit #1 center. Eichel was hurt and got a good package in return. I don’t think Vancouver trades him for less than what I put (or something equivalent). And I don’t think Vancouver will have any trouble finding someone to trade too assets.

As an example, a team like Columbus looking for a legit #1 center could also move some really good prospects and get the their top like guy.
 

Doug Prishpreed

Registered User
May 1, 2013
11,086
7,537
Brooklyn
I think it’ll hurt more. Even if Pettersson is disgruntled, he’s only an RFA. He’s no threat to walk.

He’s a legit #1 center. Eichel was hurt and got a good package in return. I don’t think Vancouver trades him for less than what I put (or something equivalent). And I don’t think Vancouver will have any trouble finding someone to trade too assets.

As an example, a team like Columbus looking for a legit #1 center could also move some really good prospects and get the their top like guy.
No one is giving up a package like that so you’re basically just saying “he won’t be traded.” Which I agree is definitely the most likely scenario.
 

Rowley Birkin

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
10,915
4,084
I think it’ll hurt more. Even if Pettersson is disgruntled, he’s only an RFA. He’s no threat to walk.

He’s a legit #1 center. Eichel was hurt and got a good package in return. I don’t think Vancouver trades him for less than what I put (or something equivalent). And I don’t think Vancouver will have any trouble finding someone to trade too assets.

As an example, a team like Columbus looking for a legit #1 center could also move some really good prospects and get the their top like guy.
It makes sense for a team like Columbus to give up a mega package to get Pettersson.

It makes absolutely no sense for us to be doing that.
 

Der Jaeger

Generational EBUG
Feb 14, 2009
18,163
15,024
Cair Paravel
No one is giving up a package like that so you’re basically just saying “he won’t be traded.” Which I agree is definitely the most likely scenario.
For a young center like Pettersson, Vancouver will get a really good deal.
It makes sense for a team like Columbus to give up a mega package to get Pettersson.

It makes absolutely no sense for us to be doing that.
Why? This board is full of posters saying “we’ve got too many forwards!!!!” This type of deal is what Adams should be looking for.

Go with my proposed deal (Kulich, Ostlund, Peterka, 1st). Then lay the lines out.

Skinner - Thompson - Tuch
Quinn - Pettersson - Cozens
Mittelstadt - Savoie - Greenway
Xxx - Krebs - xxx

With Benson coming up. That solves the logjam and puts the Sabres into overdrive.

This type of deal is exactly what Adams should be looking for.
 

Rowley Birkin

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
10,915
4,084
For a young center like Pettersson, Vancouver will get a really good deal.

Why? This board is full of posters saying “we’ve got too many forwards!!!!” This type of deal is what Adams should be looking for.

Go with my proposed deal (Kulich, Ostlund, Peterka, 1st). Then lay the lines out.

Skinner - Thompson - Tuch
Quinn - Pettersson - Cozens
Mittelstadt - Savoie - Greenway
Xxx - Krebs - xxx

With Benson coming up. That solves the logjam and puts the Sabres into overdrive.

This type of deal is exactly what Adams should be looking for.
I understand this arguement - but if we're trading that depth away & clearing that potential log jam right now (extremely unlikely) - it makes more sense to do so to fill actual needs. Not to acquire a player in Pettersson who is largely redundant given TT/Cozens are both signed long term to great contracts.

Adding a legit goalie, proven top 4 D & good defensive forward would certainly help this team FAR more than adding Pettersson would. And you could probably acquire all of those pieces for less cumulative assets than it would take to add Pettersson alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dickiedunnwrotethis

TageGod

Registered User
Aug 31, 2022
2,462
1,658
Contrarily, many Cup winners have had top-tier, deep center spines. Other than a goalie somehow turning Hasek-mode, a deep and talented center spine seems like the next likely way to get a playoff team to a Cup final.

I'm sure Ryan O'Reilly had no qualms about his position on the depth chart as he was hoisting two pieces of hardware after the final game of the season in June.

Hall of Famer Bryan Trottier won his 5th and 6th Cups as a depth center on the Lemieux-Jagr-Stevens Penguins. There are similar examples.

I'm sure both Cozens and Elias P. would play any damn position they were asked to if it meant a ticket to the conference final / Cup final for several of those 7 years.

I do, however, agree with you on the bolded and doubt BUF will be in on Elias Petterson.
The issue is we now have Mitts as the potential 3C, which if he keeps up where he left off, there is your elite center spine already. I am much more concerned with our winger depth. Find a 6-7m winger to play top 6 instead that doesn't cost us half of our prospect pool.
 

Rowley Birkin

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
10,915
4,084
The issue is we now have Mitts as the potential 3C, which if he keeps up where he left off, there is your elite center spine already. I am much more concerned with our winger depth. Find a 6-7m winger to play top 6 instead that doesn't cost us half of our prospect pool.
Or as i postrd just above :

- starting calibre goalie
- proven top 4 D
- good defensive C

Because these are the three additions which will help this team more than anything else.
 

Der Jaeger

Generational EBUG
Feb 14, 2009
18,163
15,024
Cair Paravel
I understand this arguement - but if we're trading that depth away & clearing that potential log jam right now (extremely unlikely) - it makes more sense to do so to fill actual needs. Not to acquire a player in Pettersson who is largely redundant given TT/Cozens are both signed long term to great contracts.

Adding a legit goalie, proven top 4 D & good defensive forward would certainly help this team FAR more than adding Pettersson would. And you could probably acquire all of those pieces for less cumulative assets than it would take to add Pettersson alone.
Adding a superstar center like Pettersson is never redundant. You move Cozens to wing and roll.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tatanka
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad