The new Core

[Thorny]

7 hours ago, Curt said:

Bump him away from Eichel.  He isn’t really that good 5 on 5 anyway.  I think he should be moved away from Eichel regardless of Hall.

Olofsson - Eichel - Reinhart did not have very good metrics at 5 v 5 as a line. 

[Curt]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Nylander got 7. 

I understand the UFA/RFA distinction but Sam has this franchise over a barrel due to our lack of talent. He's also a better hockey player than Skinner who isn't gonna sign for 33% less. No way. 

Your point about the economics is exactly why I think Sam will be content to push his LT signing off for a couple years. He'll sign a much bigger deal when things are more normal, if we aren't going to pony up now. 

He's remarkably consistent and doesn't miss hockey games. He won't be afraid to wait, that's my reading. What would he fetch in arbitration if he elected for that, two years straight? Would that figure really be lower than the 6 something being suggested here on a LONG TERM deal?

Yeah, Nylander got almost 7.  Sam might get almost 7 too.  I think that’s the high side though.  Skinner’s contract, I don’t think is very relevant to the discussion.

Its possible that you are correct, and Sam doesn’t want to sign long term unless it’s an “overpay”.  His rights belong to the Sabres for 2 more years, so he isn’t really in a position of total power over the team.  What have guys been getting through arbitration recently?

[Thorny]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

Skinner/Eichel, Hall/Reinhart, Olofsson/Johansson are the basis of three pretty good lines, no?

There’s no rule that says all your good players have to be stuffed into your top six

Kahun rides with one line, we acquire a similar-level player for another, and Tage, Casey and Dylan battle for the third, with Okposo as the fallback if none are ready.

To Darth’s point, Hall can drive play off the wing far better than a Henrique or a Strome can from the middle.

Actually have to disagree, here. We still need the 2C. 

[Thorny]

10 minutes ago, Curt said:

Yeah, Nylander got almost 7.  Sam might get almost 7 too.  I think that’s the high side though.  Skinner’s contract, I don’t think is very relevant to the discussion.

Its possible that you are correct, and Sam doesn’t want to sign long term unless it’s an “overpay”.  His rights belong to the Sabres for 2 more years, so he isn’t really in a position of total power over the team.  What have guys been getting through arbitration recently?

This is my curiosity, as well. If Sam has a chance to sign a couple 1-year deals for ~5.5-6 mil, why sign for 6.5 per now long term when he'll get a substantially bigger deal in two years, both because he'll be a UFA, and because the cap will be more normal. 

[dudacek]

15 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Again, Nylander scored a 7 mil per deal after 20 goals. 

Look, I'm just trying to help lol. If you guys want to set your expectations at 6 sometihng...prepare to be disappointed. I'll do cartwheels if I'm wrong, here. I'm going to assume a non-steal contract, because I can't remember the last time we signed a deal where the entire board will go, "wow, great contract!". 

Oh, I’m not debating Sam’s contract there, just pointing out a general rule of thumb.

Ive been one pushing Nylander as an excellent comparable, and I think $7 over 6 is pretty fair., @DarthEbriate had a great counterpoint of Teuvo Teravainen with better numbers, who signed for considerably less. Term is going to make a big difference on AAV.

But I think this discussion is moot. Sam has given no indication of whether he wants term. Adams has given no indication of anything.

And COVID has made all the logical comparables useless.

Sam’s deal will be one of the first to reset the market.

[Thorny]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Oh, I’m not debating Sam’s contract there, just pointing out a general rule of thumb.

Ive been one pushing Nylander as an excellent comparable, and I think $7 over 6 is pretty fair., @DarthEbriate had a great counterpoint of Teuvo Teravainen with better numbers, who signed for considerably less. Term is going to make a big difference on AAV.

But I think this discussion is moot. Sam has given no indication of whether he wants term. Adams has given no indication of anything.

And COVID has made all the logical comparables useless.

Sam’s deal will be one of the first to reset the market.

I'm going to continue asking why Sam wouldn't just arb-arb-UFA, because that's what I would do if I was him and I want my worries to be soothed. 

[dudacek]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Actually have to disagree, here. We still need the 2C. 

You don’t think Hall Reinhart and Cozens, or Hall Reinhart and Kahun can be an effective second line?

I think you might be seriously underestimating Hall. He is among the best wingers in the game and can drive offence by himself, and you’ve got him with Reinhart, a legit first-line player. 

[Thorny]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

Hockey fans speak in weird shorthand, like when they say top-4 defenceman, most really mean top-2.

1C really means franchise centre: Eichel, Mathews, McDavid, a dozen or so others.

