Off-Season Roster Thread #2 -- Nothing to do but wait

[TehDoak]

Skinner is actually pretty good at faceoffs just have him take more. You can get better at faceoffs easier than skating, IQ, etc... MacKinnon is a career 45.9% at the dot with 1 outlier season over 50%. He 41.9% the year he had 97 points and slightly better the year he had 99.

McDavid came in as a 41% faceoff player and got better every season so far peaking over 50% this year. I am not signing a guy just to win faceoffs. Complete waste of time and roster space

I think that is fair, you don't go out and get a specialist who can't take a regular shift. That is basically what we had in Eakin, a guy who isn't a NHL regular but good at faceoffs. I'd be with you that we don't want that.

But, your forward group needs someone who is at least above average at it. I think ideally you want one in your top 6 and one in your bottom 6 so you aren't shuffling out your 4th line on important offensive faceoffs.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

I think that is fair, you don't go out and get a specialist who can't take a regular shift. That is basically what we had in Eakin, a guy who isn't a NHL regular but good at faceoffs. I'd be with you that we don't want that.

But, your forward group needs someone who is at least above average at it. I think ideally you want one in your top 6 and one in your bottom 6 so you aren't shuffling out your 4th line on important offensive faceoffs.

Eakin’s problem is the $$ he got. And who he replaced. If he made 500-750 less nobody would really complain about him. Like we complain about Hayden but not that much, as we expect him to just be someone on the ice, as opposed to being “important”.

It’s why I think they should target Sturm for that ability. You can probably get him for a lot less. Like maybe $1.5 per year.

 

[threeVo]

Eakin’s problem is the $$ he got. And who he replaced. If he made 500-750 less nobody would really complain about him. Like we complain about Hayden but not that much, as we expect him to just be someone on the ice, as opposed to being “important”.

It’s why I think they should target Sturm for that ability. You can probably get him for a lot less. Like maybe $1.5 per year.

No we would still complain about Eakin because hes not physical, cant score, doesnt fight, and brings literally negatives aside from winning a draw slightly more times than he loses them. Ill never forget the sequence he lost 3 straight D zone draws in a row in a close game.

 

[Fly Boy]

Speaking of needing a center strong at faceoffs, and Vancouver looking to move up, could there be any interest around 15+Horvat for 9 + something? And yes I know Horvat has only 1 year before UFA.

 

[Zman5778]

I think that is fair, you don't go out and get a specialist who can't take a regular shift. That is basically what we had in Eakin, a guy who isn't a NHL regular but good at faceoffs. I'd be with you that we don't want that.

But, your forward group needs someone who is at least above average at it. I think ideally you want one in your top 6 and one in your bottom 6 so you aren't shuffling out your 4th line on important offensive faceoffs.

Completely agreed with your first paragraph -- I don't want a guy who's good at faceoffs but literally nothing else.

On the 2nd paragraph -- I totally agree with your ideal, but I think in our case next year.....I just want a guy who can win +50% of his faceoffs and not need to immediately go back to the bench because he's bereft of any offensive ability whatsoever. It's one of the reasons why I'm intrigued by your idea of signing Trochek.....or trading for JT Compher (JTC and EJ in the same deal?).

 

[Der Jaeger]

Any line Eakin was on also got caved in on possession, so it's not like him winning the faceoff made a huge impact regardless.

 

[Zman5778]

Speaking of needing a center strong at faceoffs, and Vancouver looking to move up, could there be any interest around 15+Horvat for 9 + something? And yes I know Horvat has only 1 year before UFA.

I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to Horvat, depending on what the +something is on our end.....AND how much it would take to sign him long-term.

He's not a legit #1C on a contending team, but he's absolutely a 2C on a contending team. That said, I'm not willing to dole out a ton of term on something $7+ AAV for him. If he's willing to sign long-term here for like $6M AAV.......yeah, I think I'd do a deal like what you mentioned.

 

[Fjordsen]

Any line Eakin was on also got caved in on possession, so it's not like him winning the faceoff made a huge impact regardless.

Absolutely, what is the use of his win on face-offs, if then almost immediately he lost the puck in elementary situations

 

[MarkusKetterer]

No we would still complain about Eakin because hes not physical, cant score, doesnt fight, and brings literally negatives aside from winning a draw slightly more times than he loses them. Ill never forget the sequence he lost 3 straight D zone draws in a row in a close game.

