Expansion and the Sabres

[3putt]

Definitely Carrier. Maybe Grant, see how is tryout goes.

[Randall Flagg]

Definitely Carrier. Maybe Grant, see how is tryout goes.

We have no idea if either of those guys can play at an NHL level. Grant almost certainly can't. Sure, he was a preseason superhero, but those guys rarely work out and his play so far has left me completely uninspired (and Disco putting him on the second power play unit for some reason)

 

I would love to see Carrier get a shot. I certainly don't EXPECT him to become better than Foligno. He could be, but we have no idea yet

[3putt]

We have no idea if either of those guys can play at an NHL level. Grant almost certainly can't. Sure, he was a preseason superhero, but those guys rarely work out and his play so far has left me completely uninspired (and Disco putting him on the second power play unit for some reason)

I would love to see Carrier get a shot. I certainly don't EXPECT him to become better than Foligno. He could be, but we have no idea yet

I think he has a higher upside offensively. Plus you have Bailey who I think fills Folignos role. Just not seeing where he fits long term.

[Hoss]

O'Reilly, Okposo, Kane, Ennis, Larsson, Girgensons gives you six. Who do you take then over Foligno? Des? Moulson? Grant? Carrier?

As it stands I go with the 8 skaters option:

8 skaters: O'Reilly, Okposo, Risto, McCabe, Bogo, Kulikov, Ennis, Larsson, Girgensons (Kane can slide in for Ennis or Girgensons) - this becomes even more guaranteed if you acquire Fowler

 

If you choose the seven forwards and three d then you're protecting Foligno out of necessity because there are no other worthy candidates.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I have a rule of thumb about forwards and their pay scale. That rule is $1 million in salary for every 10 points a forward scores. Goal scorers get a slightly higher numbers and top line players (ROR) get bigger money due to scarcity.

 

For example; Okposo has averaged over 60 pts per year for the last 3 years, including 64 pts last season. His new contract is 6 mill per season. Ennis averaged 40 pts when he got his 4.6 per year contract. Foligno put up 23 pts last year, adds a physical presence and is a key cog in our shutdown forward line. I'd say he is worth $2.25.

As it stands I go with the 8 skaters option:

8 skaters: O'Reilly, Okposo, Risto, McCabe, Bogo, Kulikov, Ennis, Larsson, Girgensons (Kane can slide in for Ennis or Girgensons) - this becomes even more guaranteed if you acquire Fowler

If you choose the seven forwards and three d then you're protecting Foligno out of necessity because there are no other worthy candidates.

Kulikov can't be protected as he is a UFA and GMTM isn't re-signing him (assuming he wants to) until after the expansion draft.

[Randall Flagg]

As it stands I go with the 8 skaters option:

8 skaters: O'Reilly, Okposo, Risto, McCabe, Bogo, Kulikov, Ennis, Larsson, Girgensons (Kane can slide in for Ennis or Girgensons) - this becomes even more guaranteed if you acquire Fowler

 

If you choose the seven forwards and three d then you're protecting Foligno out of necessity because there are no other worthy candidates.

Kulikov is a UFA.

[Hoss]

You CAN protect UFAs and I'm predicting he will sign an extension before that point.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Hoss

[Rasmus_]

If he resigns Kulikov its another story though.

 

then I'd go with 4-4-1.  

 

O'Reilly, Okposo, Larsson and Ennis.  Larsson can be replaced with whoever plays better than he did last year.

Kulikov , Risto , McCabe, Bogo.

If Lehner completely fails I'd protect Ullmark.

 

But I don't see any of our goalies being snatched, there will be better targets out there for las vegas.

 

Not sure that I agree on protecting Ennis, I would let him go easily.  I'd rather protect Foligno, which I'm not that excited about doing either lol.

[GASabresIUFAN]

You CAN protect UFAs and I'm predicting he will either sign an extension before that point.

Yes in theory since they are still under contract until 6/30 they can be protected, but no GM is going to protect a player that can walk a week after the draft and risk losing someone else. In addition, if LV wants to grab an unprotected UFA they have 3 days to sign him (June 17-20) and if they do sign him he counts as their pick from his old team. However, if GMTM reach a tentative deal before expansion, but don't sign it until after the draft, Buffalo can protect someone else and still keep the UFA.

