Defense in 2022-23 & Beyond

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Pretty sure that boils down to:

he's cheap,

he's played for Granato before,

he wants to be in Buffalo playing for Granato, and

he doesn't have a complete game but has a skill set that only 1 or 2 of the other Sabres D possess. (Which could be seen as an opportunity to exploit his strengths situationally (yes, there is a flip side to that coin & other teams will be looking to exploit that as well).)

Oh, and did we mention he's cheap.  😉

 

 

42 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Might be from his perspective.  From ownerships, believe it was more the 1st & last items.

This team will hemorrhage money this year unless payroll is literally skimming the bottom of the payroll band.  They'll still lose money - having 1/3 - 1/2 the seats filled most nights will do that.

(Thing is, they didn't have to go for another reset.  This is ownership/management's doing and we are the ones that will suffer for it.)

Will Butcher isn’t actually cheap though.  Sabres will be paying him $3M.

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I'm pretty much in agreement with you here.  I think winning games or more generally being competitive each night would do much more for the culture that anything else.  No one wants to work for a company or team going under.  

As to Butcher, him wanting to be here is all well and good, but why being him in at all. Bryson may not be as dynamic offensively, but he is better on defense and KA's stated goal was not to block the kids.  With Miller and Dahlin already on the roster, and Bryson capable of adding some O, Butcher is a luxury that was completely unnecessary.   He also isn't cheap.  We are paying 2.8 mill (of his 3.7) for a guy who'll likely be a 3rd pairing guy, giving us the same value as a 750K scrap heap vet.  It's a waste of money.  

KA should have spent the 2.8 on a goalie and at least made us a touch more competitive.  Like I said this acquisition makes no sense. 

Waste of money maybe but we aren't even at the cap floor. I guess I just disagree with him being a block (I actually think Adams' use of this term is ridiculous, for the record) - if Bryson really is more capable, I presume he'd play. 

Also again, your breakdown makes sense but it's only in theory - we should assume there will be someone out hurt because there *will be* someone out hurt - it's not theoretical. We have plenty of room for all of these guys. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Waste of money maybe but we aren't even at the cap floor. I guess I just disagree with him being a block (I actually think Adams' use of this term is ridiculous, for the record) - if Bryson really is more capable, I presume he'd play. 

Also again, your breakdown makes sense but it's only in theory - we should assume there will be someone out hurt because there *will be* someone out hurt - it's not theoretical. We have plenty of room for all of these guys. 

Once Mitts, Dahlin and Joki re-sign, we'll be over the cap and I'd have rather spent 2.8 on a goalie.  I'd feel better about it if he been a RHD.  As with last year, I'd rather see Samuelsson and Bryson over Hagg and Butcher.  

What funny about KA's off-season is that he acquired mediocre vets to compete against kids who showed ok in the NHL (Samuelsson and Bryson) making it harder for them to make the team.  However in goal he acquired guys who are not longer NHL players to not block a goalie (UPL) who can't stop pucks in the AHL.  The strategy makes literally zero sense, but then again either do the Sabres. 

 

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Once Mitts, Dahlin and Joki re-sign, we'll be over the cap and I'd have rather spent 2.8 on a goalie.  I'd feel better about it if he been a RHD.  As with last year, I'd rather see Samuelsson and Bryson over Hagg and Butcher.  

What funny about KA's off-season is that he acquired mediocre vets to compete against kids who showed ok in the NHL (Samuelsson and Bryson) making it harder for them to make the team.  However in goal he acquired guys who are not longer NHL players to not block a goalie (UPL) who can't stop pucks in the AHL.  The strategy makes literally zero sense, but then again either do the Sabres. 

 

This is such a bad way of talking about what happened to the Sabres in goal. It ignores the efforts made to sign Ullmark. 

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Once Mitts, Dahlin and Joki re-sign, we'll be over the cap and I'd have rather spent 2.8 on a goalie.  I'd feel better about it if he been a RHD.  As with last year, I'd rather see Samuelsson and Bryson over Hagg and Butcher.  

What funny about KA's off-season is that he acquired mediocre vets to compete against kids who showed ok in the NHL (Samuelsson and Bryson) making it harder for them to make the team.  However in goal he acquired guys who are not longer NHL players to not block a goalie (UPL) who can't stop pucks in the AHL.  The strategy makes literally zero sense, but then again either do the Sabres. 

