Expansion and the Sabres

[nfreeman]

Maybe. I mean, that's half the logic in adding cheap vet forwards for depth: flip them at the deadline for essentially free mid-round picks.

 

But with a piece like a top-4 Dman, that's a pretty big gamble to take (assuming we really do want him long term).

 

I don't see it as a gamble - it's effectively Pysyk for a 2nd instead of Pysyk for nothing. The gamble would be keeping an unsigned Kulikov unless he has verbally reached a wink-nudge deal to help us through expansion.

 

The move also bought them some optionality -- i.e. it lets them evaluate Bogo and Kulikov for 70% of this season -- and allows them, if they are so inclined at the time, to choose to extend Kulikov before the deadline and expose Bogo instead of Kulikov.

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't see it as a gamble - it's effectively Pysyk for a 2nd instead of Pysyk for nothing. The gamble would be keeping an unsigned Kulikov unless he has verbally reached a wink-nudge deal to help us through expansion.

I was talking about the second half: trading him away if you want to re-sign him as a UFA. Unless under that scenario he's made it clear he either won't re-sign or is testing the market no matter what.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Here's a thought I haven't seen:

The Kulikov trade was made primarily with the idea of auctioning him off as a rental at the deadline.

Instead of losing Pysyk to Vegas for nothing, we get an extra second for him, plus the use of Kulikov for the year, and the chance to sell him on Buffalo in the hopes of re-signing him this summer.

I always reviewed Kulikov this season as a one year tryout for a long-term deal. I agree that trading him at the deadline makes a great deal of sense regardless of whether or not GMTM is interested in re-signing him. Remember we traded and re-signed both Moulson and McCormick (not that those signings have worked well). I would rather get a decent D prospect because our near ready pipeline is very thin. The only reason not to trade him if the Sabres find themselves in playoff contention somehow.

 

I was talking about the second half: trading him away if you want to re-sign him as a UFA. Unless under that scenario he's made it clear he either won't re-sign or is testing the market no matter what.

This will certainly get him traded if we are out of contention. Since he is a UFA it is highly doubtful the he gets protection in expansion (frankly his play hasn't warranted protection), he should be traded at the deadline.

 

 

Who is in and who is out at the quarter poll (7-3-1)

Exempt (key players and prospects): Eichel, Reinhart, Fasching, Bailey, Baptiste, Nelson and Guhle

Must Protect: Okposo (NMC)

Will Protect: ROR, RISTO and MCCABE

 

forwards:

3. Larsson - 2 way center becoming a key piece

4. Carrier - had him an out to start the, but now filling in on the top line

5. Ennis - injured again, but under contract. Will lose if exposed.

6. Girgensons - 1st rd pick still looking for his game, but will lose if exposed

7. Foligno - works well with Larsson

8. Kane - likely to be dealt

9. Moulson - reduced to PP specialist. Big contract makes him untradeable.

10. Deslauriers

11+ UFA's Gionta, COR and Grant

 

Defense;

3. Bogosian - because we have no one else to protect

4. Kulikov - UFA who imho hasn't earned a new deal

5. Franson - UFA who imho hasn't earned a new deal

6. Gorges - hopefully LV takes him and his contract

 

Goalie:

1. Lehner - an RFA, but has been outplayed by Nilsson and injured again.

2. Ullmark - played decently in Roch, could be traded to make room for Peterson, but we need to expose a signed/rfa goalie.

3. Nilsson - A UFA, won't be protected unless re-sign prior to expansion, which is unlikely.

 

Could a draft pick acquired for Kulikov be used as a sweetener to get LV to take Moulson or Gorges off our hands?

Edited November 30, 2016 by GASabresIUFAN

[MattPie]

I always reviewed Kulikov this season as a one year tryout for a long-term deal. I agree that trading him at the deadline makes a great deal of sense regardless of whether or not GMTM is interested in re-signing him. Remember we traded and re-signed both Moulson and McCormick (not that those signings have worked well). I would rather get a decent D prospect because our near ready pipeline is very thin. The only reason not to trade him if the Sabres find themselves in playoff contention somehow.

