jame

everything is condescending.... You say: "So you are in favor of wasting assets for nothing." I say: "So you believe cap space is nothing" And I'm being condescending and you're... what? Being super cool? I don't care about your tone, but apparently you're going to harp on mine every 3rd post

Forwards: Okposo (forced), ROR, Kane, Larsson, Girgs, Foligno, Carrier Changes: Swap Ennis for Carrier Defensemen: Risto, McCabe, Bogo Changes: Swap Beaulieu for Bogo (How dumb does protecting Beaulieu over Bogo look today?). I know we had just traded for Beaulieu... so a better way of putting this might be... don't trade for Beaulieu. Goalies: Ullmark Changes: Swap Lehner for Ullmark Outcome: Vegas probably takes Ennis

1/3 of the forwards that Botts put on the opening night roster last year... are no longer in the NHL. If you're not trying to win now... why do you protect Lehner? Protecting Ennis and Foligno... to trade them for Poms and Scandella? If you're not trying to win now... what's the point of that trade?

It was a pipedream only in relation to Botts stupid vision of not trying to win for 2-3 years.... . Under a better vision, Moulson was a huge detriment.

i was just clarifying that you don't need to worry about me getting mad. The statement wasn't about ROR, it was about the presumption that Carrier or players like him can't move up in the lineup due to injury. Carrier did, and the line was even more successful. Are you implying that had we kept Carrier, he would've made such an impact that we wouldn't have finished last? I didn't know your opinion of Carrier was so high. Ah... now I see. You believe cap space is nothing.

I promise you, I'm not mad :) I know you guys are all about tone and stuff around here... but arguing about hockey doesn't affect my feelings. ?

Injuries forced Carrier on to the ROR line in 2017-18, they produced a 56% CF and a 50% GF rate... But I see now that what you believe "depth" is.... is actually called "potential". A prospect pipeline is ONE avenue to creating depth... it is not depth in and of itself. Carrier would've been an asset to creating said war zone.... instead we had to suffer through watching guys like Seth Griffith, Matt Moulson, Jason Pominville, Jacob Josefson, Benoit Pouliot.... Actually, Botts had a great option in expansion... paying Vegas to take something worthless like the Moulson contract. Skipping a great opportunity to rid ourselves of dead weight and wasted cap space.

True. I think we could've gotten it done at 6 per. Now it will probably take 8+ per.

It's not about being able to fit Eichel, Skinner, Reinhart, Dahlin, etc... It's actually about that depth that you pretend to care about so much... the 2-3 million per year that we didn't save on Reinhart, will affect the level of talent that makes up our depth.

I would've been completely fine with leaving Lehner unprotected. I don't think Vegas would've claimed him. Lehner's personality was not inline with what McPhee was building, and with Fleury as the established heavy game starter, Lehner would've been a distraction. I wouldn't have cared if Vegas did claim him though.... especially since Botts tanked the season anyways. I'm not a huge fan of giving away assets for free, especially to protect goalies who have not established themselves. It's funny that in one thread you claim to be all about the depth, and then trash Carrier.... what do you think depth actually looks like? It looks like having a 4th line that can take a regular shift against NHL competition in the playoffs (Vegas 4th line), it looks like 10 goals from "replacement level" Carrier in half a season....

