JohnC
-
Posts
5,960 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
43 minutes ago, Gabrielor said:
I remember in 2014 wishing the Pegula's would lose the Bills' bid, because I knew it would take away attention they should be putting on the Sabres.
I think, especially in the case of the 50th anniversary, they didn't oversee much directly, and just let people they trusted handle it. Turns out, these trusted folks didn't really care about the details. Sadly, their trust-issue solution appears to be elevating family of suspect qualification. They just aren't thinking 2+ moves ahead; too reactionary.
Also, I'm still not 100% sure on the Botterill firing. I want to believe they fired him for the right reason (he was a joke), but I can't shake the feeling that it was for the wrong reasons ($$).
Botterill would have been retained if he would have gone alone with the new Pegula organizational austerity plan. It was pointed out that after it was announced that he was going to be retained on the last year of his contract that there were further discussions with him about the direction of the franchise. He disagreed with the plan to slim down the staff that he hired. So the owners fired him.
From a business standpoint the way in which the owners responded to the current turbulent economic climate it is understandable and reasonable what they did. To fortify their position and weaken the GM's standing is that when the status quo is not yielding the expected outcome then arguing to maintain it is not a persuasive position to maintain.
-
3 hours ago, dudacek said:
This is the nut of it (and why deals get done).
Team A thinks Casey is a bust, Team B thinks he’s a borderline 1A in the making who’s hit a bump in the development road.
If team A is Buffalo and Team B Tamps, then a deal should be real easy to make.
What if team A (Buffalo) believes that Mitts is a borderline 1A then do they get rid of him? On the contrary, I not only don't believe that the Sabres have concluded that he is a bust but they believe that there is still a salvageable upside that is ready to be tapped. That is not to say that in a good deal they wouldn't be reluctant to include him in a deal that fortifies the second line. For me the one untouchable young player on our roster is Cozens with Yoki not far behind in that category.
-
2 hours ago, nfreeman said:
Couple of other thoughts:
- If it is Calgary and Monahan, Reino makes sense as the biggest piece going the other way. He's a good player with good numbers and I can see Treliving and his management team wanting him. From KA's perspective, Reino is an RFA who will need a fat new contract, probably at around the same cost as Monahan's deal ($6.375MM per year for 3 more years) or higher, and he isn't as good as Monahan.
- The point made upthread about Kahun, VO and Ullmark also being RFAs is interesting. I think VO and Kahun will definitely be back, but I'm not sure about Ullmark. KA has to understand that they need to improve their goaltending. If they keep Ullmark, I don't think they can give him a contract that isn't a #1 goalie contract -- and under current team and league economic circumstances, I can easily see them deciding that Ullmark isn't worth that kind of deal.
I agree with you on the importance of goaltending. On the other hand I disagree with you on the Sabres' willingness to let him go. As it stands he's our best goaltender. Is he good enough to be a solid #1 goalie and capable of providing the level of play that will enable the team to make the playoffs? I'm simply not sure? But right now I don't know what option the organization has. I don't think that it is in the interest of the player and the franchise to go for a long term deal at this point. If the player after a short term deal demonstrates that he is a locked in #1 goalie he will be rewarded with with an enriching long-term deal. And if his play warrants a later bonanza deal the franchise would certainly be willing to pay a fair market price for that level of play.
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, Curt said:
Rebuked how? Sabres have some cap room, maybe quite a bit depending on who is signed, and who walks/is traded. It’s not going to be enough to go on some outrageous spending spree, but it will be more than 90% of the NHL teams have.
If you factor in our first round pick I don't think it is out of the realm of reality that the Sabres can add a second line center and winger to next year's roster. As you point out you have to also have to consider who we are going to keep and dispatch in order to re-distribute the contracts. But it is doable.
-
2 minutes ago, inkman said:
I'm guessing Reinhart plus any combination of Larsson, Montour, Girgs and whatever other RFA they might want to keep will eat up 12-15 mill of that space. Add on a second line center at $8 mill, that $20 mill gonzo.
Your prices are highly inflated. My sense is that Reinhart will be re-signed and that either Montour or Risto will be dealt in a deal. Larsson could be retained but if so it will be at a cost effective contract. Lazur is likely to be his replacement if his price is too high. Unless a player like Cirelli is brought in I don't see the second line center commanding an $8 m contract. I still hold to my position that with some smart player and contract action the organization is in a very favorable cap situation compared to most teams.
-
Just now, inkman said:
I thought the whole "the Sabres have cap room" talking point was rebuked.
It hasn't been rebuked. We are in a good position to make our cap situation even better this offseason than many cap stressed teams are. In addition, if you bring in a player that doesn't mean that another player isn't exiting. A little finagling can go far if you are smart about it.
