Archie Lee
-
Posts
675 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Archie Lee
-
-
15 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
I'm curious what people here would think of this. Saw it proposed and approved of by several people on a Kraken website.
Krebs, Jokiharju and our 1st this year for their3 pending UFAs next year Gourde, Tanev and Larsson.
NTCs I suspect make this a non starter but if I was the Sabres I'd jump on this in a heartbeat.
I think it works as a stand-in for a conceptual roster that includes newly acquired veterans in the following roles: match-up 3C, gritty/banger 4th line winger, and 2nd pair R-shot D (in place of Joker). I don't think Seattle is looking to make such a trade at this point though (as someone else said, more likely at the deadline), and all 3 have trade protection. I think you could acquire a combination of similar players through trade and free agency, without sacrificing #11.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
Also possible Dallas is more worn down by playing tougher opponents. Lot of old guys on that Dallas team and going through Vegas and Colorado was a lot harder than LA and Vancouver. We will see if they have anything left on Sunday.
It could be. I do think Dallas is more banged up. They miss Hakanpaa on D and now Tanev has a bad wheel. Hintz hasn't been himself. They aren't getting nearly enough from Marchment, Duchene and Pavelski, who have 5 goals combined in the playoffs.
The Oilers reported weaknesses (D, team D, forward depth, grit) are overrated though. They are better in those areas than they are largely credited for. Janmark, Henrique, Holloway have combined for more goals (7 ) than the 3 Dallas players I reference. I don't think they will be intimidated physically. Skinner is a wildcard from game to game, so there is always that risk.
That said, Dallas could easily bounce back with something as simple as a great performance by Oettinger in game 6.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, dudacek said:
I have my doubts about Rosen as well, but I'm curious what you mean by the bolded.
Statistically, he finished 3rd in AHL scoring this year among U21 players, ahead of several other high picks.
https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/ahl/stats/2023-2024?age=u21
Looking at players picked in the 10-21 range in 2021, Rosen’s performance and development is either better than, equal to or in the neighborhood of all of them. He suffers when compared to Wyatt Johnston, but then so does almost everyone in the draft. Everyone missed on Wyatt.
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
When the Sabres add Pavelski and Johnston, let me know. Also, I think the OP's point was that the Sabres don't play anywhere near the type of game needed to win the playoffs. The Sabres are like wet tissue paper and the 4 remaining playoff teams are like tempered steel.
I’ve become a bit more cynical in the last year, but I’m not nearly this cynical (yet). Also, I didn’t say we were the Stars in making, but rather that they should be our model and that we have many pieces that align or potentially align with that type of team. The Stars missed the playoffs just 4 seasons ago when Hintz, Robertson, Heiskanen and Oettinger were babies. Whether our owner and GM have the commitment and courage to make the necessary moves to become a team like the Stars (starting with a Skinner buyout this June, which some fans oppose out of concern over $2.44 million in dead cap 5-6 years from now), is another thing. I’m skeptical that there is anyone in the organization with the vision to get it done, but it is most definitely attainable.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said:
The sad thing is that you watch these four teams and realize just how far the Sabres are from being even remotely competitive in today's NHL.
Dallas is the model we should follow. They have an elite young goalie and a couple of elite young defenders. Up front they have great depth, without having an elite #1C. There are some obvious roster parallels (UPL, Dahlin, Power, Cozens, Benson and Quinn or Peterka could be our Oettinger, Heiskanen, Harley, Hintz, Stankoven and Robertson). Tuch is “nice” Benn. There is development to occur and there are depth pieces missing, but I don’t need to squint too hard to see how we could be a team like the Stars with the right approach to player acquisition and usage.
-
10 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
In an ideal world, Adams does 3 things. He brings in a middle 6 forward like Cirelli to create competition and in case someone falls off or gets injured. He brings in 2 brand new bottom 6 guys with character that aren't under 25, I am talking about 28yr old grizzled veterans who have won in the playoffs a bit. Finally number 3, he moves on from Jokiharju and Bryson and backfills those spots with Ryan Johnson and a RHD that can play alongside Power, a veteran, such as Tanev.
This leaves us with 22 players, $86,871,070 in caphits and $828,930 in capspace, so we could add a guy like Savoie if there is an injury (which there will be).
Not saying the article is accurate, and maybe you just have Chatfield as a stand-in for 4th pairing right shot D, but the Athletic big board UFA rankings has Chatfield projected at 5 x $4.1 million.
