Archie Lee

Great post. It is an argument for re-signing Byram. Also, if we do trade Byram, it is an argument to just pair Power with Dahlin, as I think their results could be similar. It's ok to just put your two best D-men together and let them play 25 minutes a game. Maybe Samuelsson and Kesselring would work together as a 2nd pair.

I'm not trying to sway anyone on this, but of all the accomplishments of UPL and Levi, the single most impressive thing that either of them has done, and it isn't close in my view, is UPL playing 54 NHL games in 23-24 and going 27-22-4 with a 2.57 GAA and a .910 save %. Nothing Levi has done in his career, comes close to this as it relates to actually translating to NHL success. I wouldn't say I have tremendous faith in UPL at this point, but at least it can be said he has an actual good NHL season in his recent history.

My best guess is if Marner goes to Vegas he gets something in the Rantanen range ($12-$13). $14 mil was, I think, always the outer edge of what it would take a non-contender or a team in a high-tax state or province, to be in on him.

I’m not trying to convince you of anything. But the Sabres being bad in general doesn’t mean the Dahlin/Byram pairing was bad. Last year, the pairing was very good. That’s all.

Isn't this a combination of the two? Even strength they were on the ice together for 35 goals for (offense) and 15 goals against (defense). 70% of the goals scored when Dahlin and Byram were on the ice together at even strength, were Sabre goals. That's really, really good. Also, why are you not including offensive stats in your evaluation of D-men?

If Mrtka was truly 7th on their board, and their top 6 went top 6 in the draft, then that means they had Mrtka rated higher than Hagens. Which is interesting. Not bad, necessarily. But I don’t think that would have been the case two years ago.

I think @LGR4GM is right that the acquisition cost on Robertson would be higher than you propose. I think it would cost us one of Benson or Kulich or Helenius and maybe two of them. I would happily give them Quinn in such a deal, but I doubt they would have any interest in him as part of a package for Robertson. Also agree that you are likely between $1-2 million light on the McLeod deal. Ehlers is my sneaky “the Sabres might have a chance” UFA candidate. It was reported last year that Ehlers, who had some trade protection, would accept a deal to the Sabres but was not willing to extend. That means that either Buffalo was not on his NT list or they were but he was ok with it anyway. His lack of willingness to extend could be viewed that he didn’t see himself staying in Buffalo longterm, but it could just mean he wanted to go to UFA and see what his value is on the free market. Also, I am certain I have seen more than one interview with Ehlers when the Jets were playing the Sabres, where he spoke positively about Buffalo or the Sabre players. He gives me Ekholm vibes; he might value things other than palm trees and low taxes.

For it to work, Byram, Norris and a contract in the Quinn, Greenway, Samuelsson territory would need to go.

They need to add a goalie who is above the level of a guy they can sneak through waivers on cut-down day. That’s likely the best we can hope for. There are no great options, maybe no obvious good options. I would probably try to sign Vladar, but I acknowledge that he is not a great option.

Until we see otherwise, I think the safe money is that the Sabres will spend to an internal cap that comes in under $90 million. I could be wrong and this is the year they go big. It sounds like the Canucks are keeping Pettersson (unless there is news I’ve missed), but if he is available the Sabres could take a run. If the Sabres moved Byram and Norris in a Pettersson trade, they would still have room to add Robertson for futures. A top line of Pettersson centring Robertson and Thompson, would certainly change how the Sabres are viewed.

I wholly disagree with this. Benson on the left wing on a line with Thompson on RW, and Norris or Kulich at centre, will have one giant question mark, and it won’t be Thompson or Benson.

I personally doubt that Peterka or most modern players have great issues with tough coaching. It is a misconception in my view, that the modern star athlete has been coddled by parents and coaches through their young lives. I actually think the opposite is more likely to be true and that they have been driven hard. My best guess is that Granato said things in meetings, practices, and games, that if said to us at work would have most of us calling HR. Sometimes it’s not the message but the delivery. I’m not a Ruff fan. I admire what he did as a Sabre coach a generation ago. I don’t think he is currently the right guy for this or any NHL team. He comes across as fake tough to me. I think players see through his bluster and that there is little substance there. System and structure are just slogans and catchphrases. Maybe Peterka is just a chronic pouter. For now though, when it comes to the question of where the blame lies in the erosion of a relationship between the Sabres and a young player, I see no reason to give the benefit of the doubt to Pegula or Adams. I’ve seen multiple young players who didn’t want to be here go on to better things. I’ve yet to see Pegula and Adams do the same here.

