Roster Speculation Part XI...$teven $tamko$?? Pony up for PK?

[La Cosa Nostra]

Ok relax pal, the discussion started because the poster made a lineup that had both Stamkos AND Subban. In that scenario we would have no way of signing both Jack and Sam. Your entire post was unneccesary, if you just read through the thread more carefully.

That's funny because the whole thread itself mentions how Stamkos is unsignable because of Eichel and Reinharts contract status. Like it's impossible for Buffalo to earmark money for a superstar goal scorer because it has to re-sign two RFAs with four years left of team control. And anyway if the team got Subban Reinhart would be going the other way so that whole premise is a moot point anyway. Subban would cost Reinhart+2016 1st and probably more, no thanks on that.

And I guess you can look at the bright side of Ristos 3 points in his last 13 games....he surely isn't cracking 50 let alone pushing 60, so the 7+ per estimations were a tad overboard. He should be able to be re-signed long term at 6 per, or 6.25 per tops on a 8/50 type deal. And if that does happen then the Sabres should look to move Bogosian. He is not playing like a $5+ mil dman.

 

[Wisent42]

Maybe this is the wrong thread, but I didn't feel it was important enough to deserve it's own thread:

One thing Murray has done with this team besides adding talent is adding characters. Players who stir up emotions amongst fans. I mean, ROR became a fan favourite in no time. Kane is what he is, but he's a character. Whether you like him or not, everyone's got an opinion on him. And Lehner probably just won the entire fan base over.

Not to take anything away from the old core - Vanek and Pominville were great players for us - but they were a bit... dull.

Maybe I'm reaching here, and it could off course be coincidential. Either way, it's about entertainment. And I think we've gathered a bunch of characters that are pretty entertaining.

 

[haseoke39]

You feel bad for Moulson. He's only 32. But guys do start dropping off fast in their early thirties sometimes.

 

[SabreBlood]

Maybe this is the wrong thread, but I didn't feel it was important enough to deserve it's own thread:

One thing Murray has done with this team besides adding talent is adding characters. Players who stir up emotions amongst fans. I mean, ROR became a fan favourite in no time. Kane is what he is, but he's a character. Whether you like him or not, everyone's got an opinion on him. And Lehner probably just won the entire fan base over.

Not to take anything away from the old core - Vanek and Pominville were great players for us - but they were a bit... dull.

Maybe I'm reaching here, and it could off course be coincidential. Either way, it's about entertainment. And I think we've gathered a bunch of characters that are pretty entertaining.

Couldn't agree more. It's not only the Sabres, in my opinion. It's a league wide thing... I feel like there used to be so many characters in the NHL growing up, and now, present day, players are all so similar in their attitudes and make up. Lehner adds another layer to the Sabres entertainment quality. Add in his psycho-Nordic-rage and his ability to scare large NHL defensemen by just looking at them and his willingness to destroy everybody and what you've got is an extremely exciting, potentially dominating, memorable character in a league where memorable characters are few and far between.

 

[Chainshot]

I tend to agree Chain.
The only subject matter not addressed in these conversations has been our pipe line. Not so much the defensive side as I can't see the team knowing what we have there for several years yet. But the offensive side is the conversation I'd like to explore.

Here's my deductions early on.
1. Girgs is not the fit the organization is looking for with Eichel if we want him to be truly dynamic. That being said, who looks to be a potential in the pipe line?
2. If ROR and Reinhart appear a good fit, I can't see ROR going to wing given his FO capabilities, that LW looks open though.
3. The 3rd line. With all of this youth inbound, some is sure to stick. Does that make Girgs or Larsson expendable?

Just some thoughts, but the main one is on Eichel, how is going to put him up on the next level offensively?

1) How is having a defensively responsible wide-body who plays a power game along the wall holding Eichel back? Girgensons fills the defensive conscious role -- Hecht to Eichel's Briere to harken back to a recent comparable. There is nothing at this point holding Jack back from dynamism, he generates plays out of nothing every night. Would I like to see him have a running mate who can be the Mogilny to his LaFontaine? Sure. At $10+million dollars? **** no. I'd rather they see if the rapport Eichel had with Bailey in limited viewing is the beginning of something. Fasching also plays a very solid 2-way game with size and board work that combined with Girgensons would be an absolute load to handle along the wall... while Eichel is free-styling in open ice. It also doesn't preclude a "value" signing having an impact there either -- we see every year people late in camp landing on a team for a song who blend in and contribute immediately. Lee Stempniak in NJ is a great example of it.
2) Let ROR/Reinhart do their thing. Worry about who is where if one displaces the other.
3) The opening will be on the 4th line where there are some easy replacements like Legwand (Schaller), Moulson (traffic cone), and even Deslauriers as a fulltimer. Working in a rookie with promise need not displace something that is actually working, which is what the third line finally is doing.