 

So lets use Kulikov as an example. GMTM and Kulikov agree on a 5 year extension at say $5 mill per year, but don't sign the deal before the draft. If left unprotected, LV can negotiate with him, but he knows he has a deal with up and coming Sabres in his back pocket. Why sign with an expansion team for the same amount? You wouldn't.

[3putt]

If I am Vegas, I go young and cheap. Then I pull a Chayka and become a dump for bad contracts while acquiring young assets. They will be drafting high and can build a solid system rather quickly. As the contracts expire they move the young players up. Buffalo wants to get rid of Moulson send them Chris Brown in the trade. It could work well for them. Buffalo gets a few mid round picks. Target the systems of the big clubs instead of using the lower picks.

[Doohickie]

Protect:

1) Lehner - Ullmark has been shaky so far and Nilsson is a UFA.

2) Larsson - shutdown 3rd line centers are hard to find

3) Foligno - If the re-united Larsson lines continues to play well Foligno, an RFA is staying.

4) Ennis - Age, skill and contract would make him the first draftee if availabld. No way GMTM lets him go for nothing.

5) Girgensons - will want to get something for him or keep him as a cheap utility player.

6) Moulson - good start gets him above the line?

Unprotected:

7) Deslauriers - 4th line physical players are replaceable, but DD loves the guy

8) Kane - Injuries, attitude and contract make him expendable even for nothing in return except cap savings.

9) Ullmark - RFA goalie not exactly showing well in Roch and we need to expose a goalie.

10) Carrier - will need a good year in Roch to get protected.

11) Grant - will need to start scoring to get higher on this list.

 

That's an excellent first draft.

[MattPie]

Yes in theory since they are still under contract until 6/30 they can be protected, but no GM is going to protect a player that can walk a week after the draft and risk losing someone else. In addition, if LV wants to grab an unprotected UFA they have 3 days to sign him (June 17-20) and if they do sign him he counts as their pick from his old team. However, if GMTM reach a tentative deal before expansion, but don't sign it until after the draft, Buffalo can protect someone else and still keep the UFA.

 

So lets use Kulikov as an example. GMTM and Kulikov agree on a 5 year extension at say $5 mill per year, but don't sign the deal before the draft. If left unprotected, LV can negotiate with him, but he knows he has a deal with up and coming Sabres in his back pocket. Why sign with an expansion team for the same amount? You wouldn't.

 

The NHL has said they'd be on the lookout for teams trying to circumvent the rules, and I bet this is what they have in mind. Much like when MIller left, at most I think the Sabres may say something like, "before you sign somewhere else, please take my call." but that's about it. But it's all moot:

- LV is very unlikely to take a UFA

- There's no way Moulson scores 30 this year. There were 28 players in the league that hit 30 last year, so we're talking top-line guys. I want to see Moulson succeed as much as anyone, but 20 goals would be a great season for him.

[dudacek]

Derek Grant is older than Marcus Foligno and has yet to score an NHL goal.

Will Carrier's upside is Marcus Foligno and he has yet play an NHL game.

 

Foligno is 25, 6'4" 225 pounds, can score 10/10, play with an edge, kill penalties, win board battles, be responsible defensively and will drop them when needed. And so far this year he's shown he has continued with the consistency he showed on the back half of last year on an effective third line.

 

Why wouldn't you want to keep a guy like that around?

[Ducky]

TrueBlue, I've search here and the net and can't find any discussion of the status of Bogo's NMC, except an article on a credible fan site saying that the clause actually doesn't kick in until the end of this season other then the TBN article referenced below.

TBN says he has a NMC and must be protected. http://buffalonews.com/2016/06/14/nhl-reportedly-expanding-las-vegas-sabres-plan-expansion-draft/

I'm guessing the Sabres didn't honor it......why would they?

 

11.8

Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement.

