Roster thread: Get To Work (2022-2023 Season)

[Sabresfansince1980]

Can we, just for a second, talk about this idea, that has been started by the front office, about players needing to be in the same age range.

That's absolutely not a thing.

If you want to address about aging curves and paying for players WHEN they are MOST productive, that's fine. But the idea that we can ONLY add players that are around the other age of the 'core' players is silly.

You don't want to give a 29 year old UFA forward a 7 year deal? That's fine, that's typically a good approach.

You don't want to trade for a 31 year old productive player with 1 year left on their deal who solves many needs for the team because they don't 'fit in the age range'? That's stupid.

This is a professional hockey team whose goals are wins. Get players who help the team win, regardless of age. Stop inventing handcuffs why we can't improve.

The "age range" thing is really just the easy way to say that we want to avoid a player that requires a long-term contract that will either not be worth his on-ice value in a few years, or be a cap problem when younger players deserve a new contract, or both.

 

[Djp]

An NIL deal would be an NHL salary cap violation.

Signing a player to a standard ELC causes the player to lose the remainder of their NCAA eligbility.


My thought: hard pass.

Vancouver is a mess in general and they do not have any guys that they want to move that I would want the Sabres to add.

I do not expect them to move EPete or Demko. So, I am not looking to Vancouver to address any issues the Sabres roster have today.

what I mentioned to Matt was the idea of rules changes where they sign deferred contracts. Given players are getting money, I don’t see an issue here.

Couple forwards I think we could pluck and fit into our system pretty well.

1) Eric Robinson, CBJ: Speedy winger with good two way chops. IMO could fill several roles in the bottom 6. Late round pick could potentially bring him in

2) Nick Bjugstad, ARI: Vet on a cheap deal, comfortable with moving team to team. Would solely be to support center depth in case of injury, and we can evaluate at the end of the season to extend for cheap if needed.

3) Ivan Barbashev, STL: UFA at the end of the year, but a really strong middle six C. Maybe I'm channeling my inner Jame with how he wanted him at the draft, but he would be a VERY good add for a playoff push, with flexibility to sign at the end of the year. I'd assume he would cost quite a bit, maybe a second + prospect. But If we could bring him in and then get him on a 3-4 year deal at season end? There is a middle six winger locked down for the future.

Flame away

No interest in any of thrm. Thr last two will likely carry high price tags.

Robinson— are you wanting him over ZG next year? I wouldn’t.

 

[Jim Bob]

what I mentioned to Matt was the idea of rules changes where they sign deferred contracts. Given players are getting money, I don’t see an issue here.

Signing players to a standard ELC and allowing them to return to college would require changes to NCAA rules.

That is not something within the control of the NHL or NHLPA or the Sabres specifically.

Knowing the NCAA, I doubt they go there. But, you never know.

 

[Djp]

Can we, just for a second, talk about this idea, that has been started by the front office, about players needing to be in the same age range.

That's absolutely not a thing.

If you want to address about aging curves and paying for players WHEN they are MOST productive, that's fine. But the idea that we can ONLY add players that are around the other age of the 'core' players is silly.

You don't want to give a 29 year old UFA forward a 7 year deal? That's fine, that's typically a good approach.

You don't want to trade for a 31 year old productive player with 1 year left on their deal who solves many needs for the team because they don't 'fit in the age range'? That's stupid.

This is a professional hockey team whose goals are wins. Get players who help the team win, regardless of age. Stop inventing handcuffs why we can't improve.

i don’t have a problem going for rentals…but when we are actually a likely playoff team. This team isn’t there yet.

if the team has a broad young core for a 5+ period of time the team can go and do rentals snd it won’t be a big of a roster hurt opin the top end of the roster is set.

Dahlin, Power, and Samuelsson appears set
Tage, Cozens, Tuch, and a few of the young players

the rest of the roster is filled out after the young players develop

then you can trade some of the extras for picks and trade some picks in the rental market.

 

[Jacob582]

There's a link to the flyers brawl. I was at that game with my brother at 17 and never lost my mind more at a sporting event.

I "love" how the ref pulled Trefilov off of Snow to allow Snow to then pummel Trefilov.

 

[truthbluth]

Couple forwards I think we could pluck and fit into our system pretty well.

1) Eric Robinson, CBJ: Speedy winger with good two way chops. IMO could fill several roles in the bottom 6. Late round pick could potentially bring him in

2) Nick Bjugstad, ARI: Vet on a cheap deal, comfortable with moving team to team. Would solely be to support center depth in case of injury, and we can evaluate at the end of the season to extend for cheap if needed.