-
39 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:
I have been asked not to reveal much Information, as this is still all very tentative.
I'm confident that under the threat of being waterboarded you would be more willing to talk??
-
14 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:
According to my source, the sabres are in discussions that would bring in a second line center, as well as a top 6 winter from a team that is currently playing. The center is a player the board has talked about before. The sabres main blocks are tentatively agreed upon, but they may have to add significantly depending on playoff performance.
I'm sure your source is credible regarding the pursuit of a 2C. So I have no intention of dismissing your inside knowledge. But targeting certain centers especially on capped strapped teams isn't a revelation. And it isn't surprising that in the pursuit of a center the Sabres have preferences. But in all potential trades the issue isn't only who you want but what you are willing to give up. Would the Sabres be willing to accept their second preferred center over their first preferred player if the cost were significantly less? Of course they would. Overly stripping a thin team for an addition might solve a problem at the expense of creating another problem.
There should be no surprise that there have been, are now, and continue to be talks with numerous teams about players. Organizations are constantly talking amongst themselves. It's standard practice for all organizations to have these exploratory discussions. Leaning towards or locking onto a deal now doesn't seem like a smart way especially when the playoffs are over the trade options will increase. (Not saying that is what you are suggesting.)
Because of the Sabres favorable cap situation they are in a good situation to make roster boosting deals. This is going to be an exciting offseason with a lot of speculative trades being mentioned. I'm hoping that this new front office will make the right personnel decisions that will get this team in a better position to seriously compete.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
You mean their approach since... checks math... 2015?
Botterill and Murray traded away massive amounts of picks and got nothing useful. Draft better.
I'm a believer in the draft and develop philosophy as the best approach to building a successful operation. That philosophy assumes a proficiency in evaluating prospects. As you point out this organization has been deficient on that score. However, this year I am more receptive to trading our (relatively) high first round pick if it individually or packaged brings back a genuine second line player. Hopefully, the return would be a # 2 center but I'm willing to accept a winger if it is a young and established high yield player.
Make no mistake in interpreting what I'm stating here. I'm not advocating that this franchise has to act out of desperation to address a major need. If a fair value deal can't be made then stay the course and make secondary type deals to more incrementally improve and better balance the roster.
-
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
Keep in mind Kahun is 25 so idk how young he really is. I think he is a solid forward that might be a 2nd line guy.
If Kahun becomes a 2nd line player then the trade that Botts made was a gem. Even if he becomes a third line player it will be an upgrade on a lower and more contributing line. As I said in a prior post I was intrigued with the Johansson/Kahun/Olofsson line with Johansson and Kahun being interchangeable between center and winger.
-
48 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
If Tage works that is like found money. Hoping he does.
What's your assessment on Kahun. I thought when he was on a line with Johansson and Olofsson that he demonstrated that he could skate and create opportunities. For the short time that they were together at the end of the season I thought they fit well together. Getting a few young players such as Kahun and Tage to show that they can play as good third line players and shake up the roster mix for the lower lines.
-
2 hours ago, Zamboni said:
No matter how he develops and progresses, you’ll still get a few fans attempting to be funny with the tired, old, stale and inaccurate giraffe joke. You know who they are. The whole five of them ?
I think TT can be a solid 3rd liner and possibly a top six guy in the NHL. Like every player before him, he just needs development time. He’ll figure it out. He has too much talent, not to.If he becomes a solid third line forward then it is a useful role. One of the glaring deficiencies for this team has been the lack of scoring beyond the first line. So he can help in that area. And as you noted there is a possibility that he can develop into a second line winger. (I'm less confident of that higher role.)
The ROR deal and calculations are in the past. Too many people use that boondoggle deal to color their perception of TT. It takes time for tall and lanky prospects to physically fill out and be able to play against NHL men. It sure would be nice for him to be ready to make the adjustment.
-
11 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:
I need to find a way to make my sarcasm more universally acceptable.
Maybe a double poop emoji can be used to express the sentiment???
-
10 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:
OMG I hope they cancel the game tonight and the one for whatever team is supposed to use the locker room from the night before!
They did cancel the game in Philly.
https://www.mlb.com/news/marlins-orioles-yankees-phillies-postponed
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I'm fairly intrigued by the proposed deal because of the inclusion of Kerfoort, though, who I like. An ideal 3C, sure, but immediately the second best centre on our team upon acquisition. A reasonable placeholder 2C if he's the best that can be had for a price we are comfortable paying.
Some may not be comfortable with the Risto price tag, but if it's both Kerfoort and Kapanen coming back, I'm sorely tempted.
In my personal estimation, Risto is easier replaced by committee on the right defensive side, with a slightly adjusted defensive strategy - a strategy made possible by the significantly improved forward group due to the additions of two quality forwards - than the task of filling our centre vacancy sans trade.