 

I think you need to start separating what you think should happen from what is happening. Your breakdowns of what should be done certainly seem smart and apt but Adams isn't trying to build a team that wins games - and the bolded make sense through the prism of that, what I'd argue to be, fact. 

The vets being so mediocre actually makes it easier for the younger players to make the team, the bar they have to clear being lower. The more challenging bar these vets seem to present is that of mindset. Adams believes that these 750k guns for hire are attitude beacons. He doesn't believe a poor culture will be allowed to foster under the make up of his roster. The kids, though more talented, will only play if Adams finds them to be mentally capable with dealing with all of the losing, I'd assume. 

To me there are too many that will be playing regardless, as guys like Cozens are going to be asked to play roles too high by necessity, but my opinion on that doesn't really matter, Adams has already spoken: it's a BLINDING LIGHT he said. He's blinded, for better or worse, by what he perceives to be our culturally unshakable young core. 

[dudacek]

57 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We already has this the first time. 

As you said, it comes down to development. I already mapped out the two sides the last time we had this discussion, we would theoretically pass the first group in mass of assets if we commit to two full years of tanking. 

I'm not one to look at future drafts as any kind of certainty in terms of amassing a "critical level" of talent - it's all relative. The draft is deep for all the other teams in the league next year, too. 

Our system, prospects and roster, compares favourably, at this time, to perhaps zero other NHL systems. Seriously, counting every asset in the organization, which organization would you take the Sabres over? Couldn't you count them on one hand?

This is the most simple way to look at it, because so much of our perceived pathway to success lies in unlocked future value. 

I think the Sabres basket of U23 talent is generally underrated, although I do see they’ve cracked the top 8 at minimum in Pronman’s annual ranking this year.

In the fall of 2013 the Sabres had in their U23 system (players from the previous 6 drafts):

• 1 top 10 pick (Ristolainen)
• 5 other 1st-rounders (Zadorov, Girgensons, Grigorenko, Armia, Pysyk)
• 5 2nd-rounders (Compher, Hurley, Bailey, McCabe, Larsson)

Right now they have:

• 2 1st overall picks (Dahlin, Power)
• 3 other top 10 picks (Quinn, Cozens, Mittelstadt)
• 4 other 1st rounders (Rosen, Johnson, Jokiharju, Thompson)
• 6 2nd rounders (Poltapov, Kisakov, Peterka, Samuelsson, Lukkonnen, Asplund)

I think they are clearly both deeper and stronger at the high end right now than they were then.

Edited September 1, 2021 by dudacek

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

I think the Sabres basket of U23 talent is generally underrated, although I do see they’ve cracked the top 8 at minimum in Pronman’s annual ranking this year.

In the fall of 2014 the Sabres had in their U23 system (players from the previous 6 drafts):

• 1 top 10 pick (Ristolainen)
• 5 other 1st-rounders (Zadorov, Girgensons, Grigorenko, Armia, Pysyk)
• 4 2nd-rounders (Compher, Hurley, Bailey, McCabe)

Right now they have:

• 2 1st overall picks (Dahlin, Power)
• 3 other top 10 picks (Quinn, Cozens, Mittelstadt)
• 4 other 1st rounders (Rosen, Johnson, Jokiharju, Thompson)
• 6 2nd rounders (Poltapov, Kisakov, Peterka, Samuelsson, Lukkonnen, Asplund)

I think they are clearly both deeper and stronger at the high end right now than they were then.

But in the fall of 2014 they also had Reinhart. A top 10 pick. A lot of this is our failure to reconcile where the "starting point" is. 

A lot of it just doesn't pass the smell test for me. Counting Mittelstadt now as if he wasn't present the first time. Which tank/rebuild had "more" assets probably just depends on the chosen timeframe, the point at which you choose to look at the two builds. 

Also "Eichel" was soon heading to the first group, an all-star talent, representing a massive "elephant in the room" going forward as we have *no idea* who we will be drafting in a year and if that player will be even *close* to Jack. 

[Archie Lee]

15 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I mean we couldn't manage to achieve critical mass in the last decade - I certainly can't even envision it on the horizon in the wake of dealing our best players. Not trying to be negative or saying it won't happen but, there's no horizon right now. We are preparing for a climb up Everest and our foundational equipment looks reasonably solid. That's about it. 