 

This will certainly get him traded if we are out of contention. Since he is a UFA it is highly doubtful the he gets protection in expansion (frankly his play hasn't warranted protection), he should be traded at the deadline.

 

The Sabres have benefited from that recently, but it's still exceedingly rare and shouldn't be counted on. If we want Kulikov next season, better keep him and sign him (post Expansion draft).

[nfreeman]

I always reviewed Kulikov this season as a one year tryout for a long-term deal. I agree that trading him at the deadline makes a great deal of sense regardless of whether or not GMTM is interested in re-signing him. Remember we traded and re-signed both Moulson and McCormick (not that those signings have worked well). I would rather get a decent D prospect because our near ready pipeline is very thin. The only reason not to trade him if the Sabres find themselves in playoff contention somehow.

 

This will certainly get him traded if we are out of contention. Since he is a UFA it is highly doubtful the he gets protection in expansion (frankly his play hasn't warranted protection), he should be traded at the deadline.

 

 

Who is in and who is out at the quarter poll (7-3-1)

Exempt (key players and prospects): Eichel, Reinhart, Fasching, Bailey, Baptiste, Nelson and Guhle

Must Protect: Okposo (NMC)

Will Protect: ROR, RISTO and MCCABE

 

forwards:

3. Larsson - 2 way center becoming a key piece

4. Carrier - had him an out to start the, but now filling in on the top line

5. Ennis - injured again, but under contract. Will lose if exposed.

6. Girgensons - 1st rd pick still looking for his game, but will lose if exposed

7. Foligno - works well with Larsson

8. Kane - likely to be dealt

9. Moulson - reduced to PP specialist. Big contract makes him untradeable.

10. Deslauriers

11+ UFA's Gionta, COR and Grant

 

Defense;

3. Bogosian - because we have no one else to protect

4. Kulikov - UFA who imho hasn't earned a new deal

5. Franson - UFA who imho hasn't earned a new deal

6. Gorges - hopefully LV takes him and his contract

 

Goalie:

1. Lehner - an RFA, but has been outplayed by Nilsson and injured again.

2. Ullmark - played decently in Roch, could be traded to make room for Peterson, but we need to expose a signed/rfa goalie.

3. Nilsson - A UFA, won't be protected unless re-sign prior to expansion, which is unlikely.

 

Could a draft pick acquired for Kulikov be used as a sweetener to get LV to take Moulson or Gorges off our hands?

 

Good post and layout of the important facts.

 

However, I think there is NFW that Kane is exposed, and frankly it is close to NFW that he is traded (mostly because the Sabres would get pennies on the dollar).

 

I think it's reasonably likely that they expose Ennis and Zemgus, and that they protect Foligno before protecting those 2. 

 

Carrier could go either way depending on performance.

[Taro T]

Good post and layout of the important facts.

 

However, I think there is NFW that Kane is exposed, and frankly it is close to NFW that he is traded (mostly because the Sabres would get pennies on the dollar).

 

I think it's reasonably likely that they expose Ennis and Zemgus, and that they protect Foligno before protecting those 2. 

 

Carrier could go either way depending on performance.

Depending on how/if/when Ennis comes back from this latest injury, could definitely see him exposed.

 

Hopefully they find a role for Girgensons that both he & DB are satisfied w/ for Zemgus fairly soon or he could be that 8th F. Which will be a shame; still waiting for the legend of Zemgus to return.

[Doohickie]

Which will be a shame; still waiting for the legend of Zemgus to return.

 

That train has left the station.  At this point, the Legend of Zemgus is gone.  It is simply a memory of what was, for a short time, a bright spot on a terrible team, and any attachment fans have for him is largely emotional.  Nowadays the Shadow of Zemgus is a more apt description.  I've got nothing against him really, but he doesn't show me anything that warrants protection from the expansion draft.  If there was chemistry with other players, great, but increasingly he seems the odd man out. 

 

Foligno and Larsson stay because they're a unit; they play well off each other and with any competent winger you have a decent 3rd line.  But Zemgus hasn't found a compelling role on the Sabres of the future and I think soon he will be like Gionta and Moulson- one of those guys that's preventing the youth from moving up.  And Gionta and Moulson are more useful at the moment.

