JohnC

Marty Biron who is frequently on WGR has stated on numerous occasions that he didn't believe that addressing the goalie situation should be a priority. His repeated lamentation was that the organization needed to bring in players and develop players within the system who can score. I'm sure the organization would not be adverse to upgrade the backup goalie but if they couldn't it do for a reasonable price they probably wouldn't do it. Others have brought up the possibility of bringing in Fleury with the hope that Vegas would pay some of the contract and take Hutton. If the Sabres then dealt a player such as Montour or Miller for picks, saving on a contract, that a Fleury deal was not an outlandish thought. Upgrading the goalie position would make a big difference.

It takes courage to be patient. As you point out there will be some good value picks that will become available that could make our roster better. It shouldn't be surprising that sometimes the cheaper and lesser talent is a better value acquisition than the more expensive talent. It allows you more flexibility to address other needs than if a more expensive player was acquired that would limit your options to address other needs. The normal contract expectation for the mid-tier players (good players) is different than what it was prior to the virus era. It's like musical chairs for this large group of players. They are risking being left out of the money grab if they wait too long for the future better deals that don't materialize. Organizations that know how to be patient and selective will be able to adjust to this turbulent and unsettling environment. Just because fans panic to the moment shouldn't mean that smart front offices should get caught up in the frenzy.

With respect to the highlighted segment you and I are in accord. That was my point. Is there an official statement that the owners are going to institute a hard cap that is smaller than the league designated cap? No, for the simple reason that the owners are not willing to make a declarative statement on the internal cap other than being clear that business is not going to be conducted as it has in the past. Then what followed? The scouting department and associated costs were dramatically cut and staff in general have been let go. These were not inconsequential changes! Most often what is most telling is not what is said but what is done. Based on what has been done post Botterill with respect to cutting costs it isn't a grand leap to draw a conclusion. I acknowledge that there isn't an official statement coming from the organization. But that doesn't mean that you can't make obvious judgments based on the actions after the Botterill departure. What I am saying is that I don't believe that the Sabres will spend up to the cap. I'm not criticizing that response because it is an understandable and a reasonable response to the substantial loss of revenue. The Sabres were losing a boatload of money in what was considered normal times. The expectation is that they will be losing more in this abnormal virus induced business climate. So the expectation of not spending up to the cap should not be surprising for the Sabres and many other franchises. If there is an internal cap (and I believe there is) I don't consider it to be catastrophic from a competitive standpoint if it is handled smartly. What is the internal cap? My guess is that it will be between 72-75 M. If that is the figure it is workable.

The Sabres went to the former GM and told him that he had to radically cut the staff. He would not agree to it. He was subsequently fired. Immediately afterward the staff and associated operating costs were dramatically cut. The coaching staff was asked to take a pay cut. They did. They then were asked to take another cut. They said no. What I am attempting to demonstrate is that there is an actual tough response to cutting expenses that include spending on players. What is going on in Buffalo with the internal cap is going on elsewhere in the league due to the loss of revenue for the league in general. It has been reported that Arizona may have an internal cap of less than $70 M. Business is not being done as usual because of the dramatic loss of revenue in this virus era. I'm very confident that the Sabres will not be spending up to the designated league cap. Although it is not openly acknowledged (as you put it) by the organization it is widely reported by people who follow the team. What's going on here is going on in many places. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nhl/report-sabres-could-face-an-internal-salary-cap/ar-BB18W0Qt https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2020/09/sabres-coaches-declined-pay-cut-team-considering-internal-salary-cap.html

And so am I.

The bottom line is that it doesn't seem that the Sabres were interested in retaining him. And I'm not sure he was interested in coming back? What's obvious is that there weren't many teams that were interesting in bidding for his specialty services. He ended up going to a team with most likely with the lowest payroll in the league for a paltry contract. I really don't believe that his loss is going to have a tangible effect. In my humble opinion there is too much analysis for a transaction that isn't as consequential as many are making it out to be. I wish Larry well in Arizona.

That's exactly the point for a team that is not going to spend to the designated cap. You cut where you can at the lower level so that you can add to the higher lines.

I think Lazar is a better offensive player. That is not to say that is his role. Larson did excel at puck possession but that didn't translate into conversions. I'm happy that Larsson found another place to play and hopefully refresh his game. But I'm not bothered very much by his departure.

Larsson was a fourth line player who had a defensive role. He was replaced by a player for almost half the price. The way teams are handling the cap is to pay the lower lines less in order to pay the premium price for the top two lines. It is unfair to compare Lazar offensive stats with Larry's stats because Lazar didn't come close to having the regular playing time. Playing intermittently is a challenge that skews when making comparisons.

I'm not suggesting that Lazar is a scoring dynamo. But because he is a better skater than Larsson he will have more scoring opportunities. Again, I appreciated the effort Larry brought to the team but I'm not distressed by his departure. His market value for the team that signed him wasat bargain bin level. He was replaced by a player who can play his role more than adequately and do it for almost half the price. From an analytical standpoint it was a good deal.

