The Roster Thread, Summer 2024

[thewookie1]

I think when you have a choice to re-sign RFAs at fair deals or even slightly above, at positions of need, and choose not to even when you have the cap space for now and the foreseeable future, that is a strong indicator of operating on the cheap. Whether someone characterizes it as an internal budget or not doesn't matter, when the bottom line is that the organization chooses to spend less at the expense of the on-ice product.

So because they didn't want to pay Mitts 7mil; the only possible reason is that they want to be cheap?

There couldn't be any other possible reason

1. Maybe they wanted Byram more
2. Maybe they didn't want their 3C making 7 mil or shift Cozens to the wing making him a 7mil winger
3. Maybe they wanted to go a different direction and deemed Mitts too slow
4. Maybe they just didn't like the cut of his jib

Right or wrong, there are plenty of reasons they could of had completely independent of "Pegula scared of spending"

Reinhart was bridged by Botts first and then they went into COVID, if there was a perfect storm of cash flow shortages and a lack of desire to sign anyone to a significant contract there it was.

Ullmark wanted to reset his life after his father died; no money would of changed that.

 

[Dingo44]

You should know who else. You've been around long enough.

I honestly don't, and I've been closely following the team for over four decades, and for the entirety of the Pegula era. I can't think of one RFA in the Pegula era that we let go because the didn't want to "re-sign RFAs at fair deals or even slightly above, at positions of need, and choose not to even when you have the cap space for now and the foreseeable future". And I also don't believe that was the case with Mitts. I wasn't happy Mitts was moved, but it's apparent Adams believes that Tage and Cozens are the top two centers and that Mitts didn't fit as the traditional "third line" center. It wasn't because they didn't want to pay Mitts because of any budget other than where that player fit in the long term core.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

When you have a monopoly on the sport in the region, then you don't need loyalty.

The Buffalo News and Sabres are both monopolies...you don't need to be good at business to stay afloat with a monopoly.

Are people just now discovering professional sports is a multi-billion dollar corporate business? For most people this happens when you’re a preteen. Is this why you throw a pegula tantrum in every thread, you just discovered the corporate states of America? Jeez wait until you find out how many people own North American mass media, make sure you’re sitting down for that google search. Or even better where the money comes from for political campaigns. I tell you it’s wild.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Are people just now discovering professional sports is a multi-billion dollar corporate business? For most people this happens when you’re a preteen. Is this why you throw a pegula tantrum in every thread, you just discovered the corporate states of America? Jeez wait until you find out how many people own North American mass media, make sure you’re sitting down for that google search. Or even better where the money comes from for political campaigns. I tell you it’s wild.

Yawn. Calm down kiddo

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

So because they didn't want to pay Mitts 7mil; the only possible reason is that they want to be cheap?

There couldn't be any other possible reason

1. Maybe they wanted Byram more
2. Maybe they didn't want their 3C making 7 mil or shift Cozens to the wing making him a 7mil winger
3. Maybe they wanted to go a different direction and deemed Mitts too slow
4. Maybe they just didn't like the cut of his jib

Right or wrong, there are plenty of reasons they could of had completely independent of "Pegula scared of spending"

Reinhart was bridged by Botts first and then they went into COVID, if there was a perfect storm of cash flow shortages and a lack of desire to sign anyone to a significant contract there it was.

Ullmark wanted to reset his life after his father died; no money would of changed that.

People can come up with all kinds of extraneous factors, but each of those guys would've stayed if the organization was willing to spend, and it wouldn't have required an unfair contract. It's one thing to complain about not trading for or signing guys with big contracts - GMs don't want to trade with (insert Sabres GM) or UFAs don't want to play in Buffalo, etc. It's another thing when you draft guys, hit on those picks, spend the time to develop them, and then find ways and reasons to not keep them on relatively fair contracts...all the while staying well below the cap ceiling. Extraneous factors don't eliminate the "cheap factor" involved in those mishandled or shortsighted decisions.

