Taro T

Realizing that Benson isn't going to be adding even 20 goals this year; yes, in a very 'cut your nose off, to spite your face' sort of way trading him away wouldn't be just treading water. But he'll only be 19 this year and he is a big part of this team's future and is expected to be a key contributor when we're getting to the seasons that Adams expects this team to be true contenders. Personally, would not trade Benson for Ehlers straight up, much less in a package. The others, maybe, but don't see any way Adams does so. And either of those other 2 you mentioned, wouldn't be considered a top 6W; they'd be considered a 1st line W. Though maybe he should be panicking over the possibility of losing his job; have seen no signs yet that he is.

And, rightly or wrongly, Adams has set up a large scale experiment to see whether it is in fact the 200 game threshold that NHL quality players need to reach to "get it" as you say; or whether they need to be at least 23 or 24 to be "getting it," or whether it's a combination of the 2. Because it is really rare for a team to be this dependent on young (early mid-20's and younger) players in key roles. Common sense says the team is still too young. But, as you mentioned, the team ISN'T too inexperienced (at least not in RS action; there are still an awful lot waiting to pop that cherry). Can the experience trump the youthfulness? Adams seems to be betting his job on the answer to that being 'yes.'

Can't see them moving any of the guys currently slotted into the top 6 to bring in a different top 6W. It's suffling the deckchairs. The only rostered players that it would make sense to trade in a deal for a top 6W are Krebs, Greenway, or reluctantly one of the D. Quinn & Benson are expected to be major contributors in the near future if not necessarily now. (And personally, expect Quinn to be a major contributor now.) It doesn't make sense to make a move that is essentially treading water.

Internal growth and better coaching are reasons to expect the team is significantly better than last year. Luukkonnen not being able to sustain top 5 in the league play and the possibilities of injuries being able to derail a potentially good season as there isn't much top end nor bottom end depth at F are the reasons to expect this team to be substantially what it was last year with only modest improvement. A big part of why bringing in another 2W should be so beneficial. It doesn't just allow both Benson and Greenway to be slotted into the bottom 6; it gives at least 1 (likely) legit top 6 F (besides Zucker who might be too long in the tooth) ready to bump up into the top 6 when an inevitable injury strikes there.

Don't believe that giving out 1 year deals in the Covid summer ('20) necessarily meant that Adams didn't want those guys signed long term. Nobody knew how much longer those "2 weeks to flatten the curve" were going to stretch out, nor how cash would start flowing again. This team's billionaire owners had their money tied up primarily in rather non-liquid assets: NG bearing land and professional sports teams, both of which were not generating cash like they had prior to that March as the economy was completely locked down. Nobody traveling -> low energy prices. Nobody allowed to attend sporting events (which were still shut down at that time as well) -> no in person sales from attending patrons (nor even TV networks wanting to pay their owed monies because there were no games for them to telecast (the leagues don't hold up their end of the bargain, the networks aren't going to want to hold up their end)). So, the owners had a very good reason to not want to commit to any LT contracts at the time. They might be committing to cash outlays that they would not necessarily be able to cover. While personally agree that Adams would've rather switched gears right when he came into the GM's office, he did not do so; he tried to continue with the plan that Botterill had been implementing. Had Covid not hit and the owners had their liquid cash flow severely disrupted, there is a very good chance that Reinhart and Ullmark would've been offered multiyear deals eating some of their UFA years rather than 1 year deals that walked them to within 1 year (or 0 years in Linus' case) of UFA status. And IF those 2 (and maybe some others like Montour) all have LT deals, then Eichel might not've offered to be trade bait should there be an extended rebuild. We'll never know the answer to how it would've played out, because life as we knew it changed remarkably that spring. IF Eichel would've still asked out, we still would've been heading down this path, but not sure of just how full the extent would've been (especially had Reinhart and some others been extended).

Yes, CHL players can take it as well. But presuming they're good enough to get drafted, they still have to wait 4 years after they were originally draft eligible for it to happen. Get drafted by team A. Don't sign for 2 years. Go back into the draft. Get drafted by team B (that could be team A again; there's no prohibition against redrafting the same player). Don't sign for 2 years. Become a UFA. Make the world your oyster. 😉

Yes, if a player goes to the NCAA, you have 4 years of retaining his rights prior to signing him. If he comes through the CHL, you have 2 years of retaining his rights prior to signing him. 2*2 = 4. The discussion was about how teams lose the rights to an NCAA player after 4 years if he hasn't signed an ELC by then. Well, a team loses the rights to a CHL player after only 2 years if he hasn't signed an ELC by then. No, that CHL player doesn't become an UFA after 2 years; he becomes an overager in the draft; but yes, the team loses that player after the 2 years and must redraft him if they want to have exclusive negotiating rights with him for the full 4 years. And that 4th year was available to the team to get the player signed. You could make the argument that a team doesn't get the full 2 years of a CHL player as he might have decided as soon as his 2nd season is done that he wants nothing to do with that NHL team even though the team has the rights for another month or so.

