JohnC

This is a terrific post that has a lot of thought behind it. Your list of players who potentially can be targeted is encouraging that options will be available. Is KA creative enough and has the fortitude to act? I hope so.

Responding to your second paragraph, the answer to what KA is going do is not a mystery. He's frequently stated that his center of attention is on the lower lines. Clearly, that makes it unlikely to make some blockbuster deal to bring in a player such as Thachuk is going to materialize. That bothers a lot of people; it doesn't bother me as much. Although, if a 3C is not added, I will be disappointed. I agree with you that it's more likely that KA is going to focus his attention on the lower lines than on the top two line. As you point out, he has been candid about what his intentions are this offseason. But that doesn't mean that nothing has changed from last year. As you astutely pointed out in another post, both Quinn and Samuelsson will be back. Those are two significant return additions from last year's roster. The source of many posters' disagreement with my view about the roster is that I strongly believe that remaking the lower two lines by bringing in players from the outside are consequential moves in that it centers around the issue of roster construction. As an example, I thought the Greenway acquisition was a good deal for a reasonable price (second round pick). He added an element of toughness that was lacking in this roster. We need a few more similar deals to better round out the roster.

Your response is perplexing? Who is arguing to do nothing? No one is, including the organization. The Cup finals haven't even started. The draft is still a little way off---a time where many deals are made. Who is arguing that we shouldn't use our potential assets to address the present roster? No one is! You are making an assumption that something isn't going to happen during a period of time when transactions usually don't happen. Before getting intensely agitated about the inaction during a period of inaction, how about waiting for the period when most transactions happen. If you assess the number of post season transactions league wise, you'll find that there haven't been many deals made at this point yet. I'm confident as the finals wind down the rumors will be flying about deals for the Sabres and all teams in the league. TBD!

You and others make the assumption that the Sabres can't make a better deal than the proposed three UFA deal. That's at the heart of the disagreement. If I'm going to include in a trade our first-round pick, I would expect a better return on players and contract terms. We'll just have to wait and see.

Cirelli is brought up a lot in this site about an attractive player to target. I'm aware that Tampa will be squeezed somewhat in trying to work a deal for Stamkos. However, I haven't heard anything about Tampa being interested in shedding this particularly player. Tampa may be in the beginning in their down cycle but why would they shed one of their instrumental players when they are still a very competitive team? An interesting question regarding Tampa is would it be better for Tampa to lose Stamkos if his contract demands are too high if it was the reason for not being able to retain Cirelli who recently signed a long-term contract? I simply don't see Cirelli being available for any team at this point.

In general terms, we both are in accord that our GM has to be proactive in adding talent to this team this offseason. I totally agree that we have some excess assets to parlay. In how that should be done we have some space between us. We shall see.

In all likelihood the focus of attention for the GM relates to redoing the lower lines. (That's what he has stated.) That caliber of player/s is available. Overpaying in assets is not the right way to pursue this level of talent. I'm open to all sensible options. And that includes trading our first pick. But I'm opposed to dispatching that valuable pick for the proposed UFAs. That makes no sense to me.

An organization that acts out of desperation instead of measured calculation is a sign that the organization continues to ineptly handle its business. That's not how you attract players; it's how you continue to make players shun your franchise. There are deals to be made this offseason. The proposed deal is an example what not to do. There is a myth here that no one wants to come here. That's far from the case. Buffalo certainly is not appealing to a lot of players. That doesn't mean that other players can't be brought in. Players can be added through trades and free agency. If option A isn't attainable, then go to option B-Z.

If the proposed deal was for Sam Bennett, I would be open to it. I'm adamantly opposed to giving up assets, that includes our #11 pick, for three UFAs. That makes no sense to me. Acting out of desperation is putting yourself in a vulnerable position when getting involved in the trade market. We can do better in the market.

I respectfully but strenuously disagree. You are making an assumption that getting those three UFAs will be the difference in making the playoffs or not. There is also another false assumption regarding that proposed trade that alternative options for other players won't be collectively as good if not better than the proposed trade. I feel strongly that if you are going to deal your valuable #1 pick, that you can get a better return in a different deal for players that more likely will not be one-year rentals.

Absolutely no! I'm not giving up Quinn in any trade unless it is a zany deal that is overwhelmingly in our favor. Quinn returning to health and form is going to be one of our key players.