Edited November 30, 2016 by High Ankle Sprain

[Thorny]

The Sabres have benefited from that recently, but it's still exceedingly rare and shouldn't be counted on. If we want Kulikov next season, better keep him and sign him (post Expansion draft).

 

 

Are we sure there is a signing period available between the expansion draft and the UFA period? I think there can be no signings after June 1 until July 1, but that could just be for unsigned prospects in the system. I know they can't be signed during June, There are so many odd rules out there.  

 

Good post and layout of the important facts.

 

However, I think there is NFW that Kane is exposed, and frankly it is close to NFW that he is traded (mostly because the Sabres would get pennies on the dollar).

 

I think it's reasonably likely that they expose Ennis and Zemgus, and that they protect Foligno before protecting those 2. 

 

Carrier could go either way depending on performance.

What do you see happening with Kane, then, after next season? Do we sign him? Or do we let him walk for nothing once his deal is expired? Or a deadline deal next season maybe?

[Taro T]

Are we sure there is a signing period available between the expansion draft and the UFA period? I think there can be no signings after June 1 until July 1, but that could just be for unsigned prospects in the system. I know they can't be signed during June, There are so many odd rules out there.  

 

What do you see happening with Kane, then, after next season? Do we sign him? Or do we let him walk for nothing once his deal is expired? Or a deadline deal next season maybe?

UFA's in the NHL can be signed by their current team right up to & through July 1.

[Thorny]

UFA's in the NHL can be signed by their current team right up to & through July 1.

Thanks for the clarification. :beer:

[JJFIVEOH]

Players have to meet certain guidelines to be considered 'exposed'. One of those being they have to have played a minimum of so many games this year, or so many combined games over the last two years. They also have to be under contract in 2017-18, or an RFA who has been tendered an offer sheet. 

 

Nilsson can't be exposed as he will be a UFA. And nobody in Rochester can be exposed because they haven't played (whatever is considered the minimum for goalies) so many games this year, or over the last two years. 

 

I'm sure I am getting this wrong, but isn't Lehner the only goaltender that can be exposed? 

 

I've thought about other teams, and not having a goaltender that can qualify as being 'exposed'. Pittsburgh comes to mind if they trade Flower. What happens if teams don't have a goalie they can expose, and will we see some crazy trades going on before the deadline with teams looking to pick up a goalie they can expose?

[dudacek]

The minimum games thing doesn't apply to goaltenders.

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592

 

Looks like it has to be at least one goalie under contract, or a qualified RFA, but not necessarily an NHL goalie..

Seems to me that I remember reading something that explained that Ullmark was not exempt because, even though he is only In his second year in NA, he is actually a third-year pro. The first year of his contract he was assigned to Modo.

 

So, As long as they qualify him, Ullmark will be exposed.

Edited December 1, 2016 by dudacek

[JJFIVEOH]

Oh OK, so goaltenders don't have a minimum game requirement like forwards and defensemen have. So even though they're playing in the AHL, they still qualify if they're considered pro. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

 

forwards:

3. Larsson - 2 way center becoming a key piece

4. Carrier - had him an out to start the, but now filling in on the top line

5. Ennis - injured again, but under contract. Will lose if exposed.

6. Girgensons - 1st rd pick still looking for his game, but will lose if exposed

7. Foligno - works well with Larsson

8. Kane - likely to be dealt

9. Moulson - reduced to PP specialist. Big contract makes him untradeable.

10. Deslauriers

11+ UFA's Gionta, COR and Grant

 

 

 

I had a very hard time slotting forwards 4-9.  A case can be made for all of them to stay or go.  Larsson is almost a will protect at this point, but with 3/4 of the season to go any of these guys can still play their way higher or lower on the list.  I have Kane the odd man out because he won't be a Sabre by season's end.  GMTM is ready to cut bait with Kane and clear the $5 mill in cap space.  With Kane moved, the others will all be protected and Moulson will be the only significant Sabre left unprotected.  Frankly, GMTM will be forever grateful if LV takes one of Gorges or Moulson off his hands.  I also protected Carrier because he is the only significant prospect we have that has made an impact in Buffalo this season and who isn't otherwise exempt.