-
1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
It doesn’t really change anything. We paid a 2nd for 2+ years of a 25-30 pt player in Greenway on a fair contract at 3 mill per season. Why would we pay anything close to that for an 18 pt player on a 2.6 mill contract for a single season?
Tampa thought they were getting another Hagel. That’s not what Jeannot turned out to be. $2.65 million for a 4th line pugilist who can play a bit is steep but it is a bit of what we need, isn’t it? And there is always a chance he gets back some of the scoring touch he showed with the Preds. I don’t think it matters though. Until it happens, I don’t think we will outbid other teams for an asset. There will be Western Conference teams who will pay as much or more. If traded, Tampa will send him west.
-
1 hour ago, Brawndo said:
This does leave about 3 - 3.5 million in space, but spots 21-23 aren't accounted for. If filled with entry level-type deals, it leaves $1 million or less in space.
The thing I don't get about these roster projections is, if we are living in a the find of fantasy world where the Sabres make these kind of major acquisitions in trade and are spending to the cap, then why not go full-fantasy-mode and buyout Skinner? Then you can add a more line appropriate winger for Roy and a veteran right-shot D to pair with Power.
-
10 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
Bennett would be a great addition but I just don’t see it. It’s weird to think that Adams didn’t extend Reinhart, but then he later trades for and extends Bennett.
If the Sabres fail again next season I am still not sure Adams gets fired. Pegula doesn’t trust anyone else, or so it seems.
I suspect Pegula will see a difference between missing by a point or two and missing by 15. If we are in it until the end but miss, then I don’t see a scenario where the Adams/Ruff combo doesn’t get a 2nd year. If they are out of it by the deadline then I think changes might occur. Personally, with the exception of hypothetical extreme outcomes, I will need to see how the year plays out before I opine on whether Adams should be fired
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, GoPuckYourself said:
But the Stephenson now is who we need on this roster, I dont want to wait around for Krebs to possibly be Stephenson in 2-3 years time down the road because there's a good possibility he never will be also.
I doubt a team is signing him at 5 years 5.1M, maybe they will I truly suck at NHL projections but that seems high.
I think he will get that and would be thrilled if it was from us.
-
2 hours ago, GoPuckYourself said:
I think getting Chandler Stephenson to me would be the ideal 3rd line C for us, he offers everything that Krebs doesn't... Skill, toughness, grit, 52.6% on faceoffs. It's absolutely baffling to me what people see in Peyton Krebs at this point. He doesn't score, he doesn't fight, he has some toughness but is more or less just a guy who talks trash every now and again, only has 46.3% faceoff wins (Has over 400 less faceoff attempts as Stephenson and still not better at it). Stephenson is making 2.75M, bump it up to 3.75M per year for a 2 year deal? A nice million increase might entice him.
In 2016-17 when Stephenson was the age that Krebs was last season, he was putting up 38 points in 72 games as a Hershey Bear. It wasn’t until 2021-22, when he was age 27, that he had a breakout 64 point offensive season in the NHL. I get moving on from Krebs if the time for patience is over. But Stephenson wasn’t the Stephenson who you want, until he was a few years older than Krebs is now.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, xzy89c1 said:
a trade for bennet from Florida would be ideal. Hopefully Florida will need to clear some salaries to resign Reinhart. He has one year left. He would be one of our top centers right away. Move Thompson off center and it makes top 6 deeper. Krebs needs to be given a chance at some point to be the third center. When he played up in lineup, it was so brief we never saw what he really is.
And the number one goal of offseason is to buy out skinner. if we don't, not sure anything else matters...
Conceptually, I like the idea of bringing in a centre who can play wing (or moving Thompson or Cozens to wing) and giving Krebs a shot at 3rd C. If we signed Stephenson, as an example, he could play LW to start and if Krebs flounders or a C is injured, you have a 3rd C available to slide over. I don't see us acquiring anyone who is above the level of 4th C who can play 3C in a pinch though.
-
1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:
I'll add here: @dudacek's virulent opposition to the take is a bit perplexing to me.
I'm solidly with @PASabreFan: What has this franchise -- and this group specifically -- done to deserve more latitude from the long-suffering faithful?
There is an enormous gap that exists between giving no grace to a franchise that has floundered for 13 seasons (quite reasonable) and beating up on the character of a 23 year old because he dared to post a photo of himself relaxing with a cocktail (quite unreasonable). Carry on as you wish though.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, dudacek said:
Am I the only one who thinks it unlikely that Jacob Bryson receives his qualifying offer?
