mjd1001

Well, lets see how he performs. My opinion on Quinn was always that next to Cozens, he was the single player on this team that hurt the team the most (much more than he helpled). I'm hoping if he comes in and still plays the same (bad) game as the last year or two, they won't keep sticking him out there because of the new contract. The dollar number isn't going to prevent them from doing other things, so its OK that way, I just don't want them throwing him out there if he continues to hurt more than he helps.

That is a really good deal for Toronto. He had 38 goals in just 75 games. He would have gotten 40+ if he played the full 82. He's getting older, but $4.38m for a guy who just scored almost 40? The key thing for the Leafs is you are getting the same guy back (one year older but likely almost the same guy) but he just took about a $7m pay cut. So, Toronto gets the same guy, but now has an extra $7m per year to work with? In 3-4 years the contract may be bad..but then again, $4.38m? Even if he drops off a cliff its not a bad contract. This is very very good for Toronto. When, if ever, was the last time a guy came off of a 38 goal season (again, 40+ if he played a full 82) and signed a contract for under 5% of the cap? Unreal bargain.

Great, except Peterka has never been a point per game winger. Not over his career (0.63), not over last season (0.88), not the season before (0.61). The closest he got in one season was last year's 0.88, but if he plays 82 games over an 82 game season that still causes him to come up 10 short. Now, will he BECOME a point per game winger on Utah? Maybe, Maybe not. But on the Sabres, he isn't, and never has been one....even last year with the most Powerplay ice time on the team among forwards and lots of time on the first line, 18+ minutes per game.

A lot of comments about wanting more for the trade... Yeah, any trade you make you always want more. How often does a trade get made and if something else would have been thrown in we wouldn't have liked it? But I think part of that comes down to Peterka having a bigger name, and having a better stat sheet. I'm not saying that he's not the better player of the trade... But sometimes when someone has a bigger name or a more impressive stat sheet, they're not always the better player. Anyway, I'm trying to look at this positively but do I like to trade? Overall, Yeah. Why? Because it's likely a couple new players were going to have on the team we didn't have last year. Short of winning... Or scoring a ton of goals... having new faces on the team and seeing how they integrate into the team gives me something to look forward to watching.

I don't know....I have been pretty consistent saying he was the 3rd or 4th worst guy on the team in his own zone. Others who are saying that now after the trade I recognize as some people who posted the same thing throughout the year and even last year. So I'm not quite sure the 'sudden' part, a lot of it has been said about him for a while.

If, IF, Kesselring is an above average defenseman, and Doan gives you mid teens in goals without being a total defensive sieve....then I'm fine with this trade. My slight doubts lie with Kesserling though, I just don't know how good he is. The automatic assumption is he will be paired with Power. But hasn't everyone said they need a stable vet d-man to pair with Power...that is what Power needs? Well Kesserling has less experience than Power. He's played only 2 full seasons..a total of 156 games, and he has less than half the total time on ice that Power has. Maybe he's good, but doesn't exactly have the "this guy has seen it all" on the ice type of experience.

Petersson? I really like him (or should I say liked). I pushed for him as a top 10 player in the league 2 years ago, but its hard to not see that SOMETHING has happened to him. I don't know what it is, some say it was him signing the contract. Someone on a Vancouver board says he got hurt during a late February game last year vs Minnesota. I'm not sure. But he's been a different player than early in his career and its been like that for a while now. Since last Feb of 2024 in that game vs the wild (1.5 seasons ago), including the playoffs, he has played 102 games, has 21g and 46a. Thats a 16g, 37 assist, 53 point pace per 82, and that is over a full season and a half plus a playoff run, not a short term sample size. For $11.7 million per year, long term, with a no movement clause? To acquire him, it would probably be a massive mistake given his contract, unless he miraculously finds his game, or heals a big time injury here. For that money, I need a center to be giving me close to 40 goals, approaching 100 points, (maybe both?) over a full season But for the last going on almost 2 seasons, hes doing teens in goals and barely 50 points per 82.