 

What will be interesting is to see how this unfolds the rest of the season. Could Bogo and/or Kulikov make an impact?  Will Ennis comeback and if so will he find his game?  What will happen at the trade deadline? With Eichel back, will this team become a contender?  Will GMTM get a D or 2 at the deadline?  Will Kane, Moulson or Girgensons be traded at the deadline? What about Bogo, Kulikov or Franson being traded?

[Taro T]

Players have to meet certain guidelines to be considered 'exposed'. One of those being they have to have played a minimum of so many games this year, or so many combined games over the last two years. They also have to be under contract in 2017-18, or an RFA who has been tendered an offer sheet. 

 

Nilsson can't be exposed as he will be a UFA. And nobody in Rochester can be exposed because they haven't played (whatever is considered the minimum for goalies) so many games this year, or over the last two years. 

 

I'm sure I am getting this wrong, but isn't Lehner the only goaltender that can be exposed? 

 

I've thought about other teams, and not having a goaltender that can qualify as being 'exposed'. Pittsburgh comes to mind if they trade Flower. What happens if teams don't have a goalie they can expose, and will we see some crazy trades going on before the deadline with teams looking to pick up a goalie they can expose?

Only 1 goalie can be protected; barring something horrific, that'll be Lehner.

 

Carrier needs to be protected. The other kids are good.

 

Let's hope expansion to 32 is far off. That one won't be a killer, but Buffalo's exposed list will be a top priority of that squad. While it'll stink to lose 1/2 the Jets trade haul this summer, it won't really effect the on ice product. Losing 4th D or 8th F in 3 years will hurt. (Maybe they can package picks & a backup goalie to prevent that when it's an issue. Here's to hoping.)

[Huckleberry]

Its weird though , Capgeek had bogo protected with an nmc, capfriendly says the nmc got waived in the trade.

[nfreeman]

 

What do you see happening with Kane, then, after next season? Do we sign him? Or do we let him walk for nothing once his deal is expired? Or a deadline deal next season maybe?

 

Good question, and tough to answer because we don't have that much info yet.  He missed his first half-season here after the Sabres traded for him, played 1 season in which he was a good and effective player, had a problematic offseason, then immediately got hurt in his 2nd season here and is just now coming back to form.

 

IF he has a strong rest of this season and meshes well with Jackie boy and Reino, and stays out of trouble off the ice, I can definitely see them extending him.  It's become quite clear that the Sabres need all the offense they can get, and it's highly likely that it won't be coming from Moulson, Ennis or Zemgus -- so it's hard to see them cutting Kane loose if he is still a reliable 20-25 goal guy.

 

However, it also sounds like he's used up a good amount of his goodwill, so if there are any more arrests or missed practices I would kinda expect them to trade him at the deadline next year.

[dudacek]

I agree with pretty much all of the above with one important addition: we desperately need Kane's speed.

If we dump him, we better have someone who can supply the same in a top six role.

It's night and day with him and Jack in the lineup.

[Samson's Flow]

I agree with pretty much all of the above with one important addition: we desperately need Kane's speed.

If we dump him, we better have someone who can supply the same in a top six role.

It's night and day with him and Jack in the lineup.

We flat out cannot keep up with some of the faster teams without a way to counter that. The only "fast" players on our team right now is Eichel and Kane. Everyone else is on a range from above average (Risto, ROR) to pylon level slow (Franson).

 

I don't think it is a coincidence that the Ottawa game we played much faster and had a better transition game with Eichel back.

[LGR4GM]

We flat out cannot keep up with some of the faster teams without a way to counter that. The only "fast" players on our team right now is Eichel and Kane. Everyone else is on a range from above average (Risto, ROR) to pylon level slow (Franson).

 

I don't think it is a coincidence that the Ottawa game we played much faster and had a better transition game with Eichel back.

