The 2024-2025 Roster Thread

[GettingYourMoms]

Thompson-40
Quinn-30
Peterka-35
Benson-10
Tuch-25
Cozens-27
Zucker 12
Mcleod 10
Kulich 14

Feels like projecting but after their awful seasons last year you have to expect higher goal totals from a lot of these guys.

if Kulich gets on 3rd line and gets at least pp2 time he´s gonna score 25-30 goals. And Peterka is going to be best Sabres player, he is amazing.

 

[Jacob582]

I can't hear the questions again but I think Ruff said that Dahlin started skating.

 

[Willgamesh]

I can't hear the questions again but I think Ruff said that Dahlin started skating.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1837174693675106315

 

[TehDoak]

The issue is space beyond 24/25. The Sabres have real cap trouble given RFAs and UFAs in 25 and 26. If they were to bring in someone at at $5m+ beyond this year.what I mean is what happened with edmonton where someone OS at 2nd round rate on Quinn or peterka

That has been thoroughly debunked. With a moderate increase to the cap every year (lets say 3%), any issues are essentially washed away. You can give 7M deals long term to Byram, Quinn, and Peterka AND a 3M bridge to Levi, that puts you at ~89M cap with 17 players signed.

Move on from Krebs, puts you at 87.5 with the only trouble area is RHD for the 2nd pair, which is a problem we already have.

The real key is...don't try to lock down every player who smells success at an NHL level to a 7+ year deal and you have plenty of cash and flexibility.

Unless Quinn/Peterka put out real top line production, bridge them and be ready to move on if one of our younger cheaper wingers is ready.

Levi is a 10.2 RFA with no rights....bridge him to a 2 year deal at 1.5M. Byram isn't going to get elite PP time, so he's not going to get the numbers to demand a big deal in arb. Sign him to a smaller deal.

Projecting every player out needs a long term big ticket is silly. You already have 2 d-men signed to giant deals...its ok to walk Byram to UFA.

The only way we run into cap space problems is if Kevyn creates them by trying to lock down every player to long term deals if they sniff RFA.

 

[Zman5778]

The only way we run into cap space problems is if Kevyn creates them by trying to lock down every player to long term deals if they sniff RFA.

I'd argue that the easiest way to run into cap issues is if we take a big swing on a UFA and miss.

 

[Irie]

That has been thoroughly debunked. With a moderate increase to the cap every year (lets say 3%), any issues are essentially washed away. You can give 7M deals long term to Byram, Quinn, and Peterka AND a 3M bridge to Levi, that puts you at ~89M cap with 17 players signed.

So... if you add McLeod's contract to your above scenario, they would then be at or slightly over the cap with only 5 D signed, zero money to re-sign Johnson or greenway, shit for depth, and still needing to sign 5 guys to fill out the roster... and no cap to do any of it.

Sounds like those doing the debunking may be mathematically challenged.

 

[BFLO]

I'd argue that the easiest way to run into cap issues is if we take a big swing on a UFA and miss.

Is this because you think all big ticket UFAs are bad? Or because you think Adams would miss on the UFA he signed?

 

[TehDoak]

So... if you add McLeod's contract to your above scenario, they would then be at or slightly over the cap with only 5 D signed, zero money to re-sign Johnson or greenway, shit for depth, and still needing to sign 5 guys to fill out the roster... and no cap to do any of it.

Sounds like those doing the debunking may be mathematically challenged.

I didn't include him in the post, but that number includes Mcleod at 4M a year long term.

The cap will likely be 92M give or take a 1M. And that is giving everyone a long term deal...and its still doable. The only issue is you need a 2nd pair RHD...which you already need.

And you don't need to bring back Greenway.

There is no cap crunch with what we have currently unless Kevyn makes one by giving out 7-8 deals to every player and the AAV that comes with.

Edit:

The roster with some bridge contracts:

https://puckgm.puckpedia.com/rosters/99143

I'd argue that the easiest way to run into cap issues is if we take a big swing on a UFA and miss.

This is true. Like any long term deal...there has to be caution. We can't have another Skinner deal.

The issue is, we can add a long term contract with no issues whatsoever. Adams claiming we don't have the long term room is patently false.

If you include sending out one of the pending RFAs (Peterka or Quinn) as part of the cost of acquisition...then we REALLY have no problems.

 

[Zman5778]

Is this because you think all big ticket UFAs are bad? Or because you think Adams would miss on the UFA he signed?

Somewhere in the middle. I do worry that Adams would miss. But at the same time, I believe that spending big on a UFA is a pretty risky move in general. So many UFA contracts just aren't worth it.

 

[BFLO]

Somewhere in the middle. I do worry that Adams would miss. But at the same time, I believe that spending big on a UFA is a pretty risky move in general. So many UFA contracts just aren't worth it.

