Archie Lee

Well, all of this is going to play out in the next month or so. Again, if Byram won’t extend long-term, then he should be moved for the best return possible.

This is my fear. While there have been no real credible rumours this off-season, the two things that have been whispered are: - Byram to San Jose for pieces with the big piece being #30 overall; and - We are interested in Rakell or Rust from Pittsburgh and they like Helenius. I look at those two scenarios and see us trading maybe the best player right now in Byram, who is only 24 and plays a position where it is hard to find really good players, and the best future asset in Helenius who might be a middle 6 NHL centre, for an older winger with depreciating skills and value and a late 1st in a not strong draft. I know these things haven’t happened. And I know I have advocated for acquiring Rust. But these would be, in my view, the desperate moves of a man trying to save his job and not the calculated moves of a skilled GM.

Certainly we would need to lock up Byram before considering a Power trade. Of course if Byram is dead-set against staying in Buffalo, then he should be moved.

So true. Benson is an outlier who is simply a good 200ft player. Benson would have good d-metrics in any system because he is defensively responsible and committed. The narrative a year ago was that players were craving structure and accountability. Adams and Pegula see Ruff as the sort of old school coach that demands from players what they perceive to have been missing; but a closer examination would have allowed them to conclude that Ruff hasn’t been that coach for some time (if he ever truly was). This team needed a Hynes or an Evason.

I am not certain it would be better to trade Power than Byram. I think though that right now Byram is the better player. And I think his game translates better than Power’s to the type of hockey we are watching right now. And I think Byram has the sort of personality that people gravitate to and follow, and, while I like Power, I don’t think he has that gene. And I think we could extend Byram for less than Power’s current AAV of $8.35 million. And I think Power’s draft pedigree might mean he returns a better veteran player in trade. And, like you, I think ending this drought is critical. And Byram is only 17 months older than Power, so there is still lots of runway for Byram to improve. But I definitely could be wrong. And, there is a next to zero chance that Adams trades his first OA pick. The next GM might, but not Adams.

I’m with you (and Baker) on Byram. Extend him and let him be Dahlin’s long-term partner. He just turned 24. Power and Clifton make the same combined salary as Kadri and Andersson in Calgary. I’m not saying straight up (maybe we can get a pick or prospect too) and of course we have trade clauses to contend with, but if you want to make the playoffs this year, wouldn’t we just be a better team if we traded Power, Clifton, Kulich for Kadri, Andersson, and a wanker like Popisil (plus a future asset). And we can take a D at 9.

I have zero expectations that they will act responsibly and effectively, but if I'm in the "they should" mode, then they should act like a normal NHL team and keep the players who are good and can help them win now (see: Byram, Peterka), and move out some younger NHL assets that are not helping them win now and that are, in some cases, a bit over-priced or about to be a bit over-priced (see: Power, Kulich, Quinn, Samuelsson, perhaps Luukkonen, combined 20 million in cap for the coming season), for players who can help them make the playoffs now. Attach a prospect or draft pick to these players if needed, but don't toss away the future. The Sabres can't bring in veteran contracts without sending contracts out. If they want to win now, the contracts that are leaving should be the ones that are least likely to help with that goal.

Correct. But our GM has acknowledged he had no plan for Byram, and our record regressed with Byram (not his fault), and we now, it seems, have to trade Byram and we don’t know what we are getting for him. Sometimes there are no winners in a trade. It’s early to conclude on this one, in my view.

Good thing we aren’t trading Benson for Rust. If anyone has access to the Athletic’s player cards, they rank Rust as a +7 overall (Benson a +2, Peterka a +4). They have Rust’s contract value at $1.5 million higher than his actual $5.125 AAV. Their summary makes clear he is not great defensively. That said, I am not big on a Helenius for Rust or Rakell trade. Quinn, Rosen, and a 2nd? Sure. But as we are plagued by the same things that plagued the Sabres in the Eichel, O’Reilly, Reinhart days (a bad GM and a bad HC), I prefer we hold on to our best future assets out of hope that Pegula gets lucky with his next GM/HC hirings. My worst fears may be unfolding. Our near historically bad GM is about to trade our best future assets in a desperate attempt to save his job.

They showed a stat last night that this was one of only 7 times in history (back to the beginning), where a team overcame a 3 goal deficit to win a game in the finals. Last time it happened was 2006. I agree with the general sentiment that leads are not safe like they were 20 years ago and that game tying goals with an empty-net are now a thing that seems to happen regularly. These are good things. It makes for much better hockey. Last night’s Oiler win, was still a historical outlier though. Further to this, sort of, in his post-game press conference Maurice made a point of saying that he thinks the goaltending has been incredible. He added that the statistics are telling him something different, but the quality of shooters in today’s game is so good that the saves being made are amazing. 10 of the 16 playoff teams will finish the playoffs with a save % below .900. This is also good for hockey in my view.

