dudacek

Exactly to point one. While I do think Dahlin’s first year was special in the sense you’re saying, I also thought it was more or less expected based on the pedigree. It was like trading for Skinner and getting 30 goals, not 40 or 14.

The Pegulas keeping Botterill on if he had made the cuts is not necessarily the same as the Pegulas being happy with him. I am with you that his job performance should have been enough on its own to get him fired, but it was not. That does not mean that his job performance was irrelevant to his being fired.

Nope. He’s played two weeks of hockey. Jury is still out. I’m saying the average GM should be 50/50 on his moves. We’re trying to make the same point.

I disagree. The odds should be 50/50.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about The Botterill era was how infrequently things did bounce our way. Dahlin lottery, first year Skinner, Olofsson, Jokiharju... can you think of other off-season hopes that were fully realized?

Three months in, we have no indication of what Adams intends to do with this roster other than vague indications of embedding analytics into the evaluation process, valuing players who are “hard to play against”, and paying more attention to team chemistry, as well as more concrete Indications of cutting dead weight from the hockey Department and empowering members of the holdovers. I guess Tage was in town for a golf tourney and is looking pretty buff. At least Craig Rivet was excited.

Everything I've seen indicates GMs don't expect that to be the case. it's why there is so much noise about walking away. Reinhart walks in with the three richest contracts that have comparable stats to his, Adams walks in with the three cheapest. Arbitrator listens to their arguments and decides.

Three weeks to the draft. Three weeks to qualifying offers. Four weeks to free agency. Teams scrambling to plan their rosters with a flat cap and perhaps reduced budgets. No AHL games in sight. We're finally going to see some action soon.

I've been saying it all along, I think people are being myopic on this one. It's way bigger than Buffalo. We are underestimating how hard virtually all teams are going to be hit, especially the ones that aren't huge brands. If there's no revenue, how are teams going to fund a $70 million payroll, let alone $81 million? Pierre McGuire on TSN1200. “I’m going to caution everybody including Mark Borowiecki’s agent, these are way different times in the National Hockey League, and you’re just starting to see just a little ripple in the water. This is going to be a very different time financially for the league, and for a lot of member clubs in the league. I’m just telling you. The stories haven’t broken yet, but this is going to be a way different time for free agents, be a way different time for established players. You’re going to see some major cost-cutting around the National Hockey League, major, major cost-cutting. There are people writing stories now about this team laying off these people. You’re going to see a lot more. It’s going to trickle down to player’s salaries. This is a very different time in this league. It’s not getting enough exposure right now. I completely understand because of the playoffs. No one really wants to talk about it. Other industries compensated through mass layoffs, which are impossible in the NHL on the ice. What is possible is declining qualifying offers, buyouts, and refusing to engage in anything other than take-it-or-leave offers to free agents. How much can each individual owner afford to piss away?

That was his reputation when he left Pittsburgh. The fact that he won't have to wear his lack of success in Buffalo is a commentary on both the strength of the old- boys network, and the lack of respect given the Sabres franchise: basically the narrative is it was the Sabres fault he failed.

Yeah, but how was your Corsi?

I agree with @thorny, but I also think Bjugstad is a pretty low bar to clear. Given his recent track record, it's not inconceivable that both Mittelstadt and Cozens have more to offer.

The Jets are horrible.

Edmundson was someone I had my eye on as a PK defensive LD. Good move if he signs, and they have the Cap space.

What a kid is at 20 or 22 is not a great indication of who he will be at 25 or 26, so be careful about giving up on young players, or projecting them too highly (See MIttelstadt, Thompson, Cozens or Jokiharju) Girgensons was in the NHL looking like a cinch to be a very good 2-way middle-six centre for a long time at 21 and ended up an OK bottom-six winger instead. Danault was looking like a bust at that age and ended up a very good 2-way middle-six centre.