I think he rehabilitated his game quite nicely last year and is a serviceable 7, but his QO of $1.9 is far too much for a spare defenceman, especially with what the Sabres are paying their top 5 (or 6 if Henri comes back).
I think the Sabres and Bryson like each other, but I think the only way he’s back is if he agrees to a pay cut. Which he might, because no team is going to give him $1.9M.
I think we offer Bryson a 2-3 year deal at around $1.2 million that clearly establishes his role as being an organizational 6-9 d-man. His future likely hinges on whether he will accept something like this in order to stay or whether he prefers to test the waters to see if he can get a larger role elsewhere.
If we qualify Bryson, and I will be very surprised if we do, it will be a clear sign that Adams has not learned lessons from last offseason.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:
They aren't getting a Top prospect for 3 UFAs
The max is Joki, Rosen, and a 2nd
I'd drop out Tanev but they aren't getting Joki(RFA), Rosen(ELC) and a 2nd for Gourde(UFA) and Borgen(UFA) Mostly because its hard to gauge Gourde's value because you could pole Seattle fans and get everything from 1st round picks to he's a cap dump
I like the idea. Seattle, I suspect though, has every interest in getting back to the playoffs this year. I don’t think they trade those 3 made for playoffs vets for our about to become overpaid d-man who doesn’t fit, the top prospect that Sabre fans value the least and a 2nd. It’s not a deal that makes them better. You can make it work value-wise, but I don’t see it as practical from Seattle’s perspective.
-
39 minutes ago, JohnC said:
If I have to give up either Power or Quinn plus our top pick and Savoie, my response would be absolute not. I'm not diminishing the talent of Tkachuk and the toughness he would add to this roster. My main issue with trading either Power or Quinn in such a deal is that both of these players have a lot more upside. I'm not opposed to giving up our first pick plus any of the prospects in the system.
Our GM will have a number of options to add players to improve and better round out this roster. We don't need to make a blockbuster deal that depletes our roster for one player. Again, for your trade proposal, I firmly say no.
I think that is more than the initial poster is suggesting. It was two assets: 1.) Quinn or Power, and 2). 11 OA or one of our top prospects.
Power and Quinn are not in the same category in my view. Power's value as a recent #1 OA who has the potential to be a #1 d-man, is orders of magnitude greater than Quinn's. Power for Tkachuk straight up is likely fair. Power probably has longer term value, but Tkachuk simply brings elements to a team that it seems every team wants (and that we don't have).
I would trade one of our young wingers (Quinn, Peterka or Benson) and #11, for Tkachuk. I think it would take more though. I think if you went to every team in the league and said you can have either Tkachuk or #11 in this draft plus Quinn AND Savoie, that the vast majority of teams take Tkachuk without the slightest hesitation.
One point though, without a Skinner buyout, any such trade for a high-priced player leaves us pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel for an entire 4th line.
-
2 hours ago, Taro T said:
Realize your comments are generalized, but you picked the wrong post to complain about too little patience for Cozens or that he's the guy that should be the 3rd line C. Every lineup this kid has come up with for this upcoming season has him at 2C with Quinn stapled to his side.
And, while it's likely that Krebs is the 4C this coming season, he very well could be next year's Jost. (IMHO, it's more likely he's the 4C than the 3C, but that's in the mix too.) By next year's Jost mean the 13th F who slots in pretty much anywhere in the bottom 6 when an injury hits. He really needs to be working his butt off this off-season because there is an opportunity there for him to grab the 3C role or he could Asplund his way right out of town or he could be any of several things on the 4th line.
Again, Pat Kane can be on a bonus laden 1 year deal. Meaning he can come it at $1-2MM officially on a contract that would give him a good shot at getting $6MM this year. If the Sabres end up under the cap w/ that bonus, great; there are no cap ramifications the following season. If they don't stay under the cap, that overage gets taken off next year's cap. Which is why having Kane pretty much forces their hand to dump Skinner NEXT off-season provided Kane doesn't hit the proverbial wall this year.
We KNOW there was interest on both sides for a deal but it didn't happen when the Sabres started the year as basketcases. From what Adams has said he's looking for this off-season, expect he would fit the W role to a T. He just needs to convince him that the Sabres have their heads out of their you know whats.
So, no, their remaining cap doesn't keep them from making "two bigger $$ additions."