2C means a 1st liner who is  not a franchise player. 

3C means a 30-40 point scorer who is dependable defensively, or a 40-50 point scorer

There are 93 centre positions on NHL 1st, 2nd and 3rd lines, but only about 50 players who are qualified to play them, according to fan shorthand.

 

Yes.

I also dislike "middle 6" cause what that really means is, 3rd line. But this one sort of works the opposite way. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Thorny

[Curt]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

I'm going to continue asking why Sam wouldn't just arb-arb-UFA, because that's what I would do if I was him and I want my worries to be soothed. 

I mean, if someone really wants their worries to be soothed, guaranteeing yourself $6.75M (for example) per year for the next 8 years isn’t the most worry inducing option out there.  Haha

[Thorny]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

You don’t think Hall Reinhart and Cozens, or Hall Reinhart and Kahun can be an effective second line?

I think you might be seriously underestimating Hall. He is among the best wingers in the game and can drive offence by himself, and you’ve got him with Reinhart, a legit first-line player. 

I'm absolutely centre biased considering what I've had to sit through for several years.

If Cozens doesn't pan out as hoped and Hall follows along the path we see MOST UFAs go (are either, and both, of those things really all that unlikely?) we are STILL sitting with weak depth at the most important position in hockey in 2 years. 

We NEED TO INSULATE COZENS. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Thorny

[dudacek]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I'm going to continue asking why Sam wouldn't just arb-arb-UFA, because that's what I would do if I was him and I want my worries to be soothed. 

I can see him doing that and getting a probable $10 or $12 million over the next two years and walking into free agency at 26, and crossing his fingers that the cap has recovered market will be huge.

I can also see him taking a guaranteed $40 million over the next six years and walking into free agency at 30, feeling secure his future is well taken care of.

So much of it pivots on how much he wants to be in Buffalo.

I’ll say it again, if he does not sign a long-term deal this summer, he will not be a Sabre by the time the 2021 draft is done.

Edited June 24, 2020 by dudacek

[Thorny]

7 minutes ago, Curt said:

I mean, if someone really wants their worries to be soothed, guaranteeing yourself $6.75M (for example) per year for the next 8 years isn’t the most worry inducing option out there.  Haha

I just think there are very specific circumstances here that are teetering (in my mind) on throwing a wrench in things. We KNOW UFAs gets paids. We know the cap is stagnating right now, and that it is LIKELY to go up again in a couple years. 

Sam could stand to make significantly more in UFA, if he waits. Waits, what, 1 and a half more seasons? Where he'd be banking big bucks in arbitration anyways?

If they want him LT they probably have to overpay, and I'm assuming a trade is on the table at this point. These aren't the types of players that get paired up with value deals. 

Just my hunch. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I can see him doing that and getting a probable $10 or $12 million over the next two years and walking into free agency at 26, and crossing his fingers that the cap has recovered market will be huge.

I can also see him taking a guaranteed $40 million over the next six years and walking into free agency at 30, feeling secure his future is well taken care of.

So much of it pivots on how much he wants to be in Buffalo.

I’ll say it again, if he does not sing a long-term deal this summer, he will not be a Sabre by the time the 2021 draft is done.

I'm also thinking the deal is this summer or never. I suppose they could wait till next, but if he's one year from UFA he probably just waits. 

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

I would agree with that statement, but I think Sam is a top 6 player. IMO, he is a first liner on a bad team, and usually a 2nd liner on a good team. For a good team, he should be around the 4th best forward.

I can agree with this, but I think 4th best forward can be first line on a good team. Your top 2 centres, and say your 1LW could be ahead.

If Skinner rebounds, we are a 2C away from this arguably being the case with THIS roster. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorny]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I always liked that one, because it told me the player was a good every day NHL player, better than a role player, but not someone to lean on. Which emphasizes the disconnect: the same phrase means different things to different people.

And again, for me, the reason the term bugs me is no doubt Sabres influenced: too many summers of addressing our top 6 with "middle 6" players. To your point, we needed players to lean on and didn't get that. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Thorny
wooooooooo 4 posts in a row cause duda deleted his

[Thorny]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

In a backhanded way losing a solid to good player like Pilut and not having it more than marginally affecting the unit is a sign that that unit has accumulated a good group of blueliners. A few years ago this unit was bereft a talent. Now it has a solid to good core. That's progress.  

Ish. 

But we are now, somehow, inexplicably, SHORT on LHD headed into next season when we had a surplus headed into last. 

[dudacek]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Yes.

I also dislike "middle 6" cause what that really means is, 3rd line. But this one sort of works the opposite way. 