Depending on what you mean by "on the horizon", I see it as the opposite.  Provided that the current Sabre braintrust knows what they are doing, and skepticism is understandable, I think that the critical mass referenced is near to being achieved. 

Without chronicling every pick and prospect, since the Eichel draft the Sabres have picked top ten for six straight years including two 1st OA picks. It has to be incredibly rare, perhaps unprecedented, for a team drafting that high for that long to also have young players like Risto and Reinhart who can be traded for multiple pieces, including two additional firsts, and still have a talent like Eichel to deal for more assets.

Corey Pronman from The Athletic is currently working through his rankings of NHL teams based on their talent under age 23.  He has worked his way from teams 32-9. Thus far the Sabres have not made an appearance.  I'm not suggesting he is the final word on such things, but I think the Sabres are near the top in this regard.  If anything we may be under-rated because, well, Sabres.  An Eichel trade and the first round of the '22 draft are going to add to the stockpile.

I'm not anti-Eichel and have no hard feelings toward him.  He is not the one responsible for the Sabres's shortcomings over the past 6 years. I do think though that when he is gone we may see that there is room for player growth that has not existed these past few seasons. 

[Thorny]

With due respect I'm not sure where we place on these "lists" is a strong argument in a thread where we are comparing and contrasting the two builds based on perception: we finished very high on these lists back then, too, higher indeed than we are placing in rankings today - and we saw how it turned out. We've generally been mid-pack of late. 

Edited September 1, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorny]

What I am waiting to see is a list of franchises, all assets considered, that people would take the Sabres' current system over. Where we are compared to a rebuild that resulted in - MULTIPLE FURTHER last place finishes is hardly a strong bar to aspire to, no? More relevant is our comparison to the league as a whole. 

What's the "horizon"? NHL relevance? Mediocrity? How many teams are we further along than on that road, ALL current assets considered? I'm actually asking. Because in my estimation we are looking up at most of the rest of the league, all assets considered, which goes a long way towards illustrating how much ground Adams has to make up going forward. 

I think people are somehow underestimating this. We had a hell of a lot of ground to make up with Eichel and Reinhart were still here - and now we need all of that, and to find a way to replace our top 2 centres. If Cozens and Mittelstadt become Eichel and Reinhart (good luck), we then need to find our Cozens and Mittelstadt.

We needed Cozens and Mittelstadt when Eichel and Reinhart were still here! To me, the system doesn't project to any kind of "critical mass" even in theory until we go through several more drafts, and that's because of the full-rebuild path we've chosen to go down.

A huge Eichel return mitigates that significantly, which you alluded to @Archie Lee- Adams knows that, and that's why he's holding so firm. 

Edited September 1, 2021 by Thorny

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But in the fall of 2014 they also had Reinhart. A top 10 pick. A lot of this is our failure to reconcile where the "starting point" is. 

A lot of it just doesn't pass the smell test for me. Counting Mittelstadt now as if he wasn't present the first time. Which tank/rebuild had "more" assets probably just depends on the chosen timeframe, the point at which you choose to look at the two builds. 

Also "Eichel" was soon heading to the first group, an all-star talent, representing a massive "elephant in the room" going forward as we have *no idea* who we will be drafting in a year and if that player will be even *close* to Jack. 

LOL. And I making it worse by saying in the fall of 2014 when I meant 2013. I also missed and have added Johan Larsson.

I am comparing this coming season to the initial “designed to lose” season of 2013-14, which I think is fair and relevant, and I think our pipeline now appears to be in better shape. 

According to many, the top of this draft offers Eichel-like talents, or at least better than Sam Reinhart.

But you are absolutely correct in that none of that means much if we don’t draft and properly develop the right players.

 

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

LOL. And I making it worse by saying in the fall of 2014 when I meant 2013. I also missed and have added Johan Larsson.

I am comparing this coming season to the initial “designed to lose” season of 2013-14, which I think is fair and relevant, and I think our pipeline now appears to be in better shape. 

According to many, the top of this draft offers Eichel-like talents, or at least better than Sam Reinhart.

But you are absolutely correct in that none of that means much if we don’t draft and properly develop the right players.