You are correct that if they can convince Kane to take such a deal then they could fit him and a bigger contract under the cap.
-
5 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:
Two years for Ruff bc of a two year contract? Bc they hired Appert?
Is there something I missed that makes you and others so sure it's two and done for Ruff?
I wouldn't put it past the Sabres to operate in such an odd fashion, but I'm not sold on The Timeline.
My sense is that it is tied to Adams’s extension and the 2 years left on Granato’s deal. If Ruff is successful and wants to keep coaching, he will get extended. Pegula likely did not want to commit any money past two years. Which is also why Ruff was likely the best/only vet coach option. No other veteran successful coach (maybe Boudreau) would have accepted a two year deal.
-
1 hour ago, Taro T said:
Kane is 35 years old and will qualify for a bonus laden contract should he be willing to sign a 1 year deal. Should they sign Kane, it pretty much guarantees that Skinner is bought out NEXT year, but he doesn't have to get bought out this year.
Believe it was GA that said the team has ~17MM they can spend towards the cap. Spending it on 2 sort of expensive players and 2 4th liners is easy to do and, especially with Kane being bonus eligiible it could be done with not breaking whatever internal cap they MIGHT have.
Lastly, people keep saying the team won't spend near the cap and presumably that will doom the season, but would Ruff have signed on if he knew he was getting hamstrung the way he used to when Hasek was around UNLESS he REALLY believed in the team they have here?
To your 2nd paragraph, I encourage you not to take anyone’s word (including mine) for how much cap space we have. Go to capfriendly and utilize their armchair GM tool. Once you sign UPL, Krebs, Joker and Bryson to even conservative deals and promote a few ELCs to backup roles, there is not enough space left to add two 5-6 million $ contracts. There isn’t. Even if you move Joker and replace him with a low level contract, there isn’t space for two bigger $$ additions.
To your 3rd paragraph, I don’t think that having an internal cap that comes in at, say, $81.5, dooms the season. It does make it tougher to upgrade the roster though and thus lowers the chances of success. I do think though that people are underestimating Ruff’s willingness to accept less than ideal circumstances while overestimating the influence he will have. He is the league’s 2nd oldest coach. A year out of the league would likely render him irrelevant to future coaching competitions. He wanted to coach in the NHL this year and coaching the Sabres again is likely viewed by him as a good way to cap a great career. I’m sure he thinks there are good pieces here that might allow for success (and he would be right), but I don’t think current evidence supports that he set a number of conditions that relate to him having a high degree of influence on anything other than coaching.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Taro T said:
Still am expecting Adams to pursue Kane to slot into the top 9 and Cirelli (or similar) to slot into the bottom 6 at C with another 1 or 2 guys to start the year on the 4th line. Will he be able to convince Kane that with Ruff leading the boys that they can contend? Will he be able to actually land Cirelli or similar? Figure those answers are maybe and probably. But those are the 3-4 slots he's likely backfilling this off-season.
Krebs will be 23 this season. Still young, but if he continues to work hard over the off-season he should be able to put on the muscle to play that d-bag style that he seems to want to play. Will it be good enough to be 3C? Maybe in a year or 2, but not expecting it this year; but am still hopeful that he won't have to be good enough to be the 3C on a regular basis this year.
I hate to keep coming back to the same thing, but Kane+Cirelli (or the equivalent) is not possible without both a Skinner buyout and a commitment to being a cap team (neither of which is likely). Kane took a bit of a prove it deal with the Wings last season and then went out and proved it. He was a legitimate difference making winger. He is going to get $6 million plus unless he prioritizes a Cup and opts to sign with a contender for less. Assuming conservative extensions for our RFA's, the $12 million it would cost for Kane + Cirelli eats the rest of the cap and still leaves us with 2/3 of a 4th line to find. I would love it if this were a possibility (ie: we buyout Skinner, commit to being a cap team and make Kane/Cirelli type deals), but I can't see it happening.
-
1 hour ago, French Collection said:
Colorado has cap constraints so it will be interesting to see what Mitts gets. KA made his decision to not have 3 $7M centres and might end up with 3 Dmen making more than that.
I will be angry like most of this board if Krebs starts at 3C. I still hope he can get there through hard work and some tweaks to his game but he has to earn it. KA has to make a move to get this team to a playoff level. The current group could do it but there is a lot that has to go right and NHL depth at C is lacking.