And I always liked it because to me it means the guy is an every day NHL who won’t carry your team, but can be effective In different spots depending on chemistry and needs. Johansson is the definition of a good middle-sixer to me, Sheary a bad one.

Of course, this perfectly illustrates the issue: the same words mean different things to different people.

[sabresparaavida]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I can agree with this, but I think 4th best forward can be first line on a good team. Your top 2 centres, and say your 1LW could be ahead.

If Skinner rebounds, we are a 2C away from this arguably being the case with THIS roster. 

That's why I said usually a 2nd liner. If he is your 4th best forward there's a reasonable chance you have a Rw that may be better. 

[LGR4GM]

6 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

That's why I said usually a 2nd liner. If he is your 4th best forward there's a reasonable chance you have a Rw that may be better. 

There's 0 chance the Sabres have a better rw than Reinhart. 

[Thorny]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

There's 0 chance the Sabres have a better rw than Reinhart. 

He's not saying that, but he is saying a team's 4th best forward would usually be on the 2nd line, but I actually think on a good team it would usually not be that way...good teams often have 2 really good centres. Therefore, often your top 2 wingers are 3rd and 4th best. 

It's admittedly a pretty finicky discussion. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Thorny

[JohnC]

23 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Ish. 

But we are now, somehow, inexplicably, SHORT on LHD headed into next season when we had a surplus headed into last. 

As a unit it is not unfair to rate them as solid with an upside where Dahlin and Joki elevating the unit. I would rather have an a more talented right handed player on the left side than having a lesser left handed player on the left side. If there is an overbalance of players at any position you can when the time is favorable deal your extra assets to better balance your roster. My point is having an abundance of talent at a certain position is a problem (at least for the short term) not to complain about. 

[nfreeman]

46 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I just think there are very specific circumstances here that are teetering (in my mind) on throwing a wrench in things. We KNOW UFAs gets paids. We know the cap is stagnating right now, and that it is LIKELY to go up again in a couple years. 

Sam could stand to make significantly more in UFA, if he waits. Waits, what, 1 and a half more seasons? Where he'd be banking big bucks in arbitration anyways?

If they want him LT they probably have to overpay, and I'm assuming a trade is on the table at this point. These aren't the types of players that get paired up with value deals. 

Just my hunch. 

I think there is a high likelihood that the cap will not be any higher in the summer of 2022 than it is this summer, and that for the next 4-5 years it will be substantially lower than it was last summer.

At some point I'm going to start a thread on this, but in the meantime, I will say that I think the NHL is going to absorb an enormous economic hit in the next 12 months, and the players are going to have to eat 50% of it.  It will probably be spread out over time, and will be implemented partially via increased escrow and partially via reduced cap.

[dudacek]

14 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I think there is a high likelihood that the cap will not be any higher in the summer of 2022 than it is this summer, and that for the next 4-5 years it will be substantially lower than it was last summer.

At some point I'm going to start a thread on this, but in the meantime, I will say that I think the NHL is going to absorb an enormous economic hit in the next 12 months, and the players are going to have to eat 50% of it.  It will probably be spread out over time, and will be implemented partially via increased escrow and partially via reduced cap.

Yep. It would be a mistake to think things are guaranteed to reset back to recent trends and patterns in a year or two. Never mind the impact of the downtime you refer to, which will be considerable, how will the industry and its revenue streams be different when you come out? Will the fans come back? The viewers? The sponsors?

Agents might be crunching the numbers and telling guys like Sam, if you can get term, take it. Owners might be saying stay away from term at all costs.

We just don’t know.

[Thorny]

20 minutes ago, JohnC said:

As a unit it is not unfair to rate them as solid with an upside where Dahlin and Joki elevating the unit. I would rather have an a more talented right handed player on the left side than having a lesser left handed player on the left side. If there is an overbalance of players at any position you can when the time is favorable deal your extra assets to better balance your roster. My point is having an abundance of talent at a certain position is a problem (at least for the short term) not to complain about. 

I hear you, but where we differ is I believe this to be an issue that needs to be remedied immediately, heading into next season. Which RHD do we have that is capable of playing well on the left? It's not really like forwards that are interchangeable. 

[thewookie1]

18 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I think there is a high likelihood that the cap will not be any higher in the summer of 2022 than it is this summer, and that for the next 4-5 years it will be substantially lower than it was last summer.

At some point I'm going to start a thread on this, but in the meantime, I will say that I think the NHL is going to absorb an enormous economic hit in the next 12 months, and the players are going to have to eat 50% of it.  It will probably be spread out over time, and will be implemented partially via increased escrow and partially via reduced cap.

The cap won't go down in literal number but it may not move for a few years.