There may be better offers out there - or not - and I'm reasonably open to such a swap, assuming Krueger is all-aboard.
In this scenario we'd need to keep Larsson or attain a player of his caliber to maximize the results. We need to add to the centre group not add some and subtract a bit, too. I can talk myself into this C unit:
Eichel
Kerfoot
Cozens/Johansson
Larsson
Have you given up on Mitts as a 3C?
-
3 hours ago, dudacek said:
Everyone expects a fair amount of salary dumping this off-season as teams struggle with the flat cap moving forward.
Most people tend to focus on the straight salary dump (I’ll pay you take Patrick Marleau) but I don’t think there will be many teams ready to take on horrible contracts, or pay exhorbitant prices to dump them, Instead, I think there will be a bigger focus on teams jettisoning useful pieces that they’d like to keep, but can’t afford, for lesser, cheaper pieces as they re-entrench in the new reality.
We’ve had a fair amount of talk on here about Cirelli, Strome and Kapanen. Here are some other youngish players the Sabres should be calling about to with some potential to strengthen the middle of the roster.
- The Sharks have $41 million invested long-term in five players averaging over 30 years of age. If they don’t/can’t wriggle out of those deals, Kevin Lebanc might have to be sacrificed. He’s an RFA right winger who probably deserves close to $4 million per after a 3rd straight year of showing he can be counted on for 15 goals and 40 points.
- If they want to keep Alex Pietrangelo, the Blues will have to dump a significant amount of cap. One name they may not be able keep is RFA Vince Dunn, a reliable defenceman who is due a decent raise and would slide perfectly into our 2LD slot behind Dahlin.
- The Penguins are in a constant struggle to stay under the cap and would probably love to dump Nick Bjugstad, who has been an oft-injured disappointment since coming from Florida. Bjugstad is older than most on this list, two years from UFA, a 6’6’ centre who can also play RW. His 4.1 million cap hit is a burden at his recent production levels, but looks good at the 49 points he put up two years ago. He can probably be had virtually for free. Jared :McCann, the other part of the Florida deal is a versatile RFA who can play centre or wing and would cost more, but has performed better.
- The Islanders have four forwards making $5-5.5 million, a fifth making $6 million and another one making $7 million. And they are about to back the Brinks truck up for Mat Barzal. Will they really be able to give 20-goal RW Anthony Beauvillier what he deserves as an RFA next summer?
- Columbus is an interesting trade partner. The new deal they have to sign with Dubois this summer might but them over the cap, which means Josh Anderson (this season), and Oliver Bjorkstrand (next) might be tough RFA contracts. Both fill needs in Buffalo. Then there’s talented 25-year-old centre Alex Wennberg who has been a bust under Torts and could be had cheap as a reclamation project. Boone Jenner is a good 3C approaching UFA. Finally, 26-year-old Ryan Murray is a year away from UFA and a perfect fit for the Sabres 2LD spot.
- Vegas is in a tight, but manageable squeeze, depending on whether they want to re-sign Lehner. But you wonder if Alex Tuch ($4.7 for 8 goals on the third line) is someone they may have soured on.
- Jake Virtanen and Adam Gaudette are a pair of RFA third liners with upside the Canucks may hesitate to invest money in given the big ticket Pettersson, Hughes and Markstrom deals pending and their desire to fill other holes.
- On the less-ambitious side, Sam Bennett is a bottom six forward who may have run his course in Calgary. He is an RFA next summer.
- Finally the Coyotes find themselves in the tough position of being bad, tight to the cap and having very few marketable contracts. The exception might be Christian Dvorak, who has five years left on a $4.5 million deal and can give you 40 points as a centre, or at wing.
We’re not talking blockbusters here, just leveraging our cap space for useful players at below-market costs. I wouldn’t break the bank for any of these players, they just might be available and interest me at the right price. Yes, these are the kind of situations Botterill tried to target with mostly horrible results, so buyer beware.
We’re talking Toni Lydman for a 3rd rounder, Miro Satan for two B prospect type deals here. They don’t all have to be Beaulieus.and Veseys.
Terrific breakdown. As you noted players such as Bjorkstrand and Wennberg can be attained for reasonable prices. Instead of trying to make a blockbuster type deal that will strip a thin roster a couple of (somewhat) reclamation projects could be terrific bargain pickups. The approach that you describe in your breakdown that I am more disposed toward is that there are secondary type players who would be terrific value pickups that add to the roster without much diminishing the roster.
-
2 hours ago, freester said:
If Dubas wants Montour I would do the deal. I think Ralph likes Risto more than Montour.