(a)

The SPC of any Player who is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent under Article10.1(a) may contain a no-Trade or a no-move clause. SPCs containing a no-Trade or a no-move

clause may be entered into prior to the time that the Player is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agentso long as the SPC containing the no-Trade or no-move clause extends through and does not

become effective until the time that the Player qualifies for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency.If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking

effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club. An acquiring Club may agree to continue to be bound by the no-Trade or no-move clause, which agreement shall be evidenced in writing to

the Player, Central Registry and the NHLPA, in accordance with Exhibit 3 hereof.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Ducky

[dudacek]

There was also the Murray interview on WGR where he said specifically that the Sabres had no issues where they would be forced to protect players due to a no-movement clause. That was prior to ROR and KO signing deals, but I heard it myself and it was talked about on this board at the time. That was in the spring/summer 2015, and Bogosian was in the fold at the time.

 

I've since seen reports that he has one, but never sourced to anything other than a cap site. Could be Murray was wrong, could be that the subsequent reports were a circle jerk of an original error. Could be the cap site is correctly reporting the contract as filed, but is unaware of the contract being voided.

 

Non-issue anyway. Protecting Bogo is not going to cost us a better player.

[TrueBlueGED]

There was also the Murray interview on WGR where he said specifically that the Sabres had no issues where they would be forced to protect players due to a no-movement clause. That was prior to ROR and KO signing deals, but I heard it myself and it was talked about on this board at the time. That was in the spring/summer 2015, and Bogosian was in the fold at the time.

 

I've since seen reports that he has one, but never sourced to anything other than a cap site. Could be Murray was wrong, could be that the subsequent reports were a circle jerk of an original error. Could be the cap site is correctly reporting the contract as filed, but is unaware of the contract being voided.

 

Non-issue anyway. Protecting Bogo is not going to cost us a better player.

Technically, what Murray said was they didn't have any players with a NMC. That could be true and they could still have to protect Bogo because at the time of the interview Bogo's NMC had yet to kick in. Either way, unless we add another Dman, I expect him to opt to protect Bogo.

[LGR4GM]

The Foligno line helped shut down McDavid all night. Matt Moulson had a few good shifts. Even if he scores 30, I am not convinced he will ever do it again in this league. Decisions Decisions. 

[nfreeman]

I think he is 50/50 on re-signing him. i think the deal was made because GMTM wanted to balance the D, move up in the draft and felt he was likely to lose Pysyk in the expansion draft as McCabe had moved past him on the depth chart. Basically the Sabres were only getting one more year out of Pysyk so worst case we only get one year out of Kulikov.

 

From GMTM's perspective if Kulikov plays well and fits in, he can re-sign him in the two weeks between expansion draft and free agency, if he doesn't, then that is 4 mill to use on someone else.

 

Good thread and good post. 

 

The decisions on D are particularly interesting IMHO, and depend on a number of unknowns:

 

- How good is Kulikov?  If Kulikov has a really good year and he and Risto emerge as a very strong top pair, it's hard to see GMTM letting him get to UFA.  That decision most likely will wait until we get close to the trade deadline.

 

- Are the Sabres in fact required to protect Bogo?  Based on Ducky's and dudacek's posts, it appears that they do not -- but Bogo could still play well enough to make the Sabres protect him.

 

- What if the Sabres trade for Fowler (or Lindholm!)?  If they do, they would protect him.

 

So, it's possible that the Sabres could find themselves wanting to protect Risto, McCabe, Kulikov, Bogo and Fowler -- before we even get to the forwards. 

 

As for the forwards, I think there is NFW that they expose Kane unless he gets arrested again or does something terrible.  I also think they will probably protect Foligno, and that if they had to decide today they would expose Ennis and Girgensons before exposing Foligno or Larsson.

[Drunkard]

Good thread and good post. 

 

The decisions on D are particularly interesting IMHO, and depend on a number of unknowns:

 

- How good is Kulikov?  If Kulikov has a really good year and he and Risto emerge as a very strong top pair, it's hard to see GMTM letting him get to UFA.  That decision most likely will wait until we get close to the trade deadline.