The prospects in our system are not going to push this team over the hump. Most people agree to that view. That's not what is being arguing here. The proposed trade of dealing away Joki, Krebs and our #1 pick for three UFAs make little sense to me. As you acknowledged, it is an overpay. So why do it, especially if the lower lines can be improved and reconfigured with attainable players without giving up much in assets? As you keenly observed, the source of this team's improvement is going to come from the half a dozen players you have listed. And as @LGR4GM noted the return to health of Quinn and Samuelsson will certainly bolster this roster. And don't discount the importance of the new coach installing more structure and accountability to this loose team being important additions. If our GM doesn't act to improve this roster (most notably bottom half), then he should be sent packing. A passive offseason strategy shouldn't be tolerated. I'm certainly not against making deals. But to make a bad deal (overpay) just to demonstrate you are taking some action isn't the right course of action to take.

Your last sentence precisely captures the issue of the balance between cost and outcome. There is no one here who doesn't want to urge this middling organization to extend itself to do what is required to make this a playoff team. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't do it in a smart and balanced way. I just think that @Archie Lee has it right that there should be a better cost/balance ratio when considering player trades. It doesn't seem to me that the proposal that included our #1 pick for three UFAs meets calculation.

The #11 pick added to Krebs and Joki is too rich for me for the proposed Seattle deal. In return we get three UFA players, essentially rentals. That's a definite no for me. There are players to be had in trades that will help to strengthen our lower lines. This seems more like an act out of desperation than a smartly calculated deal. There are a number of teams that are in a cap bind where players will have to be dealt because of it. The best approach is to be patient and wait to see how the market shakes out. Our #11 pick is a valuable asset to be used or parlayed. I'm not wasting it by using it on players who will be on their UFA year.

The Sabres have some glaring weaknesses. Face offs and players who know how to maneuver in the tight and punishing spots around the net are two of those deficiencies. We could sure use a player like him on this roster. It's really frustrating to see so many former players playing for Cup contending teams. It's sad and happened because of our own organizational ineptitude.

Your memory doesn't correspond with mine. Reinhart was one of our best and toughest players around the net. In addition, he was one of the smartest players that has ever warn the Buffalo uniform. He left Buffalo as one of our best players. The primary difference between when he was with Buffalo compared to Florida is that he is playing with better players. The Sabre front office has made a telephone book number of mistakes that has kept this franchise mired in the muck of mediocrity. Not signing him when it had the opportunity to do so was a hideously bad decision.

That's a fair way of describing his game. He possesses a willingness to go to areas and compete for the puck that a number of players seem to lack. I expect a lot from him this year. It was a shame that he was plagued with injuries last season.

This is simply my opinion: I do see him as a player with more grit than I expected. I'm not going to get carried away and say that is his main attribute. But when you watch him play, he is willing to go into the corners and battle. And he has the determination to go to the tough areas around the net. In many respects, he plays a more rugged game than JJP.

Based on he played last year, it seems that his style of play is more suitable to the fourth line. My sense is that we should be able to determine what the upper limits of his game will be this year. To be honest, I've been disappointed in him. I thought he had more offensive bandwidth. He plays with energy and grit with not much offensive production. The best approach to take with him is put the onus on him to "show us".

I'm not giving up on Krebs. But that doesn't mean that I'm counting on him to be our 3C this upcoming season. If he plays beyond our expectation, then good on him, and the team benefits. However, it would be a mistake not to bring in a credible 3C from the outside to address a major void on this team. Right now, it is more likely that Krebs is going to be slotted in the 4C role. If he plays above that role, then I will salute him and deal with an excess of talent on the roster. And that is a good problem to have.

What are you talking about? I never said he shouldn't be physical. In fact, I said the opposite. He did to a greater extent play more physically than most of the other players on the roster. The point that I made that you misinterpreted is that he was usually smart when deciding to more physically engage, and when not to.

Dahlin is arguably the best player on the team. I want him more involved in the play than being sidetracked with non-productive hitting. As I said in my prior post, he does play a physical game. But he does it in a judicious and game related manner. Playing a reckless and non-focused hitting game is going to get him more time in the penalty box and keep our best off the ice more. The opposition would love that!

Who are you pursuing as one of our top two or three Cs?

I'm not commenting on how he looks and what his upper body physique should look like. What I can say is that last season Dahlin exhibited as much physicality as any player on the team. He certainly didn't always throw his weight around. You really wouldn't want anyone who was such a central and skilled player for us indiscriminately doing that. But from what I observed, he was not a passive player on the ice. Your point is well taken that it is difficult to keep weight and tone on during the long and grinding season. And most of the physical is done in the offseason. So I'm sure he will soon get back into training. As a related side note: I have often heard that Jeff Skinner is one of the hardest training players in the offseason.

What would you give up for him?