Roster Speculation 2015-16 Pt. III

[Jame]

I agree Larsson was very good but it's hard to label him the best forward with the year Ennis had. It didn't help that Johan was up and down from Rochester all season. But that shouldn't dismiss Ennis from the conversation of best forward.

I have no problem with Ennis (and even Girgensons) being in the same conversation.

Ultimately, Larsson made our top line competent in all phases of the game. And that swings the pendulum in his favor. Even though Ennis had the best season of his career, and was more consistent than he's ever been, he was still a huge liability defensively, and Larsson completely erased that liability, while driving up Ennis offense.

Ennis w/o Larsson
GF 1.66
GA 2.63
CF 40.53
CA 71.20

Ennis WITH Larsson
GF 2.18
GA 1.09
CF 45.55
CA 63.33

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

So it looks like Larsson and Girgs are the two guys who you can pretty much slot anywhere, but we probably want/need to pick one as the official 3rd center, if only to have some consistency and to work on chemistry of certain pairings. Which one is better at center and/or isn't as flexible? Can either (both?) play on the right side? that could factor into it. I know they've both played center/LW but I've never seen either on the right side.

 

[Tapu Coco]

According to Bobby Mac, Hodgson is likely to be bought out

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/toronto-105...on-likely-to-be-bought-out-by-sabres-1.305827

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

Where I'm at right now, without specific UFA additions, excluding Goaltenders:

Kane-Eichel-Ennis
Moulson-Girgensons-Reinhart
Foligno-Larsson-Gionta
Deslauriers-McCormick-Kaleta

Zadorov-Ristolainen
Gorges-Bogosian
McCabe-Pysyk

Extras: Hodgson, Weber, UFA Vet D

 

[FearTheBeard]

According to Bobby Mac, Hodgson is likely to be bought out

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/toronto-105...on-likely-to-be-bought-out-by-sabres-1.305827

I think he's speculating for the most part. I hope so anyway. I'd rather just trade Grigs and make room for Hodgson and see what he can do after a hard offseason of training. I think this kid is too talented offensively to pay him almost 1M for the next 8 years to play for someone else

 

[enthusiast]

It feels like a waste to not give Grigs a last shot on a team that's going to be garbage regardless

 

[old kummelweck]

Reinhart is going to be in Buffalo next year, it's one thing that was made clear in this press conference. No need to make line up predictions without him anymore.

This was an SAT questions...

Regier is to Connolly as Murray is to ___________.

 

[TehDoak]

According to Bobby Mac, Hodgson is likely to be bought out

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/toronto-105...on-likely-to-be-bought-out-by-sabres-1.305827

If you listen to the interview, his lays out his thought process as to why he thinks that. Basically, he says GMs don't bring up they might buy out a player and then bring them back. While I don't disagree that he's likely gone, I think he's gone via trade rather than a buyout.

Phoenix makes sense for so many reasons, especially with the glendale issue. They aren't going to get any free agents of note to sign there (who is going to sign somewhere for more than a year when they have no idea where they could move to). They need to hit the cap floor and need centers. Add in the Regier factor, you have a nearly perfect storm to move him there.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Where I'm at right now, without specific UFA additions, excluding Goaltenders:

Kane-Eichel-Ennis
Moulson-Girgensons-Reinhart
Foligno-Larsson-Gionta
Deslauriers-McCormick-Kaleta

Zadorov-Ristolainen
Gorges-Bogosian
McCabe-Pysyk

Extras: Hodgson, Weber, UFA Vet D

I dont hate it, but get Kaleta out of there. Did you trade Grigo?

Moulson - Larsson - Ennis
Kane - Eichel - Girgensons
Foligno - Reinhart - Gionta
Des - Grigs - McCormick

Gorges - Bogo
Zads- Risto
Weber - Pysyk

 

[Jame]

Where I'm at right now, without specific UFA additions, excluding Goaltenders:

Kane-Eichel-Ennis
Moulson-Girgensons-Reinhart
Foligno-Larsson-Gionta
Deslauriers-McCormick-Kaleta

Zadorov-Ristolainen
Gorges-Bogosian
McCabe-Pysyk

Extras: Hodgson, Weber, UFA Vet D

As Bylsma has noted, there could be an issue of fit between Kane and Eichel, as both a power skating puck hogs (in a good way). Putting them together may limit one or the other's abilitites.

