Randall Flagg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I'd like to do this:McCabe - Risto (I like McCabe's start and think he's better than Gorges for Risto because he can skate)Gorges - Bogo (Gorges will allow Bogo to do what he does best, be a risk-taker that skates with the puck and stuff, Gorges can be a steadying presence)Kulikov - Franson (Kulikov can play pretty well in his own zone, and can SKATE, which Franson can't do)I think these pairings would maximize what each player can do, with what we have. I'd give Risto and Franson lines heavy offensive minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Two years in a row I've come into the season very worried about the backup goalie situation. It's still very early this season, but I should probably stop worrying about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 They need a 7th d-man with the team. Who else is there? Would you rather have Strachan or Falk or Fedun? Nelson is already 24 years old, it's not like he needs development time in Rochester.. and he's probably the best skater available at that position in the stable. Strachan, Falk or Fedun cannot do any damage from the press box. Nelson maybe 24 but still qualifies as a NHL Rookie, playing time, not practice time will benefit him. As Ink said the Amerks play most of their games on weekends, if they send him down to play those great. To have him sit here as the extra D Man without gaining game experience makes little sense. If a top six D gets hurt he would be able to be called up to play, bypassing the need for those three. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 It's obviously early, but if this is the real Kulikov, I lock him up before all the deadline/draft stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 It's obviously early, but if this is the real Kulikov, I lock him up before all the deadline/draft stuff.But then you have to protect him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 But then you have to protect himI wouldn't protect Bogosian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I wouldn't protect Bogosian Isn't bogo automatically protected ? He was according to generalfanager. Also I have no problem protecting 4 D . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 (edited) Isn't bogo automatically protected ? He was according to generalfanager. Also I have no problem protecting 4 D . There's a question somewhere (in the Expansion thread, I think). In short, Bogo had a NMC or NTC in his Winnipeg contract. When a player is traded, the new club (the Sabres, in this case) has the option to honor it or ignore it. No one is sure if Bogo's was retained. If it is, he has to be protected. Edited October 26, 2016 by MattPie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 There's a question somewhere (in the Expansion thread, I think). In short, Bogo had a NMC or NTC in his Winnipeg contract. When a player is traded, the new club (the Sabres, in this case) has the option to honor it or ignore it. No one is sure if Bogo's was retained. If it is, he has to be protected. Is he auto-protected? Meaning he doesn't use one of the protected slots? Or he automatically would use up a spot? Unless something changes drastically throughout the season... the 3D I'd protect are Risto, McCabe, and Kulikov (assuming we plan to resign him). It's just really hard to forecast the expansion draft at this point... so much can and will happen between now and then (trades, Moulson scoring 50g, etc..). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Is he auto-protected? Meaning he doesn't use one of the protected slots? Or he automatically would use up a spot? Unless something changes drastically throughout the season... the 3D I'd protect are Risto, McCabe, and Kulikov (assuming we plan to resign him). It's just really hard to forecast the expansion draft at this point... so much can and will happen between now and then (trades, Moulson scoring 50g, etc..). Unless we sign Kulikov to a long term deal, we can't protect him as he doesn't have enough term left to be a part of the expansion draft And any "auto-protected" players due to NTC/NMC still have to use one of the designated slots. You don't get a free slot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I don't know what you mean by this, "mentally" Confidence. He's been put in an unfamiliar role of winger, learned that, got pretty good at that, started to get confidence. Now he's back at center, learning what that means at an NHL level. Give him more than a game or two... his confidence will get to where it needs to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Unless we sign Kulikov to a long term deal, we can't protect him as he doesn't have enough term left to be a part of the expansion draft And any "auto-protected" players due to NTC/NMC still have to use one of the designated slots. You don't get a free slot. Well that sucks.... so if Bogo automatically takes up a spot, it might behoove GMTM to trade him for anything, just to save that protected spot for somebody else. I'm not a fan of the expansion rules. 7F and 3D (or 8 skaters)? 7Fs is more than half of your 12 F starters, 3D is only half of your defense. Why not 6Fs and 4D? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Well that sucks.... so if Bogo automatically takes up a spot, it might behoove GMTM to trade him for anything, just to save that protected spot for somebody else. I'm not a fan of the expansion rules. 7F and 3D (or 8 skaters)? 7Fs is more than half of your 12 F starters, 3D is only half of your defense. Why not 6Fs and 4D? Theoretically if you can protect 6F and 4D from each team than Las Vegas is filling their roster from the bottom 6 forwards and the last pairing from each team. That assembled team would be a lock for last place. 