 

- Are the Sabres in fact required to protect Bogo?  Based on Ducky's and dudacek's posts, it appears that they do not -- but Bogo could still play well enough to make the Sabres protect him.

 

- What if the Sabres trade for Fowler (or Lindholm!)?  If they do, they would protect him.

 

So, it's possible that the Sabres could find themselves wanting to protect Risto, McCabe, Kulikov, Bogo and Fowler -- before we even get to the forwards. 

 

As for the forwards, I think there is NFW that they expose Kane unless he gets arrested again or does something terrible.  I also think they will probably protect Foligno, and that if they had to decide today they would expose Ennis and Girgensons before exposing Foligno or Larsson.

 

No chance we protect 5 defensemen. I doubt even teams with strong defenses (Winnipeg, Nashville, Minnesota) would protect a 5th defenseman over their 4th best forward. If we do somehow trade for a guy like Fowler or Lindholm Murray will let Kulikov reach UFA status to avoid having to protect him and then try to sign him as a UFA.

[Hoss]

If Kulikov pans out very well and looks great on a pair with Risto GMTM would be a fool to let him get anywhere near the expansion draft or free agency. I don't care about risky (and possibly penalizable) backdoor deals, you don't expose him to that risk if he plays well all year and helps Risto earn the hefty contract he just got.

[Drunkard]

If Kulikov pans out very well and looks great on a pair with Risto GMTM would be a fool to let him get anywhere near the expansion draft or free agency. I don't care about risky (and possibly penalizable) backdoor deals, you don't expose him to that risk if he plays well all year and helps Risto earn the hefty contract he just got.

That's fine too. There's still no chance in hell we protect 5 dmen. That would mean protecting O'Reilly, Okposo, and only 1 other forward/goalie. Everyone says defense is the team's weakness yet we are going to forego protecting 7 forwards to protect 5 of these guys? Yeah right.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Drunkard

[nfreeman]

No chance we protect 5 defensemen. I doubt even teams with strong defenses (Winnipeg, Nashville, Minnesota) would protect a 5th defenseman over their 4th best forward. If we do somehow trade for a guy like Fowler or Lindholm Murray will let Kulikov reach UFA status to avoid having to protect him and then try to sign him as a UFA.

 

I think you're right.  I just thought it was an interesting possibility -- i.e. it's not far-fetched to think that Kulikov will play very well with Risto -- and in that case I agree with Hoss that the right move is to sign him before the expansion draft.  And the other possibilities aren't really far-fetched either -- i.e. a trade for Fowler, plus Bogo either playing well enough to protect or the Sabres being required to protect him due to his NMC.

 

The other point about Kulikov that occurs to me is that if he plays well, the Sabres' real risk is losing him in FA, not losing him to Vegas.  Why would Vegas draft him if he becomes a UFA 2 weeks later?  So, GMTM might think he could expose Kulikov in the expansion draft, but then sign him in the interim period after the draft and before FA starts -- but that would be pretty risky, as Kulikov at that point would probably want to examine his FA options.

[pi2000]

IMO, it all comes down to the Sabre's playoff hopes at the deadline.    If guys like Kulikov, Moulson, Ennis, etc.. are playing well, then it's very likely BUF is in a playoff position and become buyers at the deadline.     They'd also have to think long and hard about protecting guys like Moulson, Ennis and Kulikov in the expansion draft.  

 

If they're not in playoff contention, guys like Ennis and Kulikov should be traded.... maybe Moulson if he's somewhat productive and some playoff team wants to shore up their power play for a Cup run.     

[beerme1]

They'd also have to think long and hard about protecting guys like Moulson

    

 

After last season I see no reason to protect Moulson and even with a great year can't imagine GMTM would either unless he has to by NTC etc.

[Hoss]

Vegas will undoubtedly take some UFAs. They have to fulfill certain requirements, so I imagine they may take a few big contract UFAs to fulfill cap requirements that they can just let go a few weeks after so free up money.

And I bet they take a swing at some good young UFAs if available because that gives them a free exclusive window to say "look, we're going to pay you far more than you'll get on the market if you sign now. If you don't sign now somebody else is getting that money."