Reinhart is the most natural center of the entire bunch, and would be the last of the 5 I'd expect to see moved to wing (Eichel, Reinhart, Larsson, Girgs, Grigo). Reinhart's greatest skills are most fully realized at center.

Weber is not an extra

Gorges is very questionable to be ready for the season after microfracture surgery. He's at best a 3rd pair guy from this point forward.

I'll assume a Hodgson buyout with you.... but where's Grigo?

Start the year...
Moulson-Larsson-Ennis - top line, draws the top matchups
Kane-Reinhart/Eichel-Girgensons - takes the top matchups
Foligno-Eichel/Reinhart-Gionta - ease young gun in to Offensive zone starts
Des-Grigorenko-XXXX
X McCormick, Kaleta

XXXX-Bogo
Weber-Risto
Zadorov-Pysyk
x Gorges

 

[TehDoak]

This was an SAT questions...

Regier is to Connolly as Murray is to ___________.

Regier didn't rush Connolly to the NHL. Milbury did with the Isles.

Between that and the injuries during what should have been his prime, Connolly never really had a fair shake.

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

I dont hate it, but get Kaleta out of there. Did you trade Grigo?

Moulson - Larsson - Ennis
Kane - Eichel - Girgensons
Foligno - Reinhart - Gionta
Des - Grigs - McCormick

Gorges - Bogo
Zads- Risto
Weber - Pysyk

Yes, I'm assuming, especially based on Murray's comments, that Grigorenko is gone.

As for Kaleta, I don't want him either, but they've entered negotiations with him, and he is a decent 4th liner, so long as he plays clean.

I refuse to accept Larsson as a 1C in any scenario. Long term, he's a solid 3C IMO.

 

[Ghills23]

I have no problem with Ennis (and even Girgensons) being in the same conversation.

Ultimately, Larsson made our top line competent in all phases of the game. And that swings the pendulum in his favor. Even though Ennis had the best season of his career, and was more consistent than he's ever been, he was still a huge liability defensively, and Larsson completely erased that liability, while driving up Ennis offense.

Ennis w/o Larsson
GF 1.66
GA 2.63
CF 40.53
CA 71.20

Ennis WITH Larsson
GF 2.18
GA 1.09
CF 45.55
CA 63.33

All true, I just think unfortunately it's too small of a sample size for Larsson. Playing only 39 games many of them not on the top line, it's hard for me to justify him as the top forward for the season. But were splitting hairs here. I am glad that he is coming into his own and his ceiling is higher than I thought it would be. He's developed well and I agree that he can fit that O'Reilly role.

 

[Jame]

All true, I just think unfortunately it's too small of a sample size for Larsson. Playing only 39 games many of them not on the top line, it's hard for me to justify him as the top forward for the season. But were splitting hairs here. I am glad that he is coming into his own and his ceiling is higher than I thought it would be. He's developed well and I agree that he can fit that O'Reilly role.

Sample size is a fair argument against... I just view the performance as undeniable. I saw it in the previous season and early season call ups, even when he was playing with garbage he was a dominant puck possession player with elite defensive zone awareness. To be able to take those abilities to the top line, and prove that he could drive offense in that role as well.... He's just a complete, all around talent.

And for me, the complete 200 foot centers who also produce offense, are going to trump the 1 dimensional 50 point wingers every day, and twice in the post season

 

[CaptPantalones]

last year's best forward on the 4th line?

If Larsson was drafted in the slot where we took Grigorenko (1st round/12th overall), but everything related to his on ice career remained exactly the same (euro pro league to AHL to NHL with no changes in performance/production)... he'd be in everyone's top 6.

1. I don't number lines. I take the ruff approach to my lineups. Balance it out.

2. Larsson is very much a top 9 player on some teams. But unless girgensons or someone is pushed to wing (which may happen) larsson may never be more then a 4th line C given our current crop. And that's not a bad thing at all

 

[Jame]

1. I don't number lines. I take the ruff approach to my lineups. Balance it out.

2. Larsson is very much a top 9 player on some teams. But unless girgensons or someone is pushed to wing (which may happen) larsson may never be more then a 4th line C given our current crop. And that's not a bad thing at all

1. i dont like numbering lines either... but the line that has Deslauriers is something that the lines that have the other guys are not.