I always thought that winning or losing a trade, was measured by some nebulous combination of individual player performance and team success. For example, people have long concluded that St. Louis won the O’Reilly trade. They won the cup and the Sabres have missed the playoffs every year since. Yet, Thompson is making a case that he was the best player in that deal (he may have a few 50 goal seasons in him coming). I think Byram is a better hockey player than Mitts. Neither team reached their post-trade goals. But we will need a better return than Charlie Coyle, who we could use, for me to give the clear victory to Adams.

You must have missed the first period. There were bad calls and missed calls both ways. The reffing wasn’t particularly good, but it wasn’t biased or lopsided.

Bizarre take

There is no realistic player transaction that the Sabres could make this off-season, that would have a more immediate impact than replacing Ruff with DeBoer.

I would like to see us trade Quinn+ for Rust. I would flank Kulich with Zucker and Rust as line 3. Give Kulich something we never gave Cozens: two solid veteran wingers who can teach how to be a pro.

You think we should be trading for more 1st rd picks?

It hasn't got us much, has it? The 8 teams that made it to the final 8 this year, have a combined 13 picks in the 1st round in the next 3 drafts. The 8 teams that finished in the bottom 8, have a combined 37 picks in the 1st rd in the next 3 drafts. None of the top 8 are planning to drop out of their positions in the next 3 years. None of the bottom 8 are likely to get into the top 8 anytime soon. What is perhaps interesting, is that the 6 teams that finished below us in the standings all have 5-6 picks in the 1st rd in the next 3 years. The Sabres have no extra 1st rd picks. I'm not saying we should add any 1st rd picks, but it speaks to Adams's level of incompetence that we have clearly passed the stage of acquiring young assets, yet we are still at the bottom of the standings. The teams below us are in rebuild mode; they aren't trying to win. Adams is trying to win, but doesn't know how.

There are competing views on whether Pegula is too involved or disengaged. This video seems to want to dispel the notion that he is disengaged. And yet, it provides evidence that he is a meddler to those who think he is too involved. I haven’t watched such videos for other teams, assuming other teams produce similar content. Do other owners sit in on such discussions? Is Pegula unique? The video, to me, displayed odd editorial choices.

It does seem that it is the plan to roll the forwards back. I suspect they see a healthy Norris as an addition that has yet to arrive. Peterka, Benson, Kulich, Quinn, and even Krebs, they will be looking for additional levels from. I'm sure they think (I do), that Thompson has a 50 goal season in him Tuch could go off in a contract year. You mentioned that nobody wants to move Benson or Kulich. Benson I get, as he brings a sorely lacking element to the team. He is a rare Sabre capable of dragging others into the fight. Kulich I don't quite get. I like Kulich a lot and am not eager to see him traded; but it seems like an obvious place for an upgrade for a team trying to make the playoffs. Yet, they can't simply trade Kulich++ for a veteran centre, even if such a deal was available, as they would have to move out a contract to make room. There is also the reality that Adams makes on average only 1.4 trades per off-season that involve at least 1 NHL player (that's with including the Wil Butcher trade). If I get on PuckPediaGM and start making trades that individually seem at least possible, they almost always lead to another trade being needed and next thing I know I have mocked 4-6 trades. It's just not realistic. I'm thinking realistic moves are: - Byrum and Quinn to San Jose for Ferrero or Liljegren, Dellandrea (a grittier change of scenery winger) and 30th o/a - Maybe a depth D-man in free agency; it wouldn't surprise me to see them bring Gilbert back - Devils depth winger Nathan Bastian is a UFA; I had read that he was a Ruff favourite - A UFA goalie like Alex Lyon or Dan Vladar - Lafferty waived. I'm not trying to sell this, I just don't see them doing much more.

After posting some background data that I think, mostly, supports the argument to not trade Peterka, I should share my opinion that I think the Sabres could trade him (and Byram) for lesser players AND actually get better. I don't think our issue is talent. I think our issue last year was a combination of being too young, too inexperienced, not having the right mix of skill and physicality and toughness, not having the right leadership on and off the ice, and generally bad coaching. I think if you swapped* (as examples) Peterka, Byram, Clifton, Luukkonen, for Bryan Rust, Cody Ceci, Mario Ferrero, and a healthy Thatcher Demko, that the Sabres could actually change their roster make-up enough to be a playoff team. Not a contender, but a 96-97 point Ottawa Senator or Minnesota Wild level WC team. (*Not straight up trades. The Sabres are moving the two best players in this example, and should also get back some significant futures.) Though, I should add, success is unlikely with a Lindy Ruff and Kevyn Adams HC/GM combo. Over their combined last 16 years in their respective roles (11 for Ruff, 5 for Adams), they have produced 3 winning and 3 playoff seasons, for around an 18% success rate. They could fluke a WC playoff spot (we are due for at least such a fluke), but until they produce two playoff seasons in a row, making the playoffs should be viewed with skepticism at it relates to potential long-term success. Both are bad at their jobs. So, any comments or thoughts on roster changes that I make should be considered in the context that I think there is limited possibility of a successful outcome, for reasons that go far beyond the talent level of the players.