He did value Larsson. But the calculation was made that he could be replaced with a cheaper player who could offer more scoring. There were cost/benefit tradeoff calculations made. The organization sought to seek an alternative that was cheaper, more offensively capable and a faster skater. Don't dismiss the speed aspect in the calculation.

If the fourth line in its new composition adds more scoring then it will be more of a contributing line. The Larry line was mostly defensively oriented with little offensive contribution. I expect the reconstituted fourth line to be still more of a defensive line but more able to make an offensive contribution. For a team that doesn't have enough scoring coming from its lower lines I will accept the tradeoff. Angry Larry got a $1.4 X 2 deal from Arizona. That was his market value. With the Sabres he fulfilled his role. But he was far from being an indispensable player. Lazar is not the defensive stalwart that Larsson is but the tradeoff is he has more offensive capability and is a faster skater. With a cheaper price I will accept that tradeoff. I just think that you are overanalyzing his departure. For me the plusses and the minuses balance out.

He certainly can. Larsson is better defensively but Lazar has better scoring skills and is a faster skater. There are tradeoffs. And if you factor in the contract there is a cap saving that should be made in the calculation. What was angry Larry's market value? It was $1.4 per. So let's not exaggerate the value of his role when compared to the replacement. Again, I always liked him and appreciated his role. But he was not an indispensable player.

I have always appreciated what Larsson has done for the team. But let's not carried away here. He got a $1.4 X 2 contract. That was his market value. The player who is most likely going to replace him is Lazar who is going to be paid $800,000 X2. Larsson is a better defensive player but Lazar has more offensive capability than Larsson. So from a cost effective deal the way the organization handled the player and the role made a lot of sense.

Terry P is certainly backing away form big spending just like most of the other owners. There is no secret about the Sabres's internal cap. It has been widely reported. I don't know exactly what it is but it is less than the designated league cap.

It called arithmetic. Something is better than less or none.

There are plenty of places that are not popular destinations. The west coast is a popular location for many players while many players prefer to play in eastern cities. You may be surprised but for some players who grew up around the Toronto area Buffalo is a good location because it is not far from their family and friends. Skinner is an example of that. Hockey is a business that entails a lot of player movement. It's simply the nature of the business. The reality is that the most important influence where a person signs is the size of the contract.

He's the most physical defenseman on the team. Deduct him and you have a mostly finesse unit. And that isn't adequate. You may not think highly of him but the coach does. That's why he get so much playing time, especially at the end of the game.

My sense of what is going on is that mostly through the influence of Krueger the organization is attempting to alter the style of play from a finesse and east/west skating to a more north/south and harder style of play. He wants a grittier team that can win more battles. This is reflected in his seemingly reluctance to embrace Skinner who although is one of our best snipers may be considered a floater on the ice. And that style of play is anathema to Krueger. And it shouldn't be surprising that Krueger has a greater appreciation of Risto (as I do) than many others because of his rugged (although sometimes obtuse) style of play.

Putting aside the credibility of the tweeter if the Sabres are offering Kahun less than $2M and the player is asking for $2.5 M on a two year deal then I am starting to feel uncomfortable. The salary context is that Girgs got $2.2 M per and TT got $1.7 M per. It is not unreasonable to believe that Kahun is worth somewhere between $2--$2.5 M. In my opinion Kahun is a good third line player who is worth $2M per. I'm aware that the negotiating process is still on going but it would be nice to secure Kahun and then add another piece or two. Kahun is far from being an essential player but he is certainly a nice player who has a contributing role. There is no doubt that Girgs has a different role than Kahun. But Girgs is a more replaceable player and Kahun is the better player. I hope a deal can be worked out for him.

It will be interesting to see if he was offered in the $3 M range per year. And the length of the contract is another interesting question.

As you indicate there is a profile for the kind of player the coach wants. He wants to accumulate players that play hard and play a full, end to end, game. That's Girgs in spades. If he were more of a finisher he would be a 15 goal scorer. What I have never understood is the lame argument that a player who not only isn't a contributing factor for a team losing should be dispatched for the sake of change. There are more than enough players that should be moved but not the players who keep playing hard and responsibly while subjected to the depressing realization that the team you are playing for isn't going anywhere meaningful. This transaction wasn't a big move but it was a good move.

A lot of interesting maneuvers. But I don't foresee such a dramatic change because I don't believe that the Sabres will be spending to the cap. The internal cap will probably be around the mid 70s M, if that. So one or two of the higher priced players you added will probably be substituted for mid-priced players. Under normal economic circumstances your shuffling of players would be much more plausible.

I agree with you. My takeaway from the interview is that the organization is not giving up on him as a prospect. As you noted he is not penciled in for anything. He is going to have to demonstrate what he is capable of. If he doesn't earn a roster spot I see him going back to the AHL in order to work on his game. The entitlement era is over with. You get what you earn. And that is the right way to conduct business.

Could you and some of your wise cohorts give a brief evaluation of Toffoli? Could he play on our first line or is he a second line player or lower?