 

Right, I think this is more less where we got to before. I agree the system looks deeper if we now complete the two "Reinhart and Eichel" tank years. In my pathetic naivety I was hoping we were only targeting/headed for *one* year further of aiming for the top of the draft, meaning I thought the difference in young assets would be reconciled by the Eichel tank going that extra year. If that makes sense. 

You are probably right that it's more of a two year draft quest at this stage. 

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Right, I think this is more less where we got to before. I agree the system looks deeper if we now complete the two "Reinhart and Eichel" tank years. In my pathetic naivety I was hoping we were only targeting/headed for *one* year further of aiming for the top of the draft, meaning I thought the difference in young assets would be reconciled by the Eichel tank going that extra year. If that makes sense. 

You are probably right that it's more of a two year draft quest at this stage. 

To be clear, I do not believe the goal is to be bad for the next two years and I think that would be a huge mistake.

Ideally, I’d like to see next summer as similar to the summer of 2015 where we draft a stud centre (Eichel/Wright) welcome our previous top pick (Reinhart/Power) use our cap and roster flexibility to add a good veteran or two (ROR), and vault into the playoff chase.

Hopefully what is different is they will be joining a team that already has Mittelstadt, Cozens and Dahlin as viable pieces of a young core, has Quinn, Lukkonen, Johnson and others also ready to contribute, and will not have a locker room dominated by the Bogo/Kane Axis of Evil (TM)

[Archie Lee]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What I am waiting to see is a list of franchises, all assets considered, that people would take the Sabres' current system over. Where we are compared to a rebuild that resulted in - MULTIPLE FURTHER last place finishes is hardly a strong bar to aspire to, no? More relevant is our comparison to the league as a whole. 

What's the "horizon"? NHL relevance? Mediocrity? How many teams are we further along than on that road, ALL current assets considered? I'm actually asking. Because in my estimation we are looking up at most of the rest of the league, all assets considered, which goes a long way towards illustrating how much ground Adams has to make up going forward. 

I think people are somehow underestimating this. We had a hell of a lot of ground to make up with Eichel and Reinhart were still here - and now we need all of that, and to find a way to replace our top 2 centres. If Cozens and Mittelstadt become Eichel and Reinhart (good luck), we then need to find our Cozens and Mittelstadt.

We needed Cozens and Mittelstadt when Eichel and Reinhart were still here! To me, the system doesn't project to any kind of "critical mass" even in theory until we go through several more drafts, and that's because of the full-rebuild path we've chosen to go down.

A huge Eichel return mitigates that significantly, which you alluded to @Archie Lee- Adams knows that, and that's why he's holding so firm. 

Indeed there is some irony in what has happened in the last 5 months; we may finally have been near to having the homegrown talent needed to support Eichel and Reinhart.

If the Sabres don't start having on-ice success in the next couple of seasons (legitimately competing for the playoffs in 22-23, making the playoffs by 23-24) it won't be because the team's current talent pool (less Eichel) was so lacking that no GM or coach could have led them to success.  If the team doesn't move forward to being successful in that timeline it will be because Adams and those who report to him (but mostly Adams) were not up to the task, just as Murray, Botterill and Krueger were not up to the task.  

My strong view is that Jack Eichel could retire tomorrow and the Sabres get nothing for him and the 2-3 year timeline for success should still be highly achievable.   

 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

 

Will Butcher isn’t actually cheap though.  Sabres will be paying him $3M.

Fair point.  But, the team w/ 22 players signed is roughly $11MM under the floor WITH Eichel's $10MM.  If that contract goes away, they're $21MM under the floor w/ 2 spots to fill (minus whatever comes back).

Without Butcher's deal that goes away after this season AND brought back a pick, they're about $24MM under the cap w/ 3 players to go after Eichel departs.  All things considered, he IS cheap and if he finally recovers from the knee (?) &/or learns the rink has 2 ends he might actually be useful.  (Wouldn't bank on it, but it might happen.)

[Curt]

44 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Fair point.  But, the team w/ 22 players signed is roughly $11MM under the floor WITH Eichel's $10MM.  If that contract goes away, they're $21MM under the floor w/ 2 spots to fill (minus whatever comes back).