 

[old kummelweck]

Let's not forget Chris Tanev, who has been the apple of many posters' eyes:

2013/14: 64 GP
14/15: 70 GP
15/16: 69 GP (nice)
16/17: 53 GP
17/18: 42 GP
18/19: 55 GP
19/20: 69 GP (nice x2....1 game short of a full season)
20/21: 56 GP (hey look, a full season)
21/22: 82 GP (an actual full season!!!!)
22/23: 65 GP
23/24: 75 GP


Defensemen who play the style that these guys play get injured. It's a fact. Larsson was an injury-prone bust until he wasn't. Tanev was injury-prone and spent.....until he wasn't.

Cobra's contract is perfectly fine, it's a non-issue......and becoming less of an issue the more the cap goes up.

It's probably more of an issue with the depth than Samuelsson getting injured TBH. Similar to Quinn in a way. They needed both of them and when they are out, it hurts.

 

[Zman5778]

I think when you have a choice to re-sign RFAs at fair deals or even slightly above, at positions of need, and choose not to even when you have the cap space for now and the foreseeable future, that is a strong indicator of operating on the cheap.

We paid Tage and Cozens and Sammy and Power well before we had to. We should have the long-term room to extend one or two of Peterka, Quinn, Benson, Byram should we choose to.

Yes, I get that we didn't sign Reinhart or Mitts. Reinhart, who knows why. But I think it's become obvious that Mitts just did not fit the team that Adams wants/wanted to build going forward.

There's a LOT to criticize Adams for......not signing RFAs isn't one of them.

 

[Zman5778]

It's probably more of an issue with the depth than Samuelsson getting injured TBH. Similar to Quinn in a way. They needed both of them and when they are out, it hurts.

Bryson played well as a 7 last year. And notice how we brought in Gilbert this year, who is kind of a Sammy-lite player (as in, plays the same general style but not nearly as well). So I think that the brass got the message that we needed a more physical depth player on D.

As far as Quinn goes? Yeah. Adams obviously planned/hoped that one of the kids (Savoie, Kulich, Rosen) or Olofsson would have stepped up in Quinn's absence. Whoops. That didn't go well.

 

[thewookie1]

People can come up with all kinds of extraneous factors, but each of those guys would've stayed if the organization was willing to spend, and it wouldn't have required an unfair contract. It's one thing to complain about not trading for or signing guys with big contracts - GMs don't want to trade with (insert Sabres GM) or UFAs don't want to play in Buffalo, etc. It's another thing when you draft guys, hit on those picks, spend the time to develop them, and then find ways and reasons to not keep them on relatively fair contracts...all the while staying well below the cap ceiling. Extraneous factors don't eliminate the "cheap factor" involved in those mishandled or shortsighted decisions.

But they do.... making decisions based on being cheap are completely different than decisions based on philosophy or style. They may end up in similar places at times but that doesn't automatically correlate.

Is there evidence that the Pegulas aren't wanting to spend a ton, certainly but not wanting to pay Mitts 7mil is no smoking gun like you seem to want it to be.

 

[old kummelweck]

Bryson played well as a 7 last year. And notice how we brought in Gilbert this year, who is kind of a Sammy-lite player (as in, plays the same general style but not nearly as well). So I think that the brass got the message that we needed a more physical depth player on D.

As far as Quinn goes? Yeah. Adams obviously planned/hoped that one of the kids (Savoie, Kulich, Rosen) or Olofsson would have stepped up in Quinn's absence. Whoops. That didn't go well.

They thought Stillman was going to be this and we know how that went. I didn't love the player and trade at the time but I understood why Granato did it.

 

[Matt Ress]

And a key point, and major confirmation of having an internal budget. Read what I said.

And a key point, and major confirmation of having an internal budget. Read what I said.

This is boring to me

 

[DapperCam]

Technically there is until Krebs has signed. But realistically - no there isn't.

Right now we have a balanced group where everyone is projected to play the type of role they should be playing. Trying to shoehorn another 'top 6' guy in there will put everything else out of whack.

Signing a top 6 guy wouldn’t be shoe horning anything. Zucker would drop down a line, and a decision would have to be made about Krebs. He could be waived and I think he would clear. One of the players in our current bottom 6 would become the 13F (probably NAK), and he could rotate in and out. With injuries (which always happen) Krebs would find himself back as 13F soon enough.

 

[Der Jaeger]

I don't get how Johnson isn't seen as NHL ready.

I'm on the fence with trading Samuelsson as I do worry about the style of play leading to injuries. Maybe dumb luck, but another banged up year, he loses value to the team and on the market.