Here is my issue with the 2 trades the Sabres have made: they are not the trades that are made by a 79 point team that is committed to making the playoffs after 5 straight years of missing under a GM who is in the last year of a contract (never mind Pegula's larger 14-year Reign of Error). Shayna Goldman said something similar on Sabres Live, when explaining why she graded Utah higher than the Sabres in the Peterka deal. It's not that the trade is entirely bad or that the players coming in aren't good, it's that the Sabres need something bigger, something more substantive, something that puts them on the path to being a playoff team this year. The two trades they have made so far, do address handedness on D (something Adams previously told us he doesn't worry about), and they do make the Sabres bigger and harder to play against (also things that Adams previously seemed unconcerned by). They don't make the Sabres more experienced (by age, games played, playoff history, etc.). On balance, they probably don't make the Sabres more talented as Peterka would currently be considered the best "talent" in the trades. They do make the Sabres younger and cheaper, and a reasonable concern is that these are the most important factors. Until we see the return on the Byram trade and/or what the Sabres do in free agency or with other trades, these are trades that nibble on the edges of what the Sabres need to do to take a next step. For now, the big picture is that the trades are fine (I guess), but ultimately they are not the big swings that the Sabres need to take.

I’m a vacuum, I like the trade. I don’t like that it makes us younger. I don’t like that the focus seems to be on getting cheaper (though dumping Clifton is good). Timmons is projected by AFP to get $2.6 on a two year deal. Also, in less than 12 months we have gone from handedness not being an issue to it being ultra-important. It all ties in to the view that there has never been a coherent plan.

McLeod is the closest thing we have to a sure thing at centre. And I know he isn’t a sure thing. He is actually the one guy I am low-key worried about getting an offer sheet. He will turn 26 in Sept. He is 6’3”. He is a natural centre. He is one of the best skaters in the NHL. He is good defensively. He can win face-offs. He is a good and dangerous penalty killer. And he just had a 53 point season, where he never had consistent line mates. Regression is a real risk, to be sure. But with centres being hard to come by and with the cap going up to $113 million in two years, $7 million for a centre who profiles like McLeod, isn’t crazy in my view. If you are a team with a lot of cap space that is a contender and needs a centre and isn’t worried about losing their 2026 1st, say Carolina or Winnipeg, I think a 5x$7 offer sheet for McLeod could make sense. That would cost them something like picks 27 and 98 in 2026.

McLeod is a much surer thing as a top 6 centre for the coming season, than Kulich. Not even close.

It’s a bit cringey to me.

I agree with that tweet. I’m not outright down on Quinn. I like the kid. I still think he has upside. I hope he busts loose this year. But he was a net negative player last year. You can’t pay almost $3.5 million to a player without greater certainty that they will positively impact your team. Whether they spend to the cap or have an internal cap, that’s money that needs to be spent on a more sure thing, in my view. I guess he could still be traded. But this makes it less likely, I think.

On Rust, I might be wrong on this, but I think he has a partial NTC through June 30th and it comes off July 1. So, unless we aren't on the list or he outright waives his NTC, a trade might not be an option until July 1. Again, I might be wrong.

Just for clarity, Rust started 50% of his shifts "on the fly". Of his shifts that began with a face-off, 62% started in the o-zone. This is ok by me, as it is how I would use him with Kulich and Zucker. My heavy d-zone, match-up, line would be McLeod, Greenway and Tuch. Three big and lengthy players who can all play solid D, two of whom can really skate, two of whom can play physical, one of whom can be nasty. Norris, Benson, Thompson would be line 1. This is potentially weak, but Thompson has 50 goal seasons in him I think, and Benson can take a step forward and drag them into the fight most nights. Krebs, Malenstyn, Doan are line 4. Doan will hopefully make line 4 what it was intended to be a year ago. Rosen, Kozak, Lafferty would be the depth, with likely two of them headed to the Americans to start the year. Centre is not strong with Norris and McLeod both playing a line higher than ideal (Norris, to me, more so than McLeod). I also, generally, just don't think Ruff has it in him to get a team playing with the needed structure. A good coach though, and I think it is a playoff capable group of forwards.

We are all just fans. Nobody here traded Peterka for anything and nobody here is trading Byram.

Helenius, I would say no. Quinn or Rosen? Yes. We are running out of positions for Quinn if we acquire Rust.

Well, I disagree with you that Byram is a poor player.

You make great points. I like both players that we acquired. The Sabres are not so deep that we are in a position where we can only get better if we get the best player in a 2 for 1 trade. It may well work out. Here is an issue I have. I don’t recall where I saw it, but this morning someone posted a current list of the NHL’s youngest teams based on current rosters. The Sabres are 3rd youngest. The teams around us are generally a who’s who of NHL teams that nobody thinks will make the playoffs in 2025-26. Kesselring and Doan are both younger than our average age. That doesn’t mean that Kesselring and Doan are too young to help an NHL team win. But if a person thinks, as I do, that youth and inexperience were factors in our regression over the past two seasons, then Adams didn’t address that shortcoming with this trade.

Assuming the Sabres stay where they are, there are two names I want to hear get called before then: O'Brien and McQueen. That will mean Martone, Hagens, or Martin have fallen (I don't think there is any chance Frondell or Desnoyers fall to #9).