Without Butcher's deal that goes away after this season AND brought back a pick, they're about $24MM under the cap w/ 3 players to go after Eichel departs.  All things considered, he IS cheap and if he finally recovers from the knee (?) &/or learns the rink has 2 ends he might actually be useful.  (Wouldn't bank on it, but it might happen.)

He is a 3rd pairing guy (and maybe not a good one, as you say yourself, he may not even be useful) who the Sabres are going to pay $3M.  That’s not exorbitant, but it’s certainly not cheap for the level of player that he is.

The Sabres have no worries about being over the cap, so it doesn’t matter to me.  My one and only point was that Butcher was not acquired because he is super cheap.  He isn’t particularly cheap.

[Curt]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

What I am waiting to see is a list of franchises, all assets considered, that people would take the Sabres' current system over. Where we are compared to a rebuild that resulted in - MULTIPLE FURTHER last place finishes is hardly a strong bar to aspire to, no? More relevant is our comparison to the league as a whole. 

What's the "horizon"? NHL relevance? Mediocrity? How many teams are we further along than on that road, ALL current assets considered? I'm actually asking. Because in my estimation we are looking up at most of the rest of the league, all assets considered, which goes a long way towards illustrating how much ground Adams has to make up going forward. 

I think people are somehow underestimating this. We had a hell of a lot of ground to make up with Eichel and Reinhart were still here - and now we need all of that, and to find a way to replace our top 2 centres. If Cozens and Mittelstadt become Eichel and Reinhart (good luck), we then need to find our Cozens and Mittelstadt.

We needed Cozens and Mittelstadt when Eichel and Reinhart were still here! To me, the system doesn't project to any kind of "critical mass" even in theory until we go through several more drafts, and that's because of the full-rebuild path we've chosen to go down.

A huge Eichel return mitigates that significantly, which you alluded to @Archie Lee- Adams knows that, and that's why he's holding so firm. 

I agree.

The team is not close to the playoffs, and the current group of youth/prospects is not so impressive as to suggest that there will be a real critical mass of talent in the near future.

They do need the Eichel return and the drafts over the next couple of years to assemble that “critical mass” of talent.

Don't confuse this with me saying that they need to tank in pursuit of a top 1/2 pick though.  They’ll be bad enough to draft relatively high.  If they just draft well, especially with the extra picks they’ll have, I believe they can get there.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

He is a 3rd pairing guy (and maybe not a good one, as you say yourself, he may not even be useful) who the Sabres are going to pay $3M.  That’s not exorbitant, but it’s certainly not cheap for the level of player that he is.

The Sabres have no worries about being over the cap, so it doesn’t matter to me.  My one and only point was that Butcher was not acquired because he is super cheap.  He isn’t particularly cheap.

He was cheap though in terms of acquisition/opportunity cost. The Sabres got a free 5th round pick for taking on a 1-year $2.8 contract.

He also happens to be a proven NHL defenceman, save last year. Even including last year's dismal numbers, he's 55th in points for defencemen since he entered the league, sandwiched in with a group including Justin Falk, Cam Fowler, Shea Weber, Colton Parayko, Brandon Montour, Noah Hanifan and Rasmus Dahlin.

Yes, you can get two #7s for less than $2.8 million, so if he is your #7, you definitely overpaid.

But that's not bad coin for a #4/5 (115th on the salary scale alongside guys like Cole, Soucy, Nutivaara, Moore).

He has that upside and if he performs he can be flipped for another pick at the deadline.

Worst case scenario is he flames out and we sacrificed $2 million in real money (but apparently nothing in needed cap space) for a 5th-round pick.

Best case scenario, we paid $2 million for one year of a 2nd-pairing defenceman, a 5th and a 3rd.

It's good buy-low investment opportunity. Can't see the down side with this one at all.

[GASabresIUFAN]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

This is such a bad way of talking about what happened to the Sabres in goal. It ignores the efforts made to sign Ullmark. 

So KA's motto is I'm sorry I failed to support the team properly but I really really tried.  Who could have guessed that a quality UFA goalie would want play for a perennial contender instead of the worst organization in sport.