He fights in NHL22!!

I did say who he replaced was a problem. I just saw him as a body on the ice killing time, so I didn’t get worked up by him sucking ass.

But now is the time to stop having useless players, barring injuries. 1-14 should be legit NHL guys, or at worst 12-14 are AAAA guys.

 

[Fly Boy]

I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to Horvat, depending on what the +something is on our end.....AND how much it would take to sign him long-term.

He's not a legit #1C on a contending team, but he's absolutely a 2C on a contending team. That said, I'm not willing to dole out a ton of term on something $7+ AAV for him. If he's willing to sign long-term here for like $6M AAV.......yeah, I think I'd do a deal like what you mentioned.

Vancouver doesn't have a 2nd (or 3rd, although not certain) in the draft this year. So something like 9 and 73. Or 9 and a 2023 3rd that turns into the latest or middle of Buffalo's 2nds if Horvat re-signs? That way they can actually recoup a pick.

I also imagine if they were still trying to move up even further that 9+Miller would be much more appetizing to teams than 15+Miller.

I do agree on the part of him signing though. Anything around $6-6.5×5 I would probably be okay with, but $7+ would be too much.

 

[TehDoak]

I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to Horvat, depending on what the +something is on our end.....AND how much it would take to sign him long-term.

He's not a legit #1C on a contending team, but he's absolutely a 2C on a contending team. That said, I'm not willing to dole out a ton of term on something $7+ AAV for him. If he's willing to sign long-term here for like $6M AAV.......yeah, I think I'd do a deal like what you mentioned.

I doubt Vancover is moving Horvat.

If he is available, my offer is:

16 + Prospect for Horvat and Myers...and I'm trying to sign Horvat immediately to a 6x7M extension.

 

[old kummelweck]

Speaking of needing a center strong at faceoffs, and Vancouver looking to move up, could there be any interest around 15+Horvat for 9 + something? And yes I know Horvat has only 1 year before UFA.

Adam's isn't going to all of a sudden change course on how he's been building the team. I don't see any UFA signings (or trade and sign the wrong age group) outside of maybe a goalie.

 

[Djp]

I doubt Vancover is moving Horvat.

If he is available, my offer is:

16 + Prospect for Horvat and Myers...and I'm trying to sign Horvat immediately to a 6x7M extension.

Horvat for 7 yrs…yikes

 

[beerme1]

Maybe splitting hairs here but it was $10M. Still a significant amount of course.

My bad. Not sure why but 20 seemed be my memory.

 

[beerme1]

I don't think they're going to be as concerned about salary as they are about term.

It only takes one team to offer Campbell a 6 or 7 year deal, it would offer the sort of career stability that Campbell has never had.

Very true and if someone offered him term like that he'd be crazy not to take it.

 

[old kummelweck]

...

 

[Asymmetric Solution]

From the eyes of someone who’s worked in that world for 22 years, I don’t understand your first point and disagree with the second. Vehemently.

Thank you. Not to derail a thread about the Sabres but as someone who has spent most of my adult life alongside those “frat boys” I felt implored to respond. It is plainly obvious the guy you responded to has no idea what happens in these formations and sounds significantly naïve.
Comparing SOF to NHL players might be the dumbest thing I’ve seen on these forums.

 

[Ace]

Adam's isn't going to all of a sudden change course on how he's been building the team. I don't see any UFA signings (or trade and sign the wrong age group) outside of maybe a goalie.

I like how signing a goalie is a maybe.

love to see how they play all year in Buffalo and Rochester without doing it

 

[Asymmetric Solution]

 

[Der Jaeger]

I doubt Vancover is moving Horvat.

If he is available, my offer is:

16 + Prospect for Horvat and Myers...and I'm trying to sign Horvat immediately to a 6x7M extension.

I’d do something like this.

Thank you. Not to derail a thread about the Sabres but as someone who has spent most of my adult life alongside those “frat boys” I felt implored to respond. It is plainly obvious the guy you responded to has no idea what happens in these formations and sounds significantly naïve.
Comparing SOF to NHL players might be the dumbest thing I’ve seen on these forums.