With the way the game is going, I'm not sure that a team truly needs a balanced pair anymore. Nashville got away with Subban, Josi, and Ellis in their top 4 with just Ekhlom as the defensive anchor, and they did just fine. At some point, the pressure the possession places on another team by having that many top defenseman outweighs the need for the typical and traditional balance team got out of pairs. So I'm not worried about Dahlin, Power, and Byram.

I don't really think Samuelsson should be in the top 4 with the game he's being asked to play. I'd much rather see him in a defensive pair with Clifton and just asked to start in the defensive zone and play against top lines. When a defender covers for his partner, his responsibilities are so much greater than just being a partner in a shutdown pair. Lots of 2 on 1s, lots of movement required. Gone are the days when a guy like Hal Gill could just stay in the slot and cover. The stay back defender has to be more like a Pysyk or Tallinder, where they've got some physicality but are much more adept at stopping plays with skating, positioning, and an active stick.

I'd rather see Ryan Johnson in the top 4 as the stay back defender, and then have Samuelsson and Clifton do the heavy defensive lifting. And if I'm truly getting what I'd like, Clifton would move on and Adams would get a player like Fabbro. That's allow Ruff to form a shutdown pair with Samuelsson and Fabbro. Or, if he wanted to shift in the playoffs, balance it between shutdown and movement defender.

And I'm always down for 8 defenders on the roster. My 2006 playoffs scar tissue is real. Bryson and Gilbert are basically spares for a movement and shutdown defender.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

We paid Tage and Cozens and Sammy and Power well before we had to. We should have the long-term room to extend one or two of Peterka, Quinn, Benson, Byram should we choose to.

Yes, I get that we didn't sign Reinhart or Mitts. Reinhart, who knows why. But I think it's become obvious that Mitts just did not fit the team that Adams wants/wanted to build going forward.

There's a LOT to criticize Adams for......not signing RFAs isn't one of them.

There was no good reason to not sign Ullmark either. There's no "fit" argument that justifies going without ONE NHL caliber goalie. It's still silly how to this day Ullmark's 5x5 contract request would easily fit under the cap. Reinhart...who knows why??? Well being cheap certainly is a legit option. The guys KA has signed long-term were at a time when even those contracts kept them well below the cap floor. It's obviously been a pattern of staying well below the cap ceiling regardless of pending contracts that might bump them closer. Quinn/Peterka will be the first instance of having to squeeze RFA contracts up against the cap ceiling in a long time, and that's not for another year.

But they do.... making decisions based on being cheap are completely different than decisions based on philosophy or style. They may end up in similar places at times but that doesn't automatically correlate.

Is there evidence that the Pegulas aren't wanting to spend a ton, certainly but not wanting to pay Mitts 7mil is no smoking gun like you seem to want it to be.

You're saying that because there are other reasons (or possibly excuses) to make decisions that result in a lesser overall cap expenditure, that being cheap can't possibly be part of the equation. I think it clearly is, as part of a "well we're not going to contend for a while so let's just save money for now" thought process, with "we need to develop prospects, can't block them with anyone worth a damn" excuse to offer fans. You think this is just about Mitts? That's equal parts a dumb assessment of players and team needs, as it is being cheap. My previous posts above show this isn't just about him.

And not for nothing, this whole board is littered with posts over the last week about needing a top-six FW and having a disjointed D-corps. But when I say something about what has most recently led to that situation, I catch flak about "needing to get over it". FFS, there are still posters debating about the Eichel and ROR trades. When TT/Cozens struggle more like they did last season, the top-six collectively can't make up for the lost production of a couple guys, and there are more inexperienced mistakes in the D-zone by the youngest D-corps in the league with all of one good defense-first guy out of the group, then Ruff is going to have to get some massive defensive efforts from the rest of the roster, the type that almost none of them have been able to show so far in their careers. A revamped 4th line alone will not cut it. Ruff might be able to get them in the playoffs, but it won't be because the organization has decided to go full throttle via cap dollars. I said the Skinner buy-out won't end with the result many here hoped it would signal. I'm still right.