7F/3D or 8 skaters at least gives Las Vegas a chance at someone that may be worth rostering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Theoretically if you can protect 6F and 4D from each team than Las Vegas is filling their roster from the bottom 6 forwards and the last pairing from each team. That assembled team would be a lock for last place. 7F/3D or 8 skaters at least gives Las Vegas a chance at someone that may be worth rostering. I think they would be a lock for last place in either case. D are hard to come by, not being able to protect half your starters seems a bit extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Came across the lines posted by the Tampa Bay Lightning on Twitter. It's kind of a real eye-opener and shows how far we probably still have to go to reach contender status. That's depth. And star power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Don't worry, they're screwed come the expansion draft anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I think they would be a lock for last place in either case. D are hard to come by, not being able to protect half your starters seems a bit extreme. Yeah, they'll likely finish last for a few seasons, but with the right GM and some good draft picks they should be competitive in the near future. Icing a team of #4 dmen and a couple of decent goalies will go a lot farther towards making them competitive more quickly. Add in the fact that forwards develop more quickly than d men or goalies and within a few seasons they should be able to sprinkle in some good young forwards from the draft as well. Plus they should have plenty of money to plug roster holes in via Free Agency. Don't worry, they're screwed come the expansion draft anyways How so? They can only lose 1 player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I thought they could lose more than 1? If it is only one, they have the depth where it will be someone important. More so than Moulson anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I thought they could lose more than 1? If it is only one, they have the depth where it will be someone important. More so than Moulson anyways I think that's right; LV takes one player from each team. Presumably this means they'll have to take some prospects or whatnot to meet the roster limit. Unless the GM is going to try to take two NHL guys and later trade them for one player or pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I think that's right; LV takes one player from each team. Presumably this means they'll have to take some prospects or whatnot to meet the roster limit. Unless the GM is going to try to take two NHL guys and later trade them for one player or pick. Right they must take one and only one player from each team. The total salary of all players they take in the expansion draft must be no less than 60% of the upper salary cap limit from the previous season, which comes out to $43.8m or an average of $1.46m per player. So they need to take some mix of vets and prospects to hit the expansion draft cap floor. What that means for BUF, who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I thought they could lose more than 1? If it is only one, they have the depth where it will be someone important. More so than Moulson anyways But still, they'll only lose one guy. They'll be ok. Admirable depth over there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Well that gets me thinking then. Which team gets screwed over the most by this expansion draft? I figured it'd be someone like Tampa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Well that gets me thinking then. Which team gets screwed over the most by this expansion draft? I figured it'd be someone like Tampa If a team is in a position where they lose a good player, with all the players a team is able to protect, I think it just means that if they left a player that good unprotected, it says a lot about the rest of the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Well that gets me thinking then. Which team gets screwed over the most by this expansion draft? I figured it'd be someone like Tampa I don't watch a lot of games that don't involve the Sabres but from reading HF boards while waiting for new posts on here it may be Pittsburgh if they are unable to unload Fleury. They'd be forced to protect him and his NMC and then possibly lose their other young goalie. I believe the Wild have 5 good defenders so their best bet is to stand pat, protect 3 of them, lose 1 and still yield a good top 4. I imagine other teams with good defenses (Nashville and Winnipeg) will likely go the 8 skaters and a goalie route to protect their top 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 If a team is in a position where they lose a good player, with all the players a team is able to protect, I think it just means that if they left a player that good unprotected, it says a lot about the rest of the roster.True, and I get that. But that still doesn't address who gets screwed the most. I believe it's that team that has to lose a good player, despite the fact that they can afford to I don't watch a lot of games that don't involve the Sabres but from reading HF boards while waiting for new posts on here it may be Pittsburgh if they are unable to unload Fleury. They'd be forced to protect him and his NMC and then possibly lose their other young goalie. I believe the Wild have 5 good defenders so their best bet is to stand pat, protect 3 of them, lose 1 and still yield a good top 4. I imagine other teams with good defenses (Nashville and Winnipeg) will likely go the 8 skaters and a goalie route to protect their top 4.This is what I'm looking for. That tidbit about Fleury is very interesting for me. Good post So, who wants Fleury? *ducks* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.