Big UFAs are risky. But good GMs are good at managing risk, so they end up signing the good UFAs. If you don't trust your GM to sign a good one... why is he your GM at all?

Not directed at you in particular. But I don't understand how posters can hold both of these beliefs at the same time:

Belief 1: Adams is a good GM
Belief 2: I don't want Adams to sign UFAs because it's too risky.

If you don't think Adams is capable of managing that risk, then you can't really think he's a good GM.

 

[WhereAreTheCookies]

Somewhere in the middle. I do worry that Adams would miss. But at the same time, I believe that spending big on a UFA is a pretty risky move in general. So many UFA contracts just aren't worth it.

Historically speaking I think the top end of the UFA pool usually results in some heartburn long term more often than not. The middle ground is usually where you find the best results in UFA.

2022 for example. The top end of the UFA pool at the time were guys like Kadri, Copp, Klingberg, Kuemper, Campbell, Giroux, Palat, and Trochek. How many of those players still look as good now as they did the day they hit UFA?

Conversely, the middle tier guys like Marchment, Niederreiter, Mikheyev, Vatrano, Chiarot etc. seemed to have a higher success rate in terms of looking like fair deals.

 

[SundherDome]

Big UFAs are risky. But good GMs are good at managing risk, so they end up signing the good UFAs. If you don't trust your GM to sign a good one... why is he your GM at all?

Not directed at you in particular. But I don't understand how posters can hold both of these beliefs at the same time:

Belief 1: Adams is a good GM
Belief 2: I don't want Adams to sign UFAs because it's too risky.

If you don't think Adams is capable of managing that risk, then you can't really think he's a good GM.

I am of this belief put the beliefs are parallel. I think Adams is a good GM and I wouldn't want him or any Sabres GM to swing big in Free Agency. The main belief is, until we start winning, we are not a desired destination which results in a potentially worse deal that what we would think.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1837174693675106315

I like the approach. I would have liked to get Miedema in tomorrow to get a small taste before sending him back but won't lose sleep over it. Very interested to see how they handle the roster which the Euro trip.

 

[Jimmybarndoor2]

If they are competitive with playoffs, I expect to add at the deadline.

Otherwise only add before that due to dire need or great value in an area of need

Otherwise ship sails with the roster in place. And Lindy at the helm

 

[Irie]

I didn't include him in the post, but that number includes Mcleod at 4M a year long term.

The cap will likely be 92M give or take a 1M. And that is giving everyone a long term deal...and its still doable. The only issue is you need a 2nd pair RHD...which you already need.

And you don't need to bring back Greenway.

There is no cap crunch with what we have currently unless Kevyn makes one by giving out 7-8 deals to every player and the AAV that comes with.

Edit:

The roster with some bridge contracts:

https://puckgm.puckpedia.com/rosters/99143

I don't think anyone has ever pushed the narrative that the Sabres could not afford to sign their own players, which seems to be what you are implying when you say it's "been debunked". Most of the time the discussions came up when posters are pushing the idea to bring in large, non-expiring contracts (like Laine at 8.7M), and then claiming the team will have the cap in spades to make those types of moves.

With your RFA numbers from the previous post, you are looking at a bunch of sub 1 million dollar depth players, while losing the quality depth that the team has. That is a step in the wrong direction. Your last post's roster idea makes a lot of bridge assumptions that may or may not be realistic come next spring, and some of those bridges may be very ill-advised and end up costing the team a lot more as they expire in the near future. And let's be realistic, making the playoffs with a bunch of rookies or UFA bargain bin acquisitions is probably not likely.

With Mitts and Skinner out of the equation, things did get a more flexible, but any new vet additions are still going to make the cap next summer a tricky issue, and if they expect to make the playoffs, which we all want and assume they will be pushing to do, filling out the roster with rookies is not a model for success, regardless of how much potential said rookies have. This team's window should be opening, and now is not the time to dump quality depth.

 

[old kummelweck]

Levi is talking a lot of past tense when talking about Rochester. Careful kid.

 

[oldgoalie]

Levi is talking a lot of past tense when talking about Rochester. Careful kid.

This year with the goalies is going to be interesting for sure.

 

[Djp]

That has been thoroughly debunked. With a moderate increase to the cap every year (lets say 3%), any issues are essentially washed away. You can give 7M deals long term to Byram, Quinn, and Peterka AND a 3M bridge to Levi, that puts you at ~89M cap with 17 players signed.

Move on from Krebs, puts you at 87.5 with the only trouble area is RHD for the 2nd pair, which is a problem we already have.

The real key is...don't try to lock down every player who smells success at an NHL level to a 7+ year deal and you have plenty of cash and flexibility.

Unless Quinn/Peterka put out real top line production, bridge them and be ready to move on if one of our younger cheaper wingers is ready.

Levi is a 10.2 RFA with no rights....bridge him to a 2 year deal at 1.5M. Byram isn't going to get elite PP time, so he's not going to get the numbers to demand a big deal in arb. Sign him to a smaller deal.