All of this of course is helped greatly if they have defensemen who can both control attack forwards and move the puck quickly in transition. Right now, they could use all the help they can get. It makes no difference who the forwards are, especially the wingers, if the line spends its entire shift hemmed in defensively without ever having the puck in the attacking zone.

 

[Myllz]

1) How is having a defensively responsible wide-body who plays a power game along the wall holding Eichel back? Girgensons fills the defensive conscious role -- Hecht to Eichel's Briere to harken back to a recent comparable. There is nothing at this point holding Jack back from dynamism, he generates plays out of nothing every night. Would I like to see him have a running mate who can be the Mogilny to his LaFontaine? Sure. At $10+million dollars? **** no. I'd rather they see if the rapport Eichel had with Bailey in limited viewing is the beginning of something. Fasching also plays a very solid 2-way game with size and board work that combined with Girgensons would be an absolute load to handle along the wall... while Eichel is free-styling in open ice. It also doesn't preclude a "value" signing having an impact there either -- we see every year people late in camp landing on a team for a song who blend in and contribute immediately. Lee Stempniak in NJ is a great example of it.
2) Let ROR/Reinhart do their thing. Worry about who is where if one displaces the other.
3) The opening will be on the 4th line where there are some easy replacements like Legwand (Schaller), Moulson (traffic cone), and even Deslauriers as a fulltimer. Working in a rookie with promise need not displace something that is actually working, which is what the third line finally is doing.

All of this of course is helped greatly if they have defensemen who can both control attack forwards and move the puck quickly in transition. Right now, they could use all the help they can get. It makes no difference who the forwards are, especially the wingers, if the line spends its entire shift hemmed in defensively without ever having the puck in the attacking zone.

Let's not get too greedy here, that's a pretty huge upgrade to expect for the fourth line.

 

[dugman]

I'm curious if having the trade deadline fall during a west coast trip will affect how players pack... Some of them might not get a chance to stop in Buffalo for a while. I don't recall this happening to the Sabres recently.

 

[Chainshot]

Let's not get too greedy here, that's a pretty huge upgrade to expect for the fourth line.

Rolls of tape are in high demand, might not be able to find one that fits the cap structure.

 

[Vito_81]

If the option is between landing two quality, top-4 defensemen on contracts around $4.5-5.5M million per year or paying $11M for Stamkos? Easily, invest in the defensemen. Stammer is a luxury, not a necessity.

Your point is a fair one.

However, Stamkos IMO would turn the team into an instant contender. You just need to start spending smarter and cutting the fat.

Gionta Gorges Franson Ennis Moulson. That's a lot of dollars you can free up within a year or so, turn those dollars into one or two D pieces. And you're set.


These tight to the cap teams like LA and Chicago always seem to get it done. It's not the big contracts that kill you, it's the 2+ million dollar bottom 6 contracts that you need to move away from.


If I'm Murray. I take Stamkos and worry about the rest from there. Buffalo has enough space for enough years to start moving out the excess pieces at higher dollars.

 

[Chainshot]

Your point is a fair one.

However, Stamkos IMO would turn the team into an instant contender. You just need to start spending smarter and cutting the fat.

Gionta Gorges Franson Ennis Moulson. That's a lot of dollars you can free up within a year or so, turn those dollars into one or two D pieces. And you're set.


These tight to the cap teams like LA and Chicago always seem to get it done. It's not the big contracts that kill you, it's the 2+ million dollar bottom 6 contracts that you need to move away from.


If I'm Murray. I take Stamkos and worry about the rest from there. Buffalo has enough space for enough years to start moving out the excess pieces at higher dollars.

"Cutting the fat" is all fine and well and good, except that the replacement players aren't going to be on ELC's or league minimum deals. Stammer still locks up a great deal of cap space on a luxury without addressing the bigger issue of the team defense.