3) Ivan Barbashev, STL: UFA at the end of the year, but a really strong middle six C. Maybe I'm channeling my inner Jame with how he wanted him at the draft, but he would be a VERY good add for a playoff push, with flexibility to sign at the end of the year. I'd assume he would cost quite a bit, maybe a second + prospect. But If we could bring him in and then get him on a 3-4 year deal at season end? There is a middle six winger locked down for the future.

Flame away

Geez, I really don’t know Robinson. It I’ve always liked Bjugstad. He’s not great but I think he’s be an upgrade over Asplund. And Barbashev would be excellent. I think he’s push a rookie out of the lineup, but that’s ok. Maybe Jost? Don’t really have room for a middle six forward unless they are so clearly an upgrade that having to sit or send down Peterka or Quinn is worth it (Meier). Not sure how you break up the Mitts line while they are playing their best hockey of their respective careers.

 

[Nikolajs Sillers]

Rudolfs could be good pick up. Only can't stay healthy and slightly soft.

 

[WhereAreTheCookies]

I "love" how the ref pulled Trefilov off of Snow to allow Snow to then pummel Trefilov.

Watching that whole thing unfold again, I forgot how much of a rat Barnaby was. I mean I knew he was a rat, but wow my homer glasses back then really blinded me to just how much of one he really was.

I can totally understand why so many fanbases hated him.

 

[Djp]

I e"love" how the ref pulled Trefilov off of Snow to allow Snow to then pummel Trefilov.

 

[Chainshot]

Watching that whole thing unfold again, I forgot how much of a rat Barnaby was. I mean I knew he was a rat, but wow my homer glasses back then really blinded me to just how much of one he really was.

I can totally understand why so many fanbases hated him.

There is an NHL head coach (Brindy), a former NHL HC who is now Associate Coach of an NHL team (Boughner), an NHL assistant coach (Plante) and a former NHL GM on the ice for all of that.


Edit - Forgot that Zhitnik is the president of Sokil Kyiv.

 

[Dingo44]

The most iconic thing is Snow poking Barnaby on the ground and then him rising like Lazarus and pounding the crap out of Garth...

 

[Fearnot]

Tage out with upper body, good timing with the Allstar coming up soon. Who's filling in for him?

 

[Zman5778]

Tage out with upper body, good timing with the Allstar coming up soon. Who's filling in for him?

In his specific center position if he misses Thursday? I imagine if Cozens plays, he goes between Skinner and Tuch. If not, I'd think Krebs gets that spot or Mitts does.

 

[CrazyWayne]

Can we, just for a second, talk about this idea, that has been started by the front office, about players needing to be in the same age range.

That's absolutely not a thing.

If you want to address about aging curves and paying for players WHEN they are MOST productive, that's fine. But the idea that we can ONLY add players that are around the other age of the 'core' players is silly.

You don't want to give a 29 year old UFA forward a 7 year deal? That's fine, that's typically a good approach.

You don't want to trade for a 31 year old productive player with 1 year left on their deal who solves many needs for the team because they don't 'fit in the age range'? That's stupid.

This is a professional hockey team whose goals are wins. Get players who help the team win, regardless of age. Stop inventing handcuffs why we can't improve.

I think how you described it is exactly what is meant by fitting the age range

Age range should refer to the building blocks/the core who you plan to give long term to

31 year old with one year left is perfect

A 4 or 5 year deal for a 30 year old maybe not so much

The hand cuff of age range is for multi/long term deals not one or 2 year deals

I hope the sabres aren't as cut and dry as nope he is 28 years and 201 days old he is 2 days to old to sign or trade for

 

[Irie]

You don't want to trade for a 31 year old productive player with 1 year left on their deal who solves many needs for the team because they don't 'fit in the age range'? That's stupid.

It's not stupid.

Unless you believe your contending window is the next two years, it is smart GMing.

Giving up a bunch of assets for a good player that is that age means you likely only have them for the two years. This team should not be in the habit of signing 32 year old players to multi-year deals.

And a young team like Buffalo should not be trading loads of futures for immediate, short-term help until they have reached the contender stage. (They are not at that point yet, and if you try to cheat a rebuild to get to that point with quick fixes, you drastically reduce the length of your contention window).

 

[old kummelweck]

Ah... the good ole days.

 

[Dingo44]

Someone give Cozey a back scratch

 

[TehDoak]

I think how you described it is exactly what is meant by fitting the age range

Age range should refer to the building blocks/the core who you plan to give long term to

31 year old with one year left is perfect

A 4 or 5 year deal for a 30 year old maybe not so much

The hand cuff of age range is for multi/long term deals not one or 2 year deals

I hope the sabres aren't as cut and dry as nope he is 28 years and 201 days old he is 2 days to old to sign or trade for

It's not stupid.