I can certainly have it both ways. He used a protection slot... on a guy he gave away for free less than a year later. That's a fail. Now, the player he gave away is outperforming the guy he chose to replace him. Carrier may be a replacement level player... but we've spent the last two seasons with multiple sub replacement level forwards in the lineup on the regular. Reinhart v Scheifele Draft Year : Both go back to juniors Draft Year + 1 Season : Reinhart debuts 40 point rookie, Scheifele back to juniors D+2: Reinhart 79 games / 47 points / 0.60 per game Scheifele 63 games / 34 points / 0.54 per game D+3: This is last season for Reinhart.... Reinhart 82 games / 50 points / 0.61 per game Scheifele 82 games / 49 points / 0.60 per game We were going in to Reinhart's D+4 and we bridged him for D+4 and 5....here's how his development trend tracks against Scheifele. D+4: Reinhart 48 games / 44 points / 0.92 per game (pace) Scheifele 71 games / 61 points / 0.86 per game D+5: Reinhart ??? games / ??? points / ??? per game Scheifele 79 games / 82 points / 1.04 per game So for cap savings in years that Botts isn't even trying to win.... we will end up paying the difference between getting a long term deal done with a 40-50 player and a long term deal (that buys more UFA years) for a 70-80 point player in a higher cost market. Bridging Reinhart was a god awful move Winnipeg didn't bridge Scheifele.... they gave him 8 years coming of his ELC... and have a 6.1 per year bargain on their hands for a long time. Why would Vegas have claimed Lehner?

I don't see that at all.

I couldn't figure out how to multi quote.... so here we go: AWESOME JOB by Botts AWESOME JOB by Botts Baseline competency Fail. We had to give up an NHL asset to protect Ullmark, BECAUSE Botts chose to protect Lehner... and then subsequently gave him away a year later.... This was a failure on Botts part. Definitely a win for Rochester... but Eh.... I think we lost this trade. Now we are giving Botts credit for simply signing Murray's draft picks? come on.... Hutton was a very good signing... let's not forget that he gave away Lehner... a guy who is currently in the Vezina conversation. Oh god no.... the Reinhart deal is a huge failure. The only benefit to the bridge would've been trying to win this year and using the created cap space towards that end. Trading ROR, bridging Reinhart... and then using ALL that cap space on Berglund, Sobotka, Sheary, Hunwick... is epic incompetence. I love his 2018 draft. Instead of just Qualifying Wilson he gave him over 1 million per... and for multiple years... same with Beaulieu (2 years)... neither deal is a major hinderance... just show's a poor NHL level evaluation. How do you need more time to decide if trading an All Star center in his prime with term, for lotto tickets and cap dumps was a good idea? Is buying $10,000 in scratch off lotto tickets a good idea? No... and you don't need to scratch them all off first to know that.

Torts with last change... I sure hope Housley never puts the Tage-Sobotka-Poms line out for a faceoff.... that line is a nightmare.

Great article. Highlights the value of running the PP from the half wall, creating movement by the opposition. Jack needs to get back to moving the puck quickly (down low to Reinhart, HDSC to Skinner, Reset to Risto-to-Dahlin). Everytime he bides his time, he reduces the PPs effectiveness.

Reinhart (1) Eichel-Skinner-Dahlin (3) Risto (1)

Toronto has a ton of avenues to deal with their cap issues... none of which involve losing Matthews or Marner. I'd expect Marner and Matthews to sign similar contracts that allow them to hit free agency in their prime. 5 years / 10 per.

First link, Stimson EDIT: My mistake on the first link. It is a great example of HOW a team could run the PP from behind the net, not an example of an NHL team actually doing it. Second link, has nothing to do with RUNNING a PP from behind the net in TODAY's NHL. Yes... the Gretzky led Oilers ran their PP from behind the net.... that was over 30 years ago... and really no one does that anymore. Getting the puck to Reinhart below the goaline does not equal "Running the PP from behind the net" Sorry, your googling failed you.... Third link, ok...you got me, if Vancouver has taken Switzerland's behind the GOALINE (I'll give it to you :) ) PP scheme... then that would count as RUNNING the PP from behind the net/goaline. I haven't seen that... an NHL team, using Swiss PP scheme would be something.

The goal is to have actual conversations about Sabres/hockey..... the goal is the back n forth. Not attention. Not relationships.

Go watch our pp

1-3-1 PP and a 1-3-1 neutral zone scheme are two totally different things.

I can’t help you

who knew Danny Gare’s skates had insider sources.... ill take the bet

Are either of those things actually happening? What people?

I’ll take that bet. Marner in a leafs jersey next year. the idea that the cap is going to cause a team to trade a 21 year old superstar is hilarious.