Knowing how much I hate this, I'm also sure Pegs is going to back the Stupid Money truck up to Stamkos' door.

 

[Paxon]

Your point is a fair one.

However, Stamkos IMO would turn the team into an instant contender. You just need to start spending smarter and cutting the fat.

Gionta Gorges Franson Ennis Moulson. That's a lot of dollars you can free up within a year or so, turn those dollars into one or two D pieces. And you're set.


These tight to the cap teams like LA and Chicago always seem to get it done. It's not the big contracts that kill you, it's the 2+ million dollar bottom 6 contracts that you need to move away from.


If I'm Murray. I take Stamkos and worry about the rest from there. Buffalo has enough space for enough years to start moving out the excess pieces at higher dollars.

Stamkos doesn't make us an instant contender if we can't improve the defense

 

[Myllz]

Your point is a fair one.

However, Stamkos IMO would turn the team into an instant contender. You just need to start spending smarter and cutting the fat.

Gionta Gorges Franson Ennis Moulson. That's a lot of dollars you can free up within a year or so, turn those dollars into one or two D pieces. And you're set.


These tight to the cap teams like LA and Chicago always seem to get it done. It's not the big contracts that kill you, it's the 2+ million dollar bottom 6 contracts that you need to move away from.


If I'm Murray. I take Stamkos and worry about the rest from there. Buffalo has enough space for enough years to start moving out the excess pieces at higher dollars.

Based on what? The Lightning are a bubble team with Stamkos. Stamkos would put us into the playoffs, but we wouldn't be anywhere near a contender with our current defense.

 

[Yatzhee]

"Cutting the fat" is all fine and well and good, except that the replacement players aren't going to be on ELC's or league minimum deals. Stammer still locks up a great deal of cap space on a luxury without addressing the bigger issue of the team defense.

Knowing how much I hate this, I'm also sure Pegs is going to back the Stupid Money truck up to Stamkos' door.

Yes, defense should be addressed. Yes, I hope the Pegula bucks truck is already being loaded up.

Stamkos doesn't make us an instant contender if we can't improve the defense

Based on what? The Lightning are a bubble team with Stamkos. Stamkos would put us into the playoffs, but we wouldn't be anywhere near a contender with our current defense.

Truth in both statements. With all of the scouting going on between Anaheim and Buffalo, I think a trade is coming for either Fowler or Theodore. Just a guess though. In any case, I believe defense will be addressed.

And, if we add Stamkos, playoffs most certainly. I'd like to think he's a piece of the puzzle.

In the end, we'll see where the chips fall in the next 8 months prior to the start of next season.

 

[haseoke39]

I don't even think Stamkos necessarily puts us in the playoffs without fixing the D. Edmonton can tell you how great it is to have all talented forwards and an AHL blueline. If we get Stamkos and walk into next season without acquiring at least one above average LHD, Murray still gets an F, and I'm not sold we can win more than we lose.

Really, the problem should have been fixed before this season.

 

[Yatzhee]

1) How is having a defensively responsible wide-body who plays a power game along the wall holding Eichel back? Girgensons fills the defensive conscious role -- Hecht to Eichel's Briere to harken back to a recent comparable. There is nothing at this point holding Jack back from dynamism, he generates plays out of nothing every night. Would I like to see him have a running mate who can be the Mogilny to his LaFontaine? Sure. At $10+million dollars? **** no. I'd rather they see if the rapport Eichel had with Bailey in limited viewing is the beginning of something. Fasching also plays a very solid 2-way game with size and board work that combined with Girgensons would be an absolute load to handle along the wall... while Eichel is free-styling in open ice. It also doesn't preclude a "value" signing having an impact there either -- we see every year people late in camp landing on a team for a song who blend in and contribute immediately. Lee Stempniak in NJ is a great example of it.
2) Let ROR/Reinhart do their thing. Worry about who is where if one displaces the other.
3) The opening will be on the 4th line where there are some easy replacements like Legwand (Schaller), Moulson (traffic cone), and even Deslauriers as a fulltimer. Working in a rookie with promise need not displace something that is actually working, which is what the third line finally is doing.