I think Mittelstadt's deal will come in at 5-6 years and between $5-$6 million per, and I think that is what he would have gotten whether he was here or in Colorado. Cozens and Thompson got their deals after having more impressive seasons than any that Mitts has had, specifically when it comes to goals scored. Mitts's performance and value when compared to the seasons that led to the Cozens and Thompson contracts, brings Mitts in at a lower AAV.
I don't have any great issue with starting next season with Krebs getting a shot at 3C. The problem though is we are very thin at C and it will be tough to find a 4C that is good enough to move up for an extended period in the event of either an injury or Krebs not working out. Not to mention, we have no clear option for moving someone into a top 6 role if Thompson or Cozens are out of the line-up. Not to mention, it would be good to have a 5th C also.
What I struggle with is why Adams seemed so willing to discard what was a near perfect situation that he had with Thompson, Cozens, Mitts. At least, near perfect for a team without a true #1C. The best option, in my view, going into next season would have been to move Mitts or Cozens to the wing in the top 6 with Krebs at 3C. Then if you have an injury or if Krebs is just not getting it done, you have a 3rd middle-to-top-six C available to slide in to a centre role. Why Adams did not see the value of this, or thought that it was less valuable than adding Byram to the D corps, I don't understand.
(Note: I'm not down on Byram at all, and think he makes our D better. I don't see his skillset as redundant. Injuries happen on D also, and with Byram we are set-up with 3 strong puck-moving D who can QB a PP; that's not nothing. Also, there are still 3 back-end positions to fill with more defence focused players. That Clifton and Joker aren't ideal defenders does not make it wrong to acquire Byram. There are options that other teams would exercise to upgrade on Joker/Clifton.)
Now, if the plan is to go out and get a centre/LW in free agency such as Chandler Stephenson, or to trade for a Cirelli or a Colton, and to replace Joker with a more more physically-imposing and defensive-focused player, then it all comes together for me. Though this should be the plan it is highly unlikely to occur. For one, it would require a Skinner buyout, which should happen but won't (a Skinner buyout would allow us to spend on both a 3C in the Stephenson/Cirelli range and a 2nd pairing R shot D upgrade to Joker). For two, until proven otherwise I suspect we still have an internal cap that will come in closer to $80 million than $87.7 million. And third, many acquisitions and attempted acquisitions of the Adams era were rumored in advance (it was known we were in on Chychrun, Greenway had been rumored, the Byram for Mitts swap was discussed in the media weeks before it happened). The two centres linked to the Sabres last year were Cates and Laughton from the Flyers. A potential deal with the Flyers might be dead, but it is that quality of C that we are likely to add.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, shrader said:
He's a figurehead and nothing more... or was anyway.
Not saying you are wrong, but based on what? Carolina’s owner was paying Waddell a 7 figure salary as GM, to not be the GM?
-
19 minutes ago, Weave said:
Yup. I bet the info they use looks nothing like the info generally available to fans.
And, it's not used to identify the best players...it's used to identify the best players that we can afford and who will come to Buffalo. I don't think the analytics department said to Adams that he needed to go out and get Stillman. More likely is that we needed a D-man and the analytics department said if all you are prepared to pay is Josh Bloom and $1.3 million in cap, then Stillman is about as good as you are going to get.
-
29 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
I don’t think they listen to Ventura at all; not on trades, on line pairings; not on D pairings. The only exception maybe draft picks.
There is very good chance that Adams re-signs Joki and Bryson and concentrates on spending on forwards. Johnson then starts in the minors.
The pairings would be (somewhat based on xGF from last season)
Dahlin Jokiharju - xGF% 56.22
Power Samuelson - xGF% 56.36
Byram Clifton - xGF% 71.05 (limited sample size)
Bryson
Bryson
I don't think we have any idea the degree to which they do or don't listen to the analytics department. Every team, it seems, now has their own models that they use that are different from the public models (why have an analytics department if you can just subscribe to a few websites). Maybe we did largely follow what our analytics department recommended. How would we know?
-
1
-
2
-
2024 NHL DRAFT Talk
in The Aud Club
Posted
In 2021, McKenzie had Rosen at #18 in final rankings and we took him at 13.
In 2022, McKenzie had Savoie at #9 in final rankings and we took him exactly there.
In 2023, McKenzie had Benson at #9 in final rankings and he fell to us at 13.
Will somebody fall to us, like last year? Or will we stretch a little like in 2021?
I'm a bit guilty of looking at the top 10 and wondering who will fall and not paying enough attention to the players ranked 5-6 slots lower than where we will pick.