Krueger has frequently praised the play of Risto. And he has demonstrated his confidence in him by playing him maximum minutes even after stating that he would like to lower his minutes. At the end of tight games Risto most likely was on the ice. And it is very likely that with Adams as the GM Krueger will have a major say in assembling this roster.
-
11 minutes ago, dudacek said:
I fear that trading Risto for a 20-goal, 40-point winger plugs a 15-minute a night hole while opening a More important 23-minute a night hole.
But maybe the “Risto sux, Miller and Jokiharju are so much better” crowd is right.
I'm in the distinct minority but I'm willing to throw Cozens immediately into the fray and have him be our 2C with the expectation that another forward can be added to the second line to make it more credible.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Curt said:
You think someone is going to trade a top line (30+ goal, 60+ point) forward for Risto? I hope so, but I fear you may be a very long time waiting on that offer.
I'm not expecting a top line player just for Risto. However, if I throw in a first round pick then I want a first line player or no deal.
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, Curt said:
Personal opinion: Kapanen is a 2nd line W and young enough that maybe he can improve further. Kerfoot is a 3C.
If the players are the caliber of players that you judge them to be then I would be hesitant to deal Risto while open to deal Montour in this exchange. I'm open to trading Risto but I want to get better value for him.
-
1 hour ago, freester said:
Toronto is desperate for RD and has forward surplus and cap issues. We can’t worry about rivals. We need to become a legitimate NHL team
Are Kerfoot and Kapanen considered second-line talent? If they aren't I would not make the proposed deal.
-
19 hours ago, TheCerebral1 said:
When does 9 years of missing the playoffs, with the same players not become an issue. Change needs to happen....and while I don't even dislike McCabe that much, if you get a serviceable return, move on.
I never understood the logic that because a team has struggled it was imperative to get rid of players for the sake of change. If a player isn't a reason for the team's struggles then why feel compelled to jettison the player for the sake of a change. Maybe the better approach would be is to add more talent so the player/s will be in a better situation to win.
There will be changes made to this roster. Few people, if any, believe that it would be smart to continue with the status quo. The right approach is not to shed players for the sake of change but to get the right mix of players that will better balance your imbalanced roster.
-
2
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:
I don't think it was a wise move to open up the roster/ cap situation this much when we are likely on most players no-trade list and not a favorable destination for FA. That pretty much leaves an inexperienced GM being forced to trade for players or re-sign guys you didn't really want to sign.
We only have 4 signed forwards. We have 4 RFA's we could sign. That would leave about 5 spots to fill while not being anyone's choice of destination.
The Sabres are not a free agent destination. They never were. That's well known by the organization and won't be the primary approach to improving the team. The team is more likely going to rely on trades, and if it is going to get involved in free agency it won't be for the top echelon players on the market. The second tier free agent players will be targeted. In addition, young players such as Tage, Cozens and Mittelstadt will be given opportunities to contribute. Not all of them will rise to the occasion but the opportunities will be there for them. There are a number of teams that will be squeezed by their cap situation. The Sabres are in a good situation to capitalize on that situation by working out some good deals.
-
2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
So he brought in short term contracts, that put us at the cap, so in the future when the short term contracts were gone, he could also spend to the cap?
Reinhart should have been extended last year.
They could have been in this position last year. I don't find it problematic, I find it problematic that he had this opportunity for at least 1 if not 2 years and instead continued the policy of doing nothing but adding garbage. What big contract is he now free of that handicapped him? Bogo? Sure but he also added Simmonds and Frolic that means he had the money. What about adding Vesey, there's 3 million of useless money on the cap. There weren't any big contract that are suddenly gone that Botterill himself did not bring in. The only exception is Bogo's 5.25mil
Again, what contract was there on this team, this season that handcuffed him? There isn't one.
Adding players such as Simmonds and Frolic were basically stopgap acquisitions. Just because you have some cap money to work with doesn't mean that the players you might want to add in the present time are available at that time. You bring up three players such as Simmonds, Frolic and Vesey. They were all added with short term contracts. If you categorize them as garbage that's fine. None of them are worth debating over because that garbage will be gone this season leaving the Sabres in a position (hopefully) to make some impactful deals to fill their spots.
Pegula Sports Entertainment, behind the scenes
in The Aud Club
Posted
Botterill is rightly evaluated for his performance over the last three years. On the other hand the decisions that are going to be made this offseason by Adams and staff are the same decisions that Botterill would have faced if he were retained. I'm very aware that my opinion on him is contrary to most others opinion of him. It should be acknowledged that the former GM put the Sabres in a good situation to rework and upgrade the roster for next season. He had a more long turn plan to rework the roster and salary structure. Not only did time run out for him his reluctance to sync with the owners' altered plans contributed to his departure.