All of this of course is helped greatly if they have defensemen who can both control attack forwards and move the puck quickly in transition. Right now, they could use all the help they can get. It makes no difference who the forwards are, especially the wingers, if the line spends its entire shift hemmed in defensively without ever having the puck in the attacking zone.

I don't believe Girgs is helping maximize Eichels game. Baring in mind that Girgs is merely a supporting cast member, come on Chain, even you know he has been subpar in that role for Eichel thus far. And while it still is early on, better options should be pursued if it can be.

 

[Djp]

I tend to agree Chain.
The only subject matter not addressed in these conversations has been our pipe line. Not so much the defensive side as I can't see the team knowing what we have there for several years yet. But the offensive side is the conversation I'd like to explore.

Here's my deductions early on.
1. Girgs is not the fit the organization is looking for with Eichel if we want him to be truly dynamic. That being said, who looks to be a potential in the pipe line?
2. If ROR and Reinhart appear a good fit, I can't see ROR going to wing given his FO capabilities, that LW looks open though.
3. The 3rd line. With all of this youth inbound, some is sure to stick. Does that make Girgs or Larsson expendable?

Just some thoughts, but the main one is on Eichel, how is going to put him up on the next level offensively?

I think Girgs-Eichel-player who can score would work. Girgs could play on either side.

Are we defining center by where in the ice the play Or by who takes the draw?

As for Girgs/Larsson expendable ???? We will see in a couple years. Another factor in play will be money and what the team could afford.

If Girgs stays as a winger I see him getting a 2yr bridge deal then the team decides between him and Jane on who to keep after 2018. If Girgs plays 3rd line center then Larsson could be the one that gets moved. I see Larsson getting a 2yr deal this offseason. The 2018 summer will be interesting.

I'm curious if having the trade deadline fall during a west coast trip will affect how players pack... Some of them might not get a chance to stop in Buffalo for a while. I don't recall this happening to the Sabres recently.

Shouldn't be an issue. They finish up in California on Saturday ( after playing WED and FRI) so they return on a red eye landing Sunday morning in buffalo and the deadline is Monday.

 

[threeVo]

I don't even think Stamkos necessarily puts us in the playoffs without fixing the D. Edmonton can tell you how great it is to have all talented forwards and an AHL blueline. If we get Stamkos and walk into next season without acquiring at least one above average LHD, Murray still gets an F, and I'm not sold we can win more than we lose.

Really, the problem should have been fixed before this season.

I don't even think you can compare EDM and our D. Risto and Bogo would be their 2 best defenseman. They are light years behind us in that regard.

 

[dugman]

I think Girgs-Eichel-player who can score would work. Girgs could play on either side.

Are we defining center by where in the ice the play Or by who takes the draw?

As for Girgs/Larsson expendable ???? We will see in a couple years. Another factor in play will be money and what the team could afford.

If Girgs stays as a winger I see him getting a 2yr bridge deal then the team decides between him and Jane on who to keep after 2018. If Girgs plays 3rd line center then Larsson could be the one that gets moved. I see Larsson getting a 2yr deal this offseason. The 2018 summer will be interesting.



Shouldn't be an issue. They finish up in California on Saturday ( after playing WED and FRI) so they return on a red eye landing Sunday morning in buffalo and the deadline is Monday.

Had I noticed that Tuesday's Edmonton game was at home..... Sorry.

 

[joshjull]

I don't believe Girgs is helping maximize Eichels game. Baring in mind that Girgs is merely a supporting cast member, come on Chain, even you know he has been subpar in that role for Eichel thus far. And while it still is early on, better options should be pursued if it can be.

Thats interesting since the exact opposite is the case. Now if you want to argue you'd like to see a more dynamic offensive player with Eichel AND Girgs. Thats a good discussion to have.

 

[Yatzhee]

Thats interesting since the exact opposite is the case. Now if you want to argue you'd like to see a more dynamic offensive player with Eichel AND Girgs. Thats a good discussion to have.

I don5 see how Girgs has done anything special to elevate Eichels potential. There have been some connections, but the reality is, Girgs is not a playmaker and he's certainly no finisher. We can get a half dozen bodies to play the half wall and down low for a possession game. And yes, a more dynamic offensive player would help I would imagine.

As I've said before, I watch the same games you all do. Girgs hasn't impressed me at all this season. The fit just doesn't appear right.