3rd or 4th line. I could see him on a 3rd line. He brings a bit of a physical game, correct? And in his limited time in the NHL, he has scored at a 16-goal-per-82 game rate. And that is with just 13 minutes per game. Best case reasonable scenario, give him 10% more ice time on a 3rd line role and he gets 20 goals for you (or close to it) while bringing a bit of a physical game. Again, I don't know his game all that well. But, if he can give you 15-20 goals....if he plays a bit better defensively than JJP and plays a bit more physical....is that worth the 10 goal per season drop from Peterka? Again, not knowing much about his current game style, you would think he would/could be physical, but he also hardly has any penalty minutes. Anyway, he comes to camp and competes for a spot. Competition, right?

Even though Krebs added a little bit of grit to his game this year, I think their style of play and their abilities are different. As the morning goes on and I read Post made by people. I'm trying to look at this trade differently. For this trade to work out it's kind of obvious but you'd have to say that Utah got the more TALENTED/skilled player.... But not necessarily the BEST (overall execution) player.

To look at it positively, the person who gets peterka's minutes... Or how they're distributed around the forward group, let's look at that. What is the goal differential you get there? Meaning... Let's say you get 10 less goals out of those minutes, but you also allow five less.. then losing peterka is only -5. And if Doan replaces somebody on the 3rd or fourth line and gives you some production and along with not causing mistakes, gives you a positive five differential... Your forward group is close to being even. Then you could look at the improvement you get with the defense.. any improvement there is gravy on top.

What I need to know...2 things: -If Kesserling were not here, who would be getting those minutes. Meaning, how much of an improvement (overall) is Kesserling over the minutes without him? -Who will be getting Peterkas minutes. How much of a downgrade (overall) will that play have vs JJP.

I voted for make the pick but honestly... I don't care. The team has worn me down... More so the fact we are seeing so many moves in the off-season and none by the sabres. So far... That has worn me down.

A lot of those above names aren't all that great for me for Peterka. You don't have to trade Peterka, he's restricted. So, if you are going to trade him I am looking for 3 things with a player in return: -Makes the Sabres better right now than Peterka does (due to talent and/or fit) -Cheaper than Peterka (use the money saved in other places) -Makes the team better than Peterka in 2-3 years from now (talent and/or fit) You aren't getting all 3 of those, another team would be foolish to make that trade. But I want 2 of the 3 (pick whatever 2 you want). If you aren't getting 2 of those 3 things, they don't move him.

I don't like those numbers and I think at the end of the deal the contract will look bad but I probably would still do it. He certainly is not a bad player and he's more complete than Skinner, you just have to look at the possibility of buying the deal out in the last 2 years or so. If that's what it takes to keep him here, it's probably a yes for me.

Feels very similar to the Bills up until they drafted Allen.

I haven't looked at the Sabres cap lately so I don't know the numbers, but if going 3 years, I would offer him as much as I can, SHORT of causing problems with re-signing Tuch and Benson and McLeod. If I can get those 3 locked up (and Bryam and/or who you get for Byram) and then STILL have money left over for Tavares, spend away. That $4.4million cap hit for Skinner this year and the $6.4M cap hit for his buyout next year kinda stinks right now.

On individual player scouting, on strategy, on evaluation, yeah, the team's management probably knows multiple times more than the average fan. But on what general direction the team should take? is it time to buy or sell near the deadline? is it a point in the offseason to rebuild or to go 'all in'. The start player who 30 years old, do you give him a long term deal or not? A lot of those things are 50-50 choices...coin flip things whether they work out one way or the other. The 'average fan' can think they know more than the team's management because a lot of time the 'average fan' has a 50 percent chance of making the 'right' long term decision while the management has 50% chance of making the wrong one.

But they found him in less than 2 hour runtime of the movie.

Maybe, I was just looking at the transactions pages from the NHL.

The fun of being a Sabres fan: -NHL player transactions (trades, signings, extensions, etc): In the past week, 26 of them. 0 from the Sabres. -Since June 1 (last 3 weeks). NHL total transactions, 57 of them (mostly re-signings, a few trades). 0 from the Sabres. -Since the beginning of May, there is ONE Sabres player transaction, Signing D Erik Brannstrom to a three-year contract. The rest of the NHL well over 100. I mean, I'm not a person to say make a move the the sake of it, but there really isn't much to talk about here lately. You would think the team that has the longest playoff drought would be one of them that would be wanting to make the most moves to change things.