 

[thewookie1]

There was no good reason to not sign Ullmark either. There's no "fit" argument that justifies going without ONE NHL caliber goalie. It's still silly how to this day Ullmark's 5x5 contract request would easily fit under the cap. Reinhart...who knows why??? Well being cheap certainly is a legit option. The guys KA has signed long-term were at a time when even those contracts kept them well below the cap floor. It's obviously been a pattern of staying well below the cap ceiling regardless of pending contracts that might bump them closer. Quinn/Peterka will be the first instance of having to squeeze RFA contracts up against the cap ceiling in a long time, and that's not for another year.

You're saying that because there are other reasons (or possibly excuses) to make decisions that result in a lesser overall cap expenditure, that being cheap can't possibly be part of the equation. I think it clearly is, as part of a "well we're not going to contend for a while so let's just save money for now" thought process, with "we need to develop prospects, can't block them with anyone worth a damn" excuse to offer fans. You think this is just about Mitts? That's equal parts a dumb assessment of players and team needs, as it is being cheap. My previous posts above show this isn't just about him.

Well seeing as you seemingly ignored my earlier post.

Ullmark was leaving no matter what you wanted. We offered him a similar if not the same contract as Boston and he left to reset his life due to his father’s death. The only way we keep Ullmark is if his father doesn’t die.

Reinhart was case of Botts signing players short term and his new contract popped up during the COVID offseason. They, like at least half the league, trimmed their staffs and giving Reinhart a large contract extension during that probably wouldn’t of been in good taste to be perfectly honest.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Well seeing as you seemingly ignored my earlier post.

Ullmark was leaving no matter what you wanted. We offered him a similar if not the same contract as Boston and he left to reset his life due to his father’s death. The only way we keep Ullmark is if his father doesn’t die.

Reinhart was case of Botts signing players short term and his new contract popped up during the COVID offseason. They, like at least half the league, trimmed their staffs and giving Reinhart a large contract extension during that probably wouldn’t of been in good taste to be perfectly honest.

Ullmark - you don't know that. In fact all the reputable info I read showed Buffalo offered one mil less than he wanted, and then just walked because he didn't want to deal with the organization anymore. He was happy enough to then later take a similar deal from Boston, just to leave Buffalo. If Buffalo gives him what he wanted (which was a fair request) nobody can claim he would leave no matter what.

Reinhart - more extraneous reasons that don't discount that going cheap was part of the equation. Who cares about the rest of the league? They went cheap so we went cheap too?? I think that means Buffalo went cheap, which is what I said to begin with.

 

[MOGlLNY]

We didn’t sign Reinhart because he didn’t want to be here long term after Botterill tried to bridge him twice. Not much else to see here.

 

[TheMistyStranger]

We didn’t sign Reinhart because he didn’t want to be here long term after Botterill tried to bridge him twice. Not much else to see here.

Yeah. He felt like the team didn't buy what he had to offer, as evidenced by the one year contracts

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

I always thought Reino took short contracts to bet on himself. Even with Florida he didn't resign until this monster season.

 

[thewookie1]

Ullmark - you don't know that. In fact all the reputable info I read showed Buffalo offered one mil less than he wanted, and then just walked because he didn't want to deal with the organization anymore. He was happy enough to then later take a similar deal from Boston, just to leave Buffalo. If Buffalo gives him what he wanted (which was a fair request) nobody can claim he would leave no matter what.

Reinhart - more extraneous reasons that don't discount that going cheap was part of the equation. Who cares about the rest of the league? They went cheap so we went cheap too?? I think that means Buffalo went cheap, which is what I said to begin with.

Ullmark literally had an interview article last year mentioning that he left Buffalo due to his father’s death. He wanted a new place to be as a whole. Buffalo offered to match his offer from Boston. And sorry, he wasn’t worth 6.5 to 7 mil a year. Though I doubt it would of made any difference to Linus.

You seem to feel that if Reinhart was offered 7x6mil and he wanted 7x9mil or he’d walk that we should of just caved and gave him what he wanted because “we had space at the time” That’s the short sighted management teams like Toronto ran into in a hurry. Plus it sets a precedent that future RFAs will use.

You are a hammer in need of a nail and the one you found is the team is cheap and you endlessly hammer away at it. Were they cheap when they signed Skinner to an absurd contract? Just because the Sabres don’t throw silly money at UFAs doesn’t make them a cheap team.