Actually, because a player played in the NCAA, a team gets his rights for twice as long as if he'd gone to Juniors. Kids that play in the CHL and aren't signed within 2 years go back into the draft. Doesn't happen often, but it does happen. That's in place, because kids in Juniors can have signed pro contracts. It's going to change soon, but NCAA players weren't allowed to play college hockey if they had been "professionals." So, teams can sign guys right after the draft or anytime within those 1st 2 years if he went Junior, but couldn't sign a college kid until he leaves. Without that rule in place, nobody would have ever signed drafted an 18 or 19 yo college kid unless he was really special like an Eichel because they'd all be back in the draft before they'd played their Junior Year of college hockey. Will be interesting to see how that changes with the next CBA.

True. And it is mildly surprising it doesn't happen more often. But playing devil's advocate, the flip side of a Johnson situation is, the GM club is pretty insular (only having 32 members) and each one knows how much time and effort another GM's staff put into these kids for literally years only to see the kid decide to walk away at the last moment. Pretty sure those guys talk to each other and sure an Adam Fox is going to have his talent outweigh a lot of "disloyalty" (for lack of a better word; really not the ideal word, but close enough for an internet post) that perhaps a lesser player won't get the same leeway with. And GMs are going to wonder, if the kid bailed on them, how long is it going to take til he goes and bails on us. Apples to kumquats, but Tim Kennedy's career hit the skids when he was in about the best situation he could possibly be but got convinced to file for arbitration anyhow. If you aren't legitimately special, beware of asking to be treated as if you are. Because instead of viewing you as being "special," the members of that insular club might view you as SPECIAL and stay away at all costs. Plus Johnson's dad works in the NHL. Pretty sure he was giving his kid some advice on the LT implications of pulling a Vesey. Adams said all along he wasn't worried that Johnson would walk away. He might've had some additional info that we weren't privy to and actually did know he'd sign.

It's not worth it for the vast majority of players which is why it's such a big deal each time the handful of guys going that route actually does so.

Have used Puckpedia for a long time. (They bought out the old NHLnumbers site.) Not as user friendly as CF was but they've modified their site around a lot the past few months to look more like CF. Expect they'll likely continue working towards the CF style as they seem to be poised to get most of their traffic now. If there's a particular page of a site you want but tend to have a heck of a time finding, why not bookmark that particular page? It'll at least get you to a starting point even if the data you want is for Nov 17, 2025 and the bookmark shows you it for Oct 6, 2023.

Really? Ya don' say.

Isn't that what was said about the Pegulaplan about 10 years ago? Eventually they should be back in there. But who knows how "eventually" is defined?

Counselor, you appear to be arguing for the point of arguing. Paraphrasing you 'they are going to roll 4 lines, the proof being they paid ~$4MM for the 4th line' but also 'no way will the bottom lines get used a lot.' Which from this perspective looks an AWFUL LOT like 'there will be a bit of a rolling 4 lines mojo.'

That line will be playing legit minutes. But would be surprised if they're averaging nearly 15 minutes per man especially if the "3rd line" is also playing close to that. (Thus using the phrase you took exception to.)

I did not state that they'll be stationary, nor that they should be stationary. Have actually actively advocated for more actual player movement for pretty much as long as Ellis has run the PP. (Have hated having Ellis running the dumbest PP in the NHL in at least the past 25 years.) When mentioning having Quinn drift into Thompson's slot when Thompson drifts elsewhere, was referring to how Thompson would actually bring the puck off the boards (typically drifting back to towards the BL) with now having the PKers drift up with him (as that was who they were concerned with) opening up spots down low. And having Quinn slot over to the 1 timer spot now forces a D to move to follow along with where people now are setting towards opening up additional lanes. Nowhere in that post did it say that others would be stationary either. Suppose that using the term "drift" might've been confusing. But surprised that it was because "bumper" has pretty much become the term for where the player in the middle of the formation at the start of the PP starts out. We'll see Dahlin below the goal line at times (it even happened under Ellis a couple of times shockingly) but that doesn't mean he's not generally considered the point of the PP.