Unless you believe your contending window is the next two years, it is smart GMing.

Giving up a bunch of assets for a good player that is that age means you likely only have them for the two years. This team should not be in the habit of signing 32 year old players to multi-year deals.

And a young team like Buffalo should not be trading loads of futures for immediate, short-term help until they have reached the contender stage. (They are not at that point yet, and if you try to cheat a rebuild to get to that point with quick fixes, you drastically reduce the length of your contention window).

We're speaking in purely hypotheticals here obviously. The idea you can't use assets to improve in the short term until your 'contention window' opens is stupid. It isn't good GMing, it's neglecting your team. It's not cheating the rebuild if you see an obvious flaw on the team and try to fix it, even if its short term. It's why our PK is garbage and our goaltending is struggling to be average and we're the worst in the league at faceoffs.

No one is suggesting we go all in on a rental. But neglecting the current team while sitting on a pile of picks/prospects waiting for some mythical window to open is stupid. The team has obvious, fixable issues given our cap space and assets.

Ignoring them and saying "well our window isn't open" is a damn good way to ensure it never does.

 

[Beerz]

Wednesday will be the last game we wear the reverse retro pajamas ....

Thank God.

 

[Dirty Dog]

We're speaking in purely hypotheticals here obviously. The idea you can't use assets to improve in the short term until your 'contention window' opens is stupid. It isn't good GMing, it's neglecting your team. It's not cheating the rebuild if you see an obvious flaw on the team and try to fix it, even if its short term. It's why our PK is garbage and our goaltending is struggling to be average and we're the worst in the league at faceoffs.

No one is suggesting we go all in on a rental. But neglecting the current team while sitting on a pile of picks/prospects waiting for some mythical window to open is stupid. The team has obvious, fixable issues given our cap space and assets.

Ignoring them and saying "well our window isn't open" is a damn good way to ensure it never does.

I don’t think anyone is advocating for what you’re railing against, and it isn’t what the team is doing.

Being patient and seeing what we have is fine. For example, those “obvious fixable issues” the team has? 18 months ago you kept talking about how Thompson was a hole. If they did it your way, we’d have lost a top line center for no reason. Mitts is also showing his use this season. Another player you wanted to trade away while their value was low.

There’s nothing obvious about anything when you’re the youngest team in the league.

 

[Irie]

We're speaking in purely hypotheticals here obviously. The idea you can't use assets to improve in the short term until your 'contention window' opens is stupid. It isn't good GMing, it's neglecting your team. It's not cheating the rebuild if you see an obvious flaw on the team and try to fix it, even if its short term. It's why our PK is garbage and our goaltending is struggling to be average and we're the worst in the league at faceoffs.

No one is suggesting we go all in on a rental. But neglecting the current team while sitting on a pile of picks/prospects waiting for some mythical window to open is stupid. The team has obvious, fixable issues given our cap space and assets.

Ignoring them and saying "well our window isn't open" is a damn good way to ensure it never does.

Trading away loads of futures for instant fixes is why this team is now in it's third rebuild (4th if you count retool attempts) without a playoff appearance.

A patient GM finally comes in and is building the team the right way and stockpiling ELC talent on the farm to sustain a long contending window and you want to see it blown up for instant results. Did the past 10+ years teach you nothing?

Adams isn't neglecting anything. He and Granato stated in the off-season this was a development and evaluation season. They are giving the young players every opportunity to make the strides to be the solutions.

If they fail, moves will be made to address team needs. This is not some new-age fancy GM philosophy. It is tried and true and the blueprints many championship teams were built on.

Just because you don't see the plan doesn't mean it isn't clear as day to others.

 

[Irie]

Wednesday will be the last game we wear the reverse retro pajamas ....

Thank God.

Rest in Peace Cooperalls... For ever more, please.

 

[Jim Bob]

Rest in Peace Cooperalls... For ever more, please.

I wonder if we see any NHL teams go this route?

 

[Matt Ress]

The most iconic thing is Snow poking Barnaby on the ground and then him rising like Lazarus and pounding the crap out of Garth...

And it all started with May diving over Barnaby. At one point RJ says, "oh the refs have their hands full now."

 

[MarkusKetterer]

An NIL deal would be an NHL salary cap violation.

Signing a player to a standard ELC causes the player to lose the remainder of their NCAA eligbility.


My thought: hard pass.

Vancouver is a mess in general and they do not have any guys that they want to move that I would want the Sabres to add.

I do not expect them to move EPete or Demko. So, I am not looking to Vancouver to address any issues the Sabres roster have today.

I really wish the Canucks wanted to move Kuzmenko. Unfortunately they wanna keep him