Yea. It is amazing to see Carrier speeding around which isn't good because that shouldn't boggle the mind. Baptiste, Carrier, Nylander all playing in Buffalo would help speed but until they are, Kane helps a lot. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Kane's speed is pretty much useless at this point. 1st, to be useful you need to stay on the ice. He was injured when acquired, missed 17 games last year, and 11 games so far this season. 2nd, to be useful you need do what your hired to do. Kane was acquired to be a sniper for us. So far in 76 games he has 20 goals. Not horrible until you look deeper in the stats. His shooting % was 7.4% last season and is ZERO this season. This is a continuing diminishing trend for Kane. In his "good" season he hit on 10.5% of his shots. This % has been decreasing ever since. To give you a reference point, the Sabres last season shooting % was 8.2 for the team which was well below the leagues 9%.

 

Sorry, but to pay 5+ per season for a sniper who can't score is a waste. Add in his off ice issues and you have a great case for leaving him unprotected in expansion if you can't find a trade partner.

 

That said, I do agree that the Sabres need more speed. We have speed coming over the next few years as Bailey, Baptiste, Nylander, Carrier and Guhle earn places on the roster. This doesn't solve the issues on this Sabres roster, especially on D where human statues Gorges and Franson reside.

[LGR4GM]

We should expect at least one of Carrier, Bailey, Baptiste, Nylander, or Guhle to bust or at least be traded away.

[dudacek]

Kane's speed is pretty much useless at this point. 1st, to be useful you need to stay on the ice. He was injured when acquired, missed 17 games last year, and 11 games so far this season. 2nd, to be useful you need do what your hired to do. Kane was acquired to be a sniper for us. So far in 76 games he has 20 goals. Not horrible until you look deeper in the stats. His shooting % was 7.4% last season and is ZERO this season. This is a continuing diminishing trend for Kane. In his "good" season he hit on 10.5% of his shots. This % has been decreasing ever since. To give you a reference point, the Sabres last season shooting % was 8.2 for the team which was well below the leagues 9%.

 

Sorry, but to pay 5+ per season for a sniper who can't score is a waste. Add in his off ice issues and you have a great case for leaving him unprotected in expansion if you can't find a trade partner.

 

Murray is an idiot if he acquired Kane to be a sniper. Nothing in his past suggested he is one.

 

Kane was acquired to be a secondary scorer and a fast, physical force on a first or second line.

He was acquired to get lots of pucks to the net, be an abrasive fore- and backchecker, create space, force turnovers, score 20-25 goals, be hard to play against, and tilt the ice for 18 minutes a game.

 

It's debatable how often he has supplied that.

It's pretty clear he hasn't been worth his paycheque.

 

But he brings a lot of elements that are pretty hard to replace. Certainly no else on this roster has that mix.

To judge him on his offensive production the first quarter of this season is folly.

[TrueBlueGED]

Murray is an idiot if he acquired Kane to be a sniper. Nothing in his past suggested he is one.

 

Kane was acquired to be a secondary scorer and a fast, physical force on a first or second line.

He was acquired to get lots of pucks to the net, be an abrasive fore- and backchecker, create space, force turnovers, score 20-25 goals, be hard to play against, and tilt the ice for 18 minutes a game.

 

It's debatable how often he has supplied that.

It's pretty clear he hasn't been worth his paycheque.

 

But he brings a lot of elements that are pretty hard to replace. Certainly no else on this roster has that mix.

To judge him on his offensive production the first quarter of this season is folly.

I agree, minus the secondary scorer part. No way Murray pays the price he did if he thought he was getting a 20-goal scorer. At least, I hope not. I think Murray did what most of us did: saw Kane getting 3rd line even strength minutes and very limited PP time as the reason for his failure to be a regular 30 goal guy. Get him with our (eventual) centers, 1st unit PP time, and watch him score 30+ annually. Edited December 1, 2016 by TrueBlueGED

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I really think that our GM traded for Kane for the edge in his game.  No other reason.

 

He was drafting skilled forwards, but they don't have what Kane brings. 

 

I remember it being discussed that Kane (or similar) was exactly what the Sabres needed.  Of course, those discussion could have been only in my head.  You know, the place where I juggle.