 

[joshjull]

I tend to agree Chain.
The only subject matter not addressed in these conversations has been our pipe line. Not so much the defensive side as I can't see the team knowing what we have there for several years yet. But the offensive side is the conversation I'd like to explore.

Here's my deductions early on.
1. Girgs is not the fit the organization is looking for with Eichel if we want him to be truly dynamic. That being said, who looks to be a potential in the pipe line?
2. If ROR and Reinhart appear a good fit, I can't see ROR going to wing given his FO capabilities, that LW looks open though.
3. The 3rd line. With all of this youth inbound, some is sure to stick. Does that make Girgs or Larsson expendable?

I've seen this posted a few times. Its easily the silliest reason to keep ROR from the wing if thats whats best for the team. Wingers can take face-offs and in some cases do so frequently.

Just some thoughts, but the main one is on Eichel, how is going to put him up on the next level offensively?

Eichel gets help by having wingers that can help cover the defensive aspects of the game. Thus freeing him up to be more aggressive offensively. Thats what Girgs does while also having the speed to keep up with Eichel. Then you could go one of two ways on the other wing. Another winger like Girgs or one who's more offensively oriented.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

I don5 see how Girgs has done anything special to elevate Eichels potential. There have been some connections, but the reality is, Girgs is not a playmaker and he's certainly no finisher. We can get a half dozen bodies to play the half wall and down low for a possession game. And yes, a more dynamic offensive player would help I would imagine.

As I've said before, I watch the same games you all do. Girgs hasn't impressed me at all this season. The fit just doesn't appear right.

These types of players don't grow on trees. Girgensons is physical, defensive, and fast. You just don't get players like that anywhere.

 

[Matt Ress]

Thats interesting since the exact opposite is the case. Now if you want to argue you'd like to see a more dynamic offensive player with Eichel AND Girgs. Thats a good discussion to have.

That's right. The issue is with the other wing.

 

[Yatzhee]

I've seen this posted a few times. Its easily the silliest reason to keep ROR from the wing if thats whats best for the team. Wingers can take face-offs and in some cases do so frequently.



Eichel gets help by having wingers that can help cover the defensive aspects of the game. Thus freeing him up to be more aggressive offensively. Thats what Girgs does while also having the speed to keep up with Eichel. Then you could go one of two ways on the other wing. Another winger like Girgs or one who's more offensively oriented.

Putting ROR on the wing is not what's best for the team though. Why willingly decrease your face off win percentage. These silly statements that get made about wingers not being able to take face offs are just that, silly. Common sense dictates you'd want ROR taking them when he's on the ice.

As for Eichel, Girgs while many love him, has not in point of fact covered Eichel defensively. I'll use yesterday's game as a prime example. Go back and watch that game, Eichel was 1st back checker in play in an overwhelming number. You'll have to show me more than the "Girgs is a defensive safety net" to convince me he's a good fit for Eichel. And mind you, I'm not saying a player of Girgs skill sets couldn't fit, I'm out right saying Girgs himself isn't it. Sorry, but the eyes don't lie when watching these games.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Putting ROR on the wing is not what's best for the team though. Why willingly decrease your face off win percentage. These silly statements that get made about wingers not being able to take face offs are just that, silly. Common sense dictates you'd want ROR taking them when he's on the ice.

As for Eichel, Girgs while many love him, has not in point of fact covered Eichel defensively. I'll use yesterday's game as a prime example. Go back and watch that game, Eichel was 1st back checker in play in an overwhelming number. You'll have to show me more than the "Girgs is a defensive safety net" to convince me he's a good fit for Eichel. And mind you, I'm not saying a player of Girgs skill sets couldn't fit, I'm out right saying Girgs himself isn't it. Sorry, but the eyes don't lie when watching these games.

This is confusing. ROR can play wing and take FOs at the same time, lots of wingers do that. They take the FO and then shift over to W on the fly, so how is that going to hurt the team's FO %?? How is he not going to take a FO when he's on the ice, just because he's going to play wing after the FO??

As for Girgs, he's often down low forechecking in the OZ when the puck comes back out, while Eichel is positioned higher. Whether Girgs is first back into the DZ or not, he's good in the DZ and is better at getting the puck back up ice. Not all good board workers are good in the DZ, but Girgs combines a few skills that are a very good fit for Eichel, and that's not common.