Archie Lee

Lafferty is not a great answer as 4C in my view. Better as a 4th line winger who can play C if needed (ie: a tougher/grittier Girgs). Unless Malenstyn is the C? I still think we are a C short.

I get my Aube-Kubel's mixed up with my Aston-Reese's.

Wanted Stephenson, but not at that. Seattle making some desperate deals today.

Foegele to LA at 3x3.5 is a steal. Unless he just wanted to live in California, we missed out here.

As 12th/13th forward? Sure.

Maybe. We'll see what he ends up signing for elsewhere. Hard for me to imagine he wouldn't take a 5x5 to sign here. That would be an overpay, but he would make us better now than Zucker will make us, and you can figure out next year...next year.

The 3rd line isn't the issue here in my view. That's not the 2nd line of a playoff team unless at least 2 of those three take huge steps forward.

Don't really like this deal. No real issue with adding Zucker, per se, but it seems like they are worried about committing to this type of player on this AAV beyond a year, out of concern it will impact future deals for Quinn, Peterka, Byram, Levi, etc. We could have a player like Foegele in the same role, who is younger and better, if we would commit to term. Can always make moves down the road to find space or trade a good young player for picks/prospects and promote your own prospects who are ready.

At least they are in the West.

I'm missing something. Is this assuming Benson is on line 3?

Good signing. Can Play centre. Malenstyn/Krebs/Lafferty is fine as a 4th line to me.

Tanev will be on permanent LTIR no later than year 4 of that deal.

Stephenson comes with risk to be sure. I want him as an overpaid 3rd line centre without a NMC. In Vegas this year I think he was miscast as a 1st line player for much of the year due to Eichel, Karlsson and Stone missing a combined 50+ games.

A big signing (Stamkos) would be exciting. I think a better strategy is strength through depth. Give me Stephenson, Foegele and Duhaime (or something comparable), and I’m happy.

I'm torn. I watched his entire junior career and think he is great kid. I think he has some untapped offensive potential and he's pretty good defensively, kill penalties, would be good centre depth. He is not a physical or gritty player though.

I think they will add at least one more gritty forward. If they add a gritty D-man I think it will be a 7th-8th D, and I still think they will bring Brendan Smith in for that role. I don't think we will add a top-4 D.

This is likely where the concern about you misrepresenting Adams's comments comes from. Your earlier post implied that Adams said the acquisition of Malenstyn alone addressed the issue of team toughness. Maybe that isn't what you meant. Adams didn't say he is done addressing this issue, only that this player checked the boxes of what they are looking for. So, yes, if this is all they do to address team toughness it is woefully inadequate. But, Adams did not say this is all they need to do or that it is all that they plan to do.

Unless I missed something, there was never any confirmation of this. What Adams hinted at was that Arizona wanted Savoie rather than our first and that he wasn’t going to do that. So Arizona took Ottawa’s first, which at the time was looking like it would be higher than ours (and it was). There was never an indication, that I recall, that Arizona was willing to take less from Ottawa than what we were offering.

I could see a scenario where Helenius is one of the 4 best centres in a camp (not just the Sabres's camp) and makes the NHL. If he was one of the 4 best centres for the Bruins or the Lightning or the Stars, he would be surrounded by veterans who could help him ride the waves of a long NHL season, while he helps the team reach the playoffs and gains valuable experience. Here he would be surrounded by players only a few years older who are trying to find their way on their own or with the help of other youngish players who came up in the same poorly thought-out environment.

For me it will be the day they shut down capfriendly.

Not sure on the value, but he is, in my view, the sort of 4th line player that changes our make-up. Big, physical, blocks shots, kills penalties. As part of a larger strategy that comes to fruition over the next 3-4 days, I’m fine. Obviously there needs to be more.

At this point I would have to say it is likely that we do make all of the picks, though maybe we will combine a couple to trade up or move one for a comparable future pick. If we make a trade today I think it will be a mid-rd pick for a player like Iafallo (useful bottom 6 player who is overpaid but only has one or two years left on his deal).

It would not have been a popular move had Adams made it, but I actually think the Mikheyev deal would have been fine, particularly if we had also been able to sign Laferty. Mikheyev is overpaid to be sure, but only has two years left and I think is a useful bottom 6 player. Of course, he has trade protection also (12 team no trade list), so it maybe wasn't an option.

I suspect you are right and a Skinner buyout is linked to making a trade for a top 6 forward. Adams won't do anything so bold, but I would love it if they announced a Skinner buyout and then also stated that they planned to be major players in the UFA market on Monday. Let the world know that we are looking to spend some money. Guentzel, Stamkos, Lindholm, Marchessault and Kane are the big 5 UFA forwards. I don't see us being in play for any of them. After those 5 though, there are around 20 legit middle 6 forward options available. I recognize that Buffalo may not be choice #1 for many of these players, but I just can't believe that it is impossible to convince 3 of them to sign with the Sabres if we are prepared to pay at the high-end of their contract projections.

Not making excuses for Adams. His failure to recognize the need for at least incremental veteran improvements with the forwards last off-season has put him in this position where there is so much to do in 5 days. Still there is time and opportunity to make meaningful moves. I think we may still see a trade or two in the next couple of days. Less exciting players like Laughton and Iafallo are probably available. These are not franchise altering moves (and I don't mean to limit trade options in this category to these two less than sexy players), but they would change the complexion of the bottom 6 and add a new veteran presence to the team. This represents the 2nd year in a row where there was no NHL player movement when it comes to trades and the 1st rd of the draft. Maybe it is time to pivot to a UFA strategy. If the Sabres commit to buying out Skinner, focus on conservative deals for their RFA's, and slot Greenway and Krebs into 4th line roles, then there are UFA's available who could make-up a very good middle-6 forward line: Stephenson, Monahan, Wennberg, Domi, Foegele, Teravainen, Toffoli, Debrusk, Duclair, Henrique, Roslovic, Heinen, etc., will be sought after. With a Skinner buyout we would have the cap space to offer top deals in an effort to obtain 3 of them. It would mean a change of focus from trying to trade prospects for NHL players who are perhaps a little younger and have a longer runway, towards using prospects to replace players we can't afford to keep. If we signed, as an example, Stephenson, Foegele and Duclair to 3-5 year deals at top dollar (relative to their contract projections), it would mean that we likely would have to move some players next season. Maybe we can only keep one of Byram, Peterka and Quinn or have to move Samuelsson (or Tuch). I don't expect anything so bold. It is there as an option though.