2. Larsson won't play a single minute of 4th line ice time going forward.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Does anyone think Hodgson would be tradable if we retained half of his salary? (By "tradable" I mean for a late pick or whatever...nothing much.) Perhaps someone (Toronto? Phoenix?) might be more willing to take a chance on him for 4 rys at $2 million per? I'd rather have $2 mill on the books for 4 years than $1 million for 8 years, but I have a feeling he still wouldn't be tradable

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

Does anyone think Hodgson would be tradable if we retained half of his salary? (By "tradable" I mean for a late pick or whatever...nothing much.) Perhaps someone (Toronto? Phoenix?) might be more willing to take a chance on him for 4 rys at $2 million per? I'd rather have $2 mill on the books for 4 years than $1 million for 8 years, but I have a feeling he still wouldn't be tradable

IMO, $800K for 8 years is much easier to swallow to $2.125M for 4 years.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Does anyone think Hodgson would be tradable if we retained half of his salary? (By "tradable" I mean for a late pick or whatever...nothing much.) Perhaps someone (Toronto? Phoenix?) might be more willing to take a chance on him for 4 rys at $2 million per? I'd rather have $2 mill on the books for 4 years than $1 million for 8 years, but I have a feeling he still wouldn't be tradable

as has been previously stated, he could fit in Phx if they are trying to hit the cap floor, and their desperate need of centres. I don't mind giving him a 20 game try out or so. He cant hurt his trade value at this point, and the team won't suffer much in a non-playoff year

 

[Jame]

Does anyone think Hodgson would be tradable if we retained half of his salary? (By "tradable" I mean for a late pick or whatever...nothing much.) Perhaps someone (Toronto? Phoenix?) might be more willing to take a chance on him for 4 rys at $2 million per? I'd rather have $2 mill on the books for 4 years than $1 million for 8 years, but I have a feeling he still wouldn't be tradable

IMO, $800K for 8 years is much easier to swallow to $2.125M for 4 years.

agreed.

But there might be some middle ground.

Buffalo retains 800k (800k cap hit for 4 years - instead of the 8 years that they'd eat if they bought him out)

Arizona gets Hodgson at 3.45 million cap hit for 4 years)

3.45 million is really not a lot... especially for a team that has to hit the floor and is going to struggle to draw anyone in free agency

 

[tmack224]

Hoffman, Zib, Stone


Any chance we can sing them to offersheets? Obviuosly not all three but can the Sens really sign all 3 if we toss decent sized money at one of them?

I would sign Zibs or Stone to a contract at $5,000,000 a year and Hoffman to one at $3,500,000


They wont let 2 of the three walk but I would imagine they wouldnt be able to make both and then sign the third.

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

agreed.

But there might be some middle ground.

Buffalo retains 800k (800k cap hit for 4 years - instead of the 8 years that they'd eat if they bought him out)

Arizona gets Hodgson at 3.45 million cap hit for 4 years)

3.45 million is really not a lot... especially for a team that has to hit the floor and is going to struggle to draw anyone in free agency

For a 6th Rounder like Gagner. Done deal for me.

 

[old kummelweck]

I don't see anyone trading for the risk that is Hodgson. Why? If you're going to give him a shot, sign him for a one year contract near the league minimum after he gets bought out. That way you don't give up anything. At this point there does not seem to be much upside.

 

[FamilyGuy716]

My opening night top line is Moulson-Larsson-Ennis... no idea why we'd change something that was clearly capable of top line production, while easing the initial load on our kid studs (Eichel, Reinhart).

Obviously Reichel (or should we go with Einhart?) is our future 1-2 punch.... Along with Girgensons versatility to play on any line in any role. But i'd rather give Reichel some time to develop, adjust, grow before they become that 1-2 punch. Larsson provides that...

Love Larsson but I think he's on the 2nd/3rd line. Girgensons will be the 1C to start and Eichel will take over sometime during the season.

 

[FearTheBeard]

IMO, $800K for 8 years is much easier to swallow to $2.125M for 4 years.

perhaps, but the cap is really not a factor for us for the next few years. Most of our better players are signed or on ELC's. 5 years from now is when we could run into cap casualties. I think you take a chance on him to see if he can show anything early on and get a trade. I hate the idea of paying someone to play for someone else.