If his honest goal was to support the team with quality goaltending by re-signing Ullmark, then he should have had a plan B in place when Ullmark reasonably bolted.  He didn't.  A competent GM would have had a plan B. Going from Ullmark to Dell/Anderson to not a plan B.  It not even plan X.  It's a joke.  It's going from helping a team to be competitive to tanking the squad before the season even begins.  He deserves no credit for "trying" to re-sign Ullmark, because he failed to get him signed and failed to sign or acquire an adequate replacement.  Also it's not my spin that he isn't blocking UPL, it's KA's himself.  

He stated to Vogl on 7/29 about his goaltending quartet that "We feel good where we're at."

He further stated the following "We certainly spent a lot of time planning around where we would go, or how we would pivot,” Adams said. “I felt that we made a strong offer; when he made a decision to go a different direction, we pivoted. We looked into where the market was from certain trade scenarios, but for us, giving up assets isn’t something we were comfortable with at that point."  And “We don’t want to box players out in any position,” Adams said. “We want to make sure that guys like UPL, when they’re ready, they have the opportunity, but we have competition there. It’s gonna be guys competing for a spot.”

This is delusional.  There is no other way to look at this situation.  He made an offer to Ullmark, who knows what it was or even if it was a legit or competitive offer, and when that failed he had no real plan to get another quality goaltender in here.  He basically threw up his hands, pivoted to tank mode and got some guys standing on the corner holding signs saying will goaltend for food.  This is the type of terrible and short sighted decision making that got us here, thus he gets zero credit for making an offer to Ullmark.  

Edited September 1, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

He was cheap though in terms of acquisition/opportunity cost. The Sabres got a free 5th round pick for taking on a 1-year $2.8 contract.

He also happens to be a proven NHL defenceman, save last year. Even including last year's dismal numbers, he's 55th in points for defencemen since he entered the league, sandwiched in with a group including Justin Falk, Cam Fowler, Shea Weber, Colton Parayko, Brandon Montour, Noah Hanifan and Rasmus Dahlin.

Yes, you can get two #7s for less than $2.8 million, so if he is your #7, you definitely overpaid.

But that's not bad coin for a #4/5 (115th on the salary scale alongside guys like Cole, Soucy, Nutivaara, Moore).

He has that upside and if he performs he can be flipped for another pick at the deadline.

Worst case scenario is he flames out and we sacrificed $2 million in real money (but apparently nothing in needed cap space) for a 5th-round pick.

Best case scenario, we paid $2 million for one year of a 2nd-pairing defenceman, a 5th and a 3rd.

It's good buy-low investment opportunity. Can't see the down side with this one at all.

This move only makes sense if your in tank mode and are willing to "box out" a prospect or two (which is something KA said he won't do).  No way we are going to pay 2.8 to someone to sit on the bench.  Remember he was so bad in his own zone that a rebuilding team (NJ) wanted him gone and was willing to pay us to take him. 

However, lets say he plays well and you flip him at the deadline for a 3rd.  How exactly does this help us become a winner sooner then later?  Yes we ended up with a 3rd and 5th in 2022.  The odds we find an NHL player with either pick is low, about 22% for the 3rd and 15% for the 5th and that is 3-5 years away if they make it.

Since we are now clearly a budget team, KA could have instead used that money and allocated it somewhere like goaltending to help the team be competitive now.  Obviously if you have pivoted to tank mode, then helping us be competitive now isn't the goal so why not bring in a defensively challenged defensemen to play in front of your AHL goaltenders. He will certainly help us lose games.  I'm so excited that our management wants to teach another generation of Sabres prospect how to lose with dignity.

[dudacek]

26 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This move only makes sense if your in tank mode and are willing to "box out" a prospect or two (which is something KA said he won't do).  No way we are going to pay 2.8 to someone to sit on the bench.  Remember he was so bad in his own zone that a rebuilding team (NJ) wanted him gone and was willing to pay us to take him. 

However, lets say he plays well and you flip him at the deadline for a 3rd.  How exactly does this help us become a winner sooner then later?  Yes we ended up with a 3rd and 5th in 2022.  The odds we find an NHL player with either pick is low, about 22% for the 3rd and 15% for the 5th and that is 3-5 years away if they make it.

Since we are now clearly a budget team, KA could have instead used that money and allocated it somewhere like goaltending to help the team be competitive now.  Obviously if you have pivoted to tank mode, then helping us be competitive now isn't the goal so why not bring in a defensively challenged defensemen to play in front of your AHL goaltenders. He will certainly help us lose games.  I'm so excited that our management wants to teach another generation of Sabres prospect how to lose with dignity.