The only consistency to how Ruff uses his players is he looks at what THEIR strengths are and determines a system that will work for them. He doesn't have a set philosophy for how to play other than, the system needs to suit the players he has, he can't force them into the system. There is no consistency to whether he runs even D deployment or not; whether he's rolling 4 lines or 3 with an energy line filling in; running 1 goalie until he drops or a more even split of the goalies. So, considering what we have in Buffalo, would expect Dahlin will be far and away the most played skater, UPL will get about 55 games if he can handle that, and there will be a bit of a rolling 4 lines mojo.

Likewise.

One thing that helps, especially w/ learning a new system, is there was only 1 new D man brought in & he's likely the 7 but who gets a fair # of games situationally &/or due to injury. It often takes well into a 1st season in a new place for a D-man to settle in w/ his new teammates.

Nice analysis. 2 additional points to mention. The Sabres poor drafting is covered in large overlap by the "video scouting" era. MANY here opposed it & a big argument against was, if it was as big a failure as feared, it wouldn't be proven out for 4 or 5 years, and at that point a lot of damage would be done. It sure seems to have failed as spectacularly as feared. And, Murray's plan could've worked, we'll never know for sure because Botterill's preferred players were pretty much a 180 from what Murray was bringing in. Had Botterill (or ideally someone that didn't love trading picks for presumptive 3rd liners that actually played barely like 4th liners) not wanted to swap from the LA model to more of a Pittsburgh model, they could've rejoined the league sooner than they are on pace to do. That sort of total direction change was a big part of why the Bills went 17 years between playoff berths. (We're a 34 team, no a 43 team, no 34, no 43 and personnel had to be adjusted accordingly. That, churning highly drafted RBs & DBs & having no legit QB were a recipe for failure.) Adams shifted gear from Botterill's build; but at least both wanted fast teams. So, the kids Botterill drafted could be a part of the new, newer, newest core.

Personally have said the expectation for a healthy Quinn is 35 goals. But also didn't bump Peterka over his 28 from last year, nor Tuch over his injury riddled 22. If Quinn "only" has 27 or 28, those 2 alone could make up that "lost" production. Could see them using him, in the bumper slot on PP1 as should Thompson drift away from his 1 timer spot Quinn could drift there. With Peterka at the other side & Dahlin at the top, they could have a good shooter all over the ice. Would have Tuch down low for his size on screens & his forecheck on loose pucks that miss the net & rebounds. (Which still leaves Cozens, Benson, Power, & Byram as a core for the 2nd PP. And that's without any addition potential trade for a 2W.)

Pretty sure that's what they'll do w/ the top 2 lines. But 5 years is an eternity for many bottom 6ers.

And, again, Ruff has said flat out that Dahlin will have multiple partners IN GAME. The 2 he specifically mentioned were Power & Samuelsson. Personally expect Dahlin getting 24+ minutes/night primarily w/ Samuelsson but late in periods & towards the end of shifts w/ Power as expect Owen will be getting ~23 minutes/ night. Expecting Muel at or just under 20 and Byram getting similar usage. Putting whichever 2 of Clifton, Jokiharju, & Gilbert dressing getting 14-16 each. (Could see Gilbert getting significantly less most nights he dresses, but don't have a good feel for how often that'd be should everyone be healthy.) And on nights when the Sabres are home & the opponent has only 1 line, could see Ras & Owen together more often in game. Will be interesting seeing what combos Ruff comes up w/. He is definitely from the Bowman school of player utilization.

THIS version of this team is NOT a SC contender. It IS a playoff contender. (Please note, saying it is a playoff contender doesn't mean it's a lock to be in.) BUT you have to get to be a playoff contender before you can be a SC contender. Adams timeline for SC contention is IMHO 2 seasons away. UPL should be in his prime & Levi will finally be there too. Dahlin will be squarely in his prime years & Power & Byram will be mid-20's (aka entering theirs) w/ at least 1 of Samuelsson or Johnson able to round out the top 4 & Novikov would likely be available to fill into the top 6 should whatever 2 other guys are rounding out the unit by then get injured/ need support/relief. Yes, Thompson & Tuch are getting long in the tooth by then, bit Peterka, Cozens, & Quinn are all at their primes & there is at least middle 6 talent ready to step up in Kulich, Oslund, & Helenius. And we haven't even mentioned Benson nor McLeod nor should he still be in the organization Wahlberg. Find a couple other useful bottom 6ers & you're cooking w/ gas. And all Adams has taken from that squad is a 2nd round pick that wouldn't be ready to help anyway and Savoie who still would need to beat out all those other guys plus Rosen. The future looks bright. (But you can never count on the future.) But the present looks alright too & there could still be another move or 2 to happen.