I'm ok with a ban on fighting...but if, only IF they start HEAVILY penalizing all the stick work, late hits, head shots, etc that lead to many fights. You do any of the above and someone can't respond to it in a fight, even if the refs miss it then the replay of the offense after has to be heavily penalized. I'm talking multi-games suspensions for stuff right now in the NHL that gets only a 2 minute or MAYBE a 5 minute penalty. You want that stuff to stop, make it prohibitive.

Look at the stats and the analytics over the past 3 seasons combined, Everything points to him playing without Hintz doesn't change his game that much. But Hints playing without Robertson is a bigger issue. Hintz needs Robertson WAY MORE than Robertson needs Hintz. To break it down another way: When Robertson was on the ice in the past 3 seasons without Hintz, the team scored a goal every 23.8 minutes When Hints was on the ice in the past 3 seasons without Robertson, the team scored a goal every 42.2 minutes.

I'm not to far away from you. Since I was a little kid (under 10) I have followed this team. Through the drought, I wasn't happy but I followed the team. the Kruger losing streak? Never walked away from the team. I posted about pretty much every game on this forum over the last few years. BUT, last year I wavered a BIT after the 1st of the year. For the first time ever, in almost 40 years since I was in elementary school I wavered a bit in my fandom. Now, for no reason that I know of, this offseason I have wavered a bit more. I think in the past 2 months I have maybe posted on this forum 20 times? I would do that in a few days in the last few offseasons. I think a guy like Alex Tuch, a Sabres and Bills fan his whole life...WANTING to come here to play here.......even the rumors of him wavering hit me hard. They need to start next season strong. If they aren't in a playoff spot after the first month, its a problem. If they aren't in (or competing) for a spot the entire season (meaning to NOT ever fall more than 3-4 points out of the 8th spot), its a big problem.) If this team fails to make the playoffs next year, and/or is a negative goal differential team again, I personally might get to the point of canceling the cable package and agreeing with you. Many fans have walked away from the team in the past decade. Others (many/most of us on this forum) haven't, and some never will. Its getting to the point where everything is just negative, I'm a happier person when NOT thinking about the franchise.

I respect that, and I even admit that I feel that 'energy' when at a big game. But for me, I don't really want it. The bigger the game, the MORE I want to be at home by myself, to really get into the game, to watch every nuance that is happening, the less I want to be sitting next to "Joe from Cheektowaga" who is yelling and swearing and cheering and wanting to give me (and everyone else) a high five after every score. Again, I'm not denying the energy of it and even feeling it in a positive way, but for some of us, it can take away from the nuance of the game. I'd almost rather have my 'at the arena' entertainment involving those around me to be between periods/quarters, before the game, in commercial breaks...etc. During the game I want nothing distracting me from the game itself.

I think the NHL believes, maybe its true, that winning is NOT all that matters. Toronto is a great example. The 'everday' fan has been mostly priced out of the games. Yeah, there are some, but a lot of the crowd seems to be from a higher 'social-economic' class. And do they want the team to win? Sure they do, but it also appears for them its more about a 'night out', its about bragging they were at the game, its about the food, the entertainment. Then look at other cities. Kids days games are popular, and do the kids want the home team to win? Again, sure they do, but many times they are just as happy with the music they can dance to between commercials, the games on the ice between periods, and they are happy to cheer for the home team when they score 3 goals, even though the opposing team scores 5. Personally, I don't go to many games anymore. As a fan, I think I can see more, interact with others more, just get a better experience as a 'fan of the game' at home than I do in the Arena. But the few times I go to the arena, I want to be entertained. Again, I can see the on-ice product just as well at home, maybe even better, so if I'm going to the game, you better give me good food, good entertainment, stuff I CAN'T get at home. So yeah, I think the NHL, most sports leagues, and even the Sabres are going to lean into the entertainment aspect of the gameday experience. Maybe not so much to get more people to come out (winning will do that, but the marketing dept can't fix that) but to find out what people are into and see how they can extract more money from the people that do show up.