Meh. I think this is a case of manufacturing an issue.

We need 8 NHL defencemen. We have 6 including 4 guys trying to revive their NHL careers, plus 2 young guys we’ve crossed our fingers for. You call it blocks. I call it depth and honest competition. If Butcher reclaims his game he becomes an asset. If he sucks, he’ll sit. He’s a below-average cap hit on a one-year deal who Adams was paid to take. The only ego at stake here is Butcher’s.

His cap hit and salary are and were irrelevant to the goaltending picture or any other “helpful” piece the Sabres might be or have been considering picking up. He’s a stopgap with apparently a good mindset, a ton of motivation and some upside, acquired at low cost to help us through a rebuilding year.

The plan might suck and you can fill your boots complaining about that, but within the context of the plan, Will Butcher makes a lot of sense.

Edited September 2, 2021 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Meh. I think this is a case of manufacturing an issue.

We need 8 NHL defencemen. We have 6 including 4 guys trying to revive their NHL careers, plus 2 young guys we’ve crossed our fingers for. You call it blocks. I call it depth and honest competition. If Butcher reclaims his game he becomes an asset. If he sucks, he’ll sit. He’s a below-average cap hit on a one-year deal who Adams was paid to take. The only ego at stake here is Butcher’s.

His cap hit and salary are and were irrelevant to the goaltending picture or any other “helpful” piece the Sabres might be or have been considering picking up. He’s a stopgap with apparently a good mindset, a ton of motivation and some upside, acquired at low cost to help us through a rebuilding year.

The plan might does suck and you can fill your boots complaining about that, but within the context of the plan, Will Butcher makes a lot of sense.  Fixed

If the plan is to tank, then yes they are succeeding.  Putting another crop of prospects in another losing situation is a stupid plan by definition. You don't fix a losing culture with more losing. We had the cap space to make the team competitive this season without taking an ice time away from our top kids.  That type of support is how you build a winning culture. Apparently the Sabres' brass never learns.

Edited September 2, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[Curt]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

He was cheap though in terms of acquisition/opportunity cost. The Sabres got a free 5th round pick for taking on a 1-year $2.8 contract.

He also happens to be a proven NHL defenceman, save last year. Even including last year's dismal numbers, he's 55th in points for defencemen since he entered the league, sandwiched in with a group including Justin Falk, Cam Fowler, Shea Weber, Colton Parayko, Brandon Montour, Noah Hanifan and Rasmus Dahlin.

Yes, you can get two #7s for less than $2.8 million, so if he is your #7, you definitely overpaid.

But that's not bad coin for a #4/5 (115th on the salary scale alongside guys like Cole, Soucy, Nutivaara, Moore).

He has that upside and if he performs he can be flipped for another pick at the deadline.

Worst case scenario is he flames out and we sacrificed $2 million in real money (but apparently nothing in needed cap space) for a 5th-round pick.

Best case scenario, we paid $2 million for one year of a 2nd-pairing defenceman, a 5th and a 3rd.

It's good buy-low investment opportunity. Can't see the down side with this one at all.

Totally agree.  Worth a shot, and you definitely can’t argue with the acquisition price.  From that perspective he was cheap.  I was just thinking about the salary aspect.  He is actually the highest paid player that Buffalo acquired this offseason.

For Sabres his cap hit will be just under $3M, and actual salary will be just over $3M.

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 minutes ago, Curt said:

Totally agree.  Worth a shot, and you definitely can’t argue with the acquisition price.  From that perspective he was cheap.  I was just thinking about the salary aspect.  He is actually the highest paid player that Buffalo acquired this offseason.

For Sabres his cap hit will be just under $3M, and actual salary will be just over $3M.

Do you think he'll perform to the level of a $3 mill player? or will his defensive failing make him into Miller 2.0 and ultimately spend the season in the pressbox?    

[Curt]

10 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Do you think he'll perform to the level of a $3 mill player? or will his defensive failing make him into Miller 2.0 and ultimately spend the season in the pressbox?    

I honestly have no idea.  I haven’t paid enough attention to him to have an opinion.