Projecting every player out needs a long term big ticket is silly. You already have 2 d-men signed to giant deals...its ok to walk Byram to UFA.

The only way we run into cap space problems is if Kevyn creates them by trying to lock down every player to long term deals if they sniff RFA.

How I see it...

In 2025

RFAs are Quinn, peterka, mcleod, byrum, levi
UFA Greeneay, NAK, Zucker

Assume 92M cap in 25/26. Sabres have about 30M in space. Targetting a 13f/7d/2g roster

Keep Greenway or a similar vet you sign for 3M for 3 yrs

NAK and Zucker replaced by ELCs=1M over the next 2 yrs

McLeod. Quinn, peterka signed would be 13F.

For D/G
Levi signed for 1.75 for 2 yrs replacing Reimer
Bryson/ vet signed for 1M as 7D for next 2 yrs
RyJo replaces Joker at 1.5M for 2 yrs in a top 6D


25/26 buffalo has about 21.5M in space for Peterka, Quinn, McLeod, and Byrum

If you sign Byrum for 6M per for 6 yrs
Quinn and Peterka for 2yr bridge at 5M
McLeod signs for 3.5M for say 4 yrs.

They are left with about $2M in space

The next summer in 26/27..
Clifton leaves and repkace by ELC RD at 1M
Tuch resigned for 6M for 4 yrs
Benson resigns for 5M ( same as quinn and jpp)
Krebs is replaced with a 1M elc/vet
Malenstyn is resigned for 2M
Lafferty is replaced by ELC/vet at 1M

The net effect is -2.33+1.25+4.1-.0.45+0.65-1=-3.78+5=1.25M

The cap increase covers mainly the higher cap penalty for skinner buy out.

If the cap is 95M buffalo will have about $1M in space

things will be very tight in 25/26 and 26/27 ,unless s big trade is made where buffalo moves out more as li ary than what comes in. Maybe you trade Peterka or benson for ELCs/ picks/ futures or trade Byrum or Power for a RD making less of about 4-5M

If you sign JPP/Quinn to something higher snf longer you will be handcuffing the team team later like benson being exposed to a $4M OS that buffalo cant match

 

[Djp]

I don't think anyone has ever pushed the narrative that the Sabres could not afford to sign their own players, which seems to be what you are implying when you say it's "been debunked". Most of the time the discussions came up when posters are pushing the idea to bring in large, non-expiring contracts (like Laine at 8.7M), and then claiming the team will have the cap in spades to make those types of moves.

With your RFA numbers from the previous post, you are looking at a bunch of sub 1 million dollar depth players, while losing the quality depth that the team has. That is a step in the wrong direction. Your last post's roster idea makes a lot of bridge assumptions that may or may not be realistic come next spring, and some of those bridges may be very ill-advised and end up costing the team a lot more as they expire in the near future. And let's be realistic, making the playoffs with a bunch of rookies or UFA bargain bin acquisitions is probably not likely.

With Mitts and Skinner out of the equation, things did get a more flexible, but any new vet additions are still going to make the cap next summer a tricky issue, and if they expect to make the playoffs, which we all want and assume they will be pushing to do, filling out the roster with rookies is not a model for success, regardless of how much potential said rookies have. This team's window should be opening, and now is not the time to dump quality depth.

From a cap structure if anyone wants to acquire an established F for multiple yea contract, quinn, peterka, byrum/ power/ Sam gets sent back in the deal in order to control csp space.

 

[Dingo44]

 

[Irie]

Not directed at you in particular. But I don't understand how posters can hold both of these beliefs at the same time:

Belief 1: Adams is a good GM likely a better GM than whomever Pegula will hand pick if Adams is fired
Belief 2: I don't want Adams to sign UFAs because it's too risky.

If you don't think Adams is capable of managing that risk, then you can't really think he's a good GM.

FIFY

Belief 1 and 2 are both realities in my world.

80% of the GMs in the league make poor decisions when it comes to UFA signings. It isn't that 80% of GMs are bad GMs, but more likely most GMs are just sorta average, and it takes a pretty exceptional GM to regularly play the UFA market and consistently come out ahead. Adams is not an exceptional GM.

 

[DapperCam]

Levi is talking a lot of past tense when talking about Rochester. Careful kid.

If he shows out in camp and preseason, it wouldn't be the end of the world for him to play 41 games and UPL to play 41 games. If the setup would be a traditional starter/backup it would be pointless though. He needs to play.

 

[jcbeze]

Levi is talking a lot of past tense when talking about Rochester. Careful kid.

He's always doing that....kid sounds entitled to me and I don't like it one bit

 

[HOOats]

He's always doing that....kid sounds entitled to me and I don't like it one bit

This is facetious right

 

[jcbeze]

This is facetious right

No, he's referred to Rochester stints as past tense things previously.