To be fair, I made the comparison to highlight the importance of having a good culture.

 

[TehDoak]

Horvat for 7 yrs…yikes

Let's consider Bo Horvat

1. He just turned 27. So at the end of the contract, he'd be 34.
2. He can play all situations and play them well.
3. He's takes hard d-zone starts

I mean, if you could pick an ideal player that Buffalo was missing (other than a goalie), it'd be Horvat. He's an ideal complement to the defensively challenged Thompson line. Asplund-Horvat-Cozens/Quinn/Peterka as your 2nd line? I mean....

I certainly get the aging curve argument. You hope he's a 35-40 point center at the end of the deal that can still kill penalties and is a faceoff ace. You hope he doesn't fall off a cliff at the age of 30

 

[TehDoak]

So, I have a bit of an out of the box idea.

So, let's just say, you want to add a veteran forward to the group, but you don't want to give away Olofsson for a draft pick. What's the way to maximize his value?

You sign him to a 3 year deal....and retain 50% of his salary. You tell him that this is coming, heck you can let the team negotiate the deal with him directly. And you retain 50% and ship him off.

Now you are shopping a 25-30 goal winger., prime aged, ...at 2.5-2.75M

You look at teams fighting the cap ceiling, this could be a god send. Cheap production locked up through the prime years? I mean, you'd get significant interest. You might be able to pry free a late 1st + top tier prospect for him.

 

[Djp]

Let's consider Bo Horvat

1. He just turned 27. So at the end of the contract, he'd be 34.
2. He can play all situations and play them well.
3. He's takes hard d-zone starts

I mean, if you could pick an ideal player that Buffalo was missing (other than a goalie), it'd be Horvat. He's an ideal complement to the defensively challenged Thompson line. Asplund-Horvat-Cozens/Quinn/Peterka as your 2nd line? I mean....

I certainly get the aging curve argument. You hope he's a 35-40 point center at the end of the deal that can still kill penalties and is a faceoff ace. You hope he doesn't fall off a cliff at the age of 30

max I go is 4 yrs On any UFA During their UFA years

So, I have a bit of an out of the box idea.

So, let's just say, you want to add a veteran forward to the group, but you don't want to give away Olofsson for a draft pick. What's the way to maximize his value?

You sign him to a 3 year deal....and retain 50% of his salary. You tell him that this is coming, heck you can let the team negotiate the deal with him directly. And you retain 50% and ship him off.

Now you are shopping a 25-30 goal winger., prime aged, ...at 2.5-2.75M

You look at teams fighting the cap ceiling, this could be a god send. Cheap production locked up through the prime years? I mean, you'd get significant interest. You might be able to pry free a late 1st + top tier prospect for him.

absolutely not.

first signing then retaining is not done and coukd be considered circumvention.

the market will not be there on wingers

 

[TehDoak]

absolutely not.

first signing then retaining is not done and could be considered circumvention.

the market will not be there on wingers

The NHL has shown it doesn't give a rat's ass about cap circumvention. There are no rules about how soon after a contract is signed it can be retained and traded. And Olofsson is a RFA, so he can talk to other teams directly and get a deal done without permission from us.

And maybe I'm 100% wrong on about what his value would be on a 2-3 year, 50% retained deal. But I'm thinking a team like MN could see the value in a cheap contract like that. I don't think Fiala is a fit for us, but maybe Olofsson (50% retained on a 3 year deal) and Joker for Dumba? They'd cut 1M in practical cap space, and could use Fiala to go get another d-man or they'd have the space to dip into the UFA d-man pool.

 

[Jim Bob]

Skinner is actually pretty good at faceoffs just have him take more. You can get better at faceoffs easier than skating, IQ, etc... MacKinnon is a career 45.9% at the dot with 1 outlier season over 50%. He 41.9% the year he had 97 points and slightly better the year he had 99.

McDavid came in as a 41% faceoff player and got better every season so far peaking over 50% this year. I am not signing a guy just to win faceoffs. Complete waste of time and roster space

Jeff Skinner Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Salary, Title | Hockey-Reference.com

Checkout the latest stats of Jeff Skinner. Get info about his position, age, height, weight, trade, draft, salary and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

Skinner is 44% on faceoffs for his career and was at 40.6% last season.

I would not call that pretty good.