Danault is another lesson in player development curves. He was a late 1st round pick. When he was Dylan Cozens age: 62 GP 18/53/71 in the Q (Fans: He didn't tear it up, but he's looking pretty good down there. I like him) Ras Dahlin: 56 23/62/85 in the Q (Fans: he took a big step. He's good one, might even make the team next year) Casey Mittlelstadt 72 6/20/26 as an AHL rookie (Fans: he had a tough adjustment to the pros, but he'll be alright) Alex Nylander 70 13/25/38 as a 2nd-year AHL pro (Fans: we needed to see better numbers, I'm worried he's going to be a bust) Jack Eichel 51 4/6/10 as an NHL rookie (Chicago fans: Bust! Burn the witch! Montreal fans: they did a bad job developing him, a change of scenery can turn him around) Sam Reinhart 82 13/27/40 NHL regular (Fans: This kid's a good one, Bergevin stole him!) Rasmus Ristolainen 52 8/17/25 NHL regular (Fans: he's a solid player, but he's never going to play in the top-six; we need better centres) Zemgus Girgensons 81 12/41/53 NHL regular (Fans: he did a good job at 2C and he'll be a great 3C when Kotkaniemi matures) Joel Armia 71 13/34/47 NHL regular (Fans: he's not good enough to be our 2C but too good to be our 3C. We'll trade him to you at bargain 1C prices) He was Sam Reinhart's age when he became an NHL regular and Gus' age when he became what he is.

Don't know that we are talking the same thing here. What I'm trying to say is that Terry has never once let money get in the way of the Sabres being competitive; on the contrary, he has spent lavishly on trying things that have provided little to no return. I think he is doing what he can to minimize COVID losses, and that he is clearing the building of people he doesn't think are his people, or providing good value. But I also think he will give the on-ice team a budget that will be competitive with other teams around the league, and if he is presented with a deal that clearly improves the Sabres, he won't let that self-imposed budget get in the way.

It's actually a great example of how Botterill focused more on assets than actual players. Bear with me here because I know this trade comes with a lot of baggage: The late 1st-round prospects cancel out, the 2nds cancel out. And you're left to choose between a pair of middle six forwards: one younger, the other with both a $3m cap dump, and a 1st rounder thrown in. Purely from an asset view, one could easily argue at the time that the St. Louis offer was better. Of course since then Danault has gone from a 35-point 2-way 3C to a 50-point 2-way 2C, while Berglund was out of the NHL within months. Botterill and his scouts whiffed badly on the actual players.

This just feels right. Terry has never once through words or actions given off the vibe that he's not willing to spend on helping the hockey team win. It feels that he's saying that this team in this climate is not willing to spend on things that generate no tangible return.

It's basically the same as signing Bjugstad to a one-year $4.1 million free agent contract. Helluva a good deal if he puts up the 49 points he did three years ago. A disaster if he puts up the 14 points he put up four years ago, the 26 he put up two years ago or the 2 points he put up this year. I might make that move if I was at the table empty handed at the end of free agency, but this early in the game I keep my powder dry for bigger targets, especially when the smarter money says there will be safer bets available at that price point. EDIT: Missed the retention part. That might have made it more palatable, depending on how much.

I don't think the media has very many insiders left in the Sabres hockey department; what they do have are a number of hockey insiders who lost, or whose friends lost, jobs in the purge. There will always be some fans eager to believe the best or the worst, and people ready to spread either. I am interested, of course, in the Sabres cap figure. But I am more interested in budgets of other teams and what they will have to do to make those budgets work and how the Sabres can potentially benefit. We just don't know what their plan is, or what opportunities may materialize based on the plans of others. This next month is tabula rasa for the entire league. Maybe the drastic cuts off-ice happened in order to subsidize the team on-ice.

Reinhart and arbitration-eligible players like him are in a real interesting situation. Do they play hardball and walk their teams to arbitration where they will probably get a bigger award for next year? Or does that carry the risk of a team walking away? Free agency will be done at that point, and no one will have any money left to spend on you. And there is a chance that this cap-crunch scenario repeats next summer. Finding the sweet spot will be so hard for either side.

There are still a lot of ways this can go. The Sabres spending $70 million in cap when 25 teams are at $80 is a terrible situation for us. The Sabres spending $75 million in cap when 15 teams are below $70 is wonderful. September is going to be the craziest off-season ever.

I tried to pick a bad team, a solid team and a great team, none of which operate in a big market. But it really is about looking at it on a team by team basis. The Coyotes have $80 million in salaries committed and 3-6 roster holes to fill. How the heck do they get their payroll down to $70 and ice a 21-man roster? Nobody is taking on bad contracts in this climate. The probably have to sell good players on big-money contracts for futures. So long Kuemper and Ekman-Larson, and to who, for what? Prices are going plummet because the sellers will far outnumber the buyers — in both trades and free agency. The Leafs getting a 1st for Kapanen is going to look real good for them by the time this is finished. But the fact is a $3 million good player will be far more valuable to most teams than a great player at $7 million.