 

[StrompTroller]

There was no good reason to not sign Ullmark either. There's no "fit" argument that justifies going without ONE NHL caliber goalie. It's still silly how to this day Ullmark's 5x5 contract request would easily fit under the cap. Reinhart...who knows why??? Well being cheap certainly is a legit option. The guys KA has signed long-term were at a time when even those contracts kept them well below the cap floor. It's obviously been a pattern of staying well below the cap ceiling regardless of pending contracts that might bump them closer. Quinn/Peterka will be the first instance of having to squeeze RFA contracts up against the cap ceiling in a long time, and that's not for another year.

You're saying that because there are other reasons (or possibly excuses) to make decisions that result in a lesser overall cap expenditure, that being cheap can't possibly be part of the equation. I think it clearly is, as part of a "well we're not going to contend for a while so let's just save money for now" thought process, with "we need to develop prospects, can't block them with anyone worth a damn" excuse to offer fans. You think this is just about Mitts? That's equal parts a dumb assessment of players and team needs, as it is being cheap. My previous posts above show this isn't just about him.

And not for nothing, this whole board is littered with posts over the last week about needing a top-six FW and having a disjointed D-corps. But when I say something about what has most recently led to that situation, I catch flak about "needing to get over it". FFS, there are still posters debating about the Eichel and ROR trades. When TT/Cozens struggle more like they did last season, the top-six collectively can't make up for the lost production of a couple guys, and there are more inexperienced mistakes in the D-zone by the youngest D-corps in the league with all of one good defense-first guy out of the group, then Ruff is going to have to get some massive defensive efforts from the rest of the roster, the type that almost none of them have been able to show so far in their careers. A revamped 4th line alone will not cut it. Ruff might be able to get them in the playoffs, but it won't be because the organization has decided to go full throttle via cap dollars. I said the Skinner buy-out won't end with the result many here hoped it would signal. I'm still right.

All of the bolded.

This has been a weird offseason. A revamped bottom 6 is fantastic. Most people even the curmudgeons on here agree.

Some wanted more or better and not spending like a drunken sailor and are told they are wrong.

One page later are clamoring for a top 4rhd or top 6 forward.

If we busted our load on mcleod where are we conjuring this top 6 forward or top 4 dman from lol? The trades we made were dumb. Flat out even if the players are quality. I admit they are. Now we sit here wanting more? People are talking about trading for Brady lol? Thats gonna cost Petera and 4x 1sts at the Adamas rate.

 

[sabremike]

Ullmark literally had an interview article last year mentioning that he left Buffalo due to his father’s death. He wanted a new place to be as a whole. Buffalo offered to match his offer from Boston. And sorry, he wasn’t worth 6.5 to 7 mil a year. Though I doubt it would of made any difference to Linus.

You seem to feel that if Reinhart was offered 7x6mil and he wanted 7x9mil or he’d walk that we should of just caved and gave him what he wanted because “we had space at the time” That’s the short sighted management teams like Toronto ran into in a hurry. Plus it sets a precedent that future RFAs will use.

You are a hammer in need of a nail and the one you found is the team is cheap and you endlessly hammer away at it. Were they cheap when they signed Skinner to an absurd contract? Just because the Sabres don’t throw silly money at UFAs doesn’t make them a cheap team.

Any organization that has ever resorted to the Charles Wang/Coyotes/poverty franchise stunt of trading for retired contracts to reach the cap floor loses all benefit of the doubt.

 

[Aladyyn]

I think I'll live without a top 6 addition on the market where it takes a 2nd to get Malenstyn and Savoie to get McLeod. I like Ehlers but a year of him isn't worth 3 premium pieces like Cheveldayoff is reported to want for him. Marino trade hurts a lot though, would have loved Kevyn to get in on that.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

A lot of people still cry about the 6th rounder swapping but are pleased with turning a #9 overall (high end asset) and #43 overall picks into two bottom 6 forwards who will never be top 6 forwards. Just laughable and insane asset management.

 

[Jacob582]

A lot of people still cry about the 6th rounder swapping but are pleased with turning a #9 overall (high end asset) and #43 overall picks into two bottom 6 forwards who will never be top 6 forwards. Just laughable and insane asset management.

We love our assets.

Still mourning the loss of Savoie? Just wait and see who we lose in the next expansion draft...