Perhaps food for thought. Peterka just finished his D5 season (5th year post-draft). No current Sabre player who was drafted by the team, has had a more uniform and straight-forward rise. In his D1 he played well against men in Germany. In D2 he had an excellent AHL season. In D3 he played a middle 6 role in his rookie NHL season and played to a 34 point pace. In D4 he played a top 6 role and had 50 points. In D5 he played a top 6 to top-line role and played to a 72 point pace. He has improved year over year. Peterka was tied for 51st in NHL scoring this year. There are 24 players who are primarily wingers, who finished ahead of him in scoring; of those players, only Lucas Raymond is younger (by 2 months). I realize there are more factors that make up a player’s effectiveness than just points. Goals are more valuable than assists. Primary assists are more valuable than secondary. Defensive acumen needs to be considered. Attitude and leadership abilities are factors. Can a guy drop the gloves if needed? Will he “accidently” elbow the opposition goalie in the head while pretending to be pushed over in a playoff game? All factors. But, points are still, generally, a primary point of measurement for where a player is placed in the line-up and for how much he gets paid. Of the 24 wingers who had more points than Peterka this past year, here is the post-draft year that they first played to the 72 point pace that Peterka just played to in his D5 season (this is not meant to be an exhaustive list of elite wingers; for example, due to injury this past season, Kaprizov is not on this list). D1: none D2: Ovechkin* (There was no NHL season in Ovechkin’s D1) D3: Pastrnak, Rantanan, Marner D4: Robertson, Raymond D5: Kucherov, Kyle Connor, Guentzel, Konecny, Boldy, Peterka is in this grouping D6: Necas, Filip Forsberg, Bratt, Nylander, Keller, Caufeld, Kyrou, Panarin* (Panarin was not drafted; had he been drafted in his first year of eligibility, then he would have reached the 72 point or greater level in D6, which was also his rookie NHL season) D7: Marchenko, Rakell D8: Reinhart, Hagel D9: Kempe There are 7 players on this list who have been traded. Of those, there is only one example where the player had established himself as an NHL player and the trading team was intending to improve immediately, as a result of the trade. That was Necas, traded this season for a truly elite winger in Rantanan. Generally, teams don't trade players like Peterka when they are 23 years old.

I’m not defending Pegula or Adams (they are bad at their roles, and big picture are obviously more to blame than Ruff). I just think it’s absurd to think that if Ruff, the venerable veteran, hand-picked, nobody else considered, greatest coach in team history, 3rd all-times in games coached and 5th in wins, said that in order to improve chances of winning he needed to bring in one guy that could help install his system or coach the PP, that Adams and Pegula would say no to spending an extra $350K (from what I can gather, about an average assistant coaching salary). I mean, I think things are pretty dire. But that is far more bleak than even I believe. If that’s the case, then we are in “no hope” territory.

As much as I am down on Ruff and think he is no longer a good option as an NHL head coach, I don’t think he is accepting a position where he is that handcuffed. If Ruff thought he needed better assistants, I have zero doubt that he would tell Adams that. And if Adams said no and told Ruff the org won’t fork out $350K to fire Matt Ellis, then I think Ruff would resign. The Sabres just added Staal and Kekalainan to their front office. I would bet they are being paid a lot more than Wilford and Ellis. It defies logic that Pegula would agree to spend more on the front office but won’t pay comparable peanuts to upgrade the coaching staff.

Ok, so what does that say about Lindy Ruff? I’m not defending Adams. Frankly, Adams should have fired the entire staff, did a full actual search for a head coach and let that head coach pick his staff the way it is done around the league (my understanding is that the GM typically has some say). If the Sabres functioned like a normal team, then after 22-23 Adams would have gone to Granato and said, “time to get serious Donny, we are making a couple of changes to the coaching staff”. There are still fans who think Ruff is getting the shaft. He’s a 65 year old independently wealthy man who has coached more NHL games than all but 2 people. Do us a solid Lindy and grow a pair and step down and tell the world that the conditions are not conducive to winning. The point isn’t that Adams isn’t a weasel, he’s a big one. The point is, Ruff is a weasel too.

Any team that trades for Miller will be doing so because they see him as a 1st or 2nd paid d-man. So, a $6 million AAV won’t be out of line (it might be an overpay for what he is, but it won’t be an overpay for what the team thinks they are trading for). For the Sabres, assuming Byram is good as gone, then Miller would either slot beside Dahlin or Power; unless they put Dahlin and Power together (which typically has worked well, I think) and put a right shot d-man with Miller. B-Docker might fit better with Miller than with Power.