NHL Trade Rumors and Speculation 2022-23

[Brawndo]

Lance Lysowski on the Maintenance Day Podcast said a source told Him that Jack Campbell is not a option for the Sabres. 
 

Husso as well, He feels Holtby will prefer to sign with a contender. 
 

He feels the most logical trade partner is San Jose for Adin Hill or James Reimer 

[thewookie1]

27 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Lance Lysowski on the Maintenance Day Podcast said a source told Him that Jack Campbell is not a option for the Sabres. 
 

Husso as well, He feels Holtby will prefer to sign with a contender. 
 

He feels the most logical trade partner is San Jose for Adin Hill or James Reimer 

Joy….. we have use assets to gain mediocrity 

Edited July 5, 2022 by thewookie1

[tom webster]

45 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Lance Lysowski on the Maintenance Day Podcast said a source told Him that Jack Campbell is not a option for the Sabres. 
 

Husso as well, He feels Holtby will prefer to sign with a contender. 
 

He feels the most logical trade partner is San Jose for Adin Hill or James Reimer 

They have become so good at using media to cover their *****. This way, if their efforts are unsuccessful, they’ve tempered expectations. Maybe they think their old friend Mike Grier will help them out.

[JohnC]

6 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

the key word is "interesting". That could mean anything. Could be Kane, could be Husso, could be ?    What exactly would be "something interesting" ?

You really seem to love KA as GM. Why I don't know, but it's clear you are all in on him 100%. To me at this point he still needs to prove himself. Deconstruction was not the hard part. At this point for me he's no different than the others. You called him the "young GM" earlier which made me laugh as the implication was that somehow made him what, better? We've had nothing but young GMs in this era and they've all screwed up royally. Until we see the results of his drafting we can't really evaluate him. As to his "plan", of course that's the plan, and there's a bunch of picks coming, but there comes a point where you need to make other moves too. 

The draft is without a doubt how you build, but the teams you mentioned, Yzerman and all that, also made trades and signed UFAs to make them better. You want to win you don't just save money for the future, you balance your payroll. For example after his entry level deal ends you'll need money for Power, so you can sign a UFA with a contract that expires around that same time. You MANAGE the cap as you are the GENERAL MANAGER. Spending nothing and sitting on the cap floor cheats the fans and only lines the pocket of the owner. 

Two things I don't want. I don't want to wait any longer, and I definitely do not want to teach this group that they have to wait and that losing is acceptable. We do that, and this will all unravel yet again, just like last time. No thank you. 

You have missed my point on my comments on KA. What I have said about him is that he is fully transparent about what he is going to do. There is no hidden agenda. He has repeatedly publicly stated on what his strategy is to rebuild this roster. If you disagree with it, then that is fine. But what he is doing and the direction he is taking in this endeavor should not be a mystery to anyone. He is doing exactly what he said he would be doing since his installation. 

[JohnC]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

But I want to listen because he hears things that Kevyn Adams isn’t discussing publicly.

That last sentence wasn’t added by accident and it fits with what Tom has said about Kane to Buffalo, which is what Friedman has said about how Kane and Toews would exit Chicago.

I have repeatedly heard Kevyn Adams say he would only spend money or make a big move if it made sense long-term. Kane for “excess” picks and/or prospects makes sense long term.

While I generally share your vision of Adams plan, I don’t share your dogmatic interpretation of it.

I don't understand your "dogmatic interpretation" about my comments. What I have said is that the GM has clearly stated what his strategy will be in how he rebuilds the roster. And without question he has adhered to it. He has been up front about not being a high expenditure franchise now so he can be in a better situation in the future when a wave of his young core players enter into their next contracts.  

[dudacek]

15 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't understand your "dogmatic interpretation" about my comments. What I have said is that the GM has clearly stated what his strategy will be in how he rebuilds the roster. And without question he has adhered to it. He has been up front about not being a high expenditure franchise now so he can be in a better situation in the future when a wave of his young core players enter into their next contracts.  

First of all, the bold is not a true statement; the two scenarios are not unavoidably linked. For example, he could theoretically sign Letang and Malkin each to 1-year, $10 million contracts this summer and not hurt his ability to re-sign his young players in the future one iota.

More pertinent, however, is that this is also not exactly what Adams said. What he actually said was that he not willing to make moves today that could disrupt the development of his young prospects today, or tie his hands under the cap down the road when he expects them to be in their prime.

Your posting history has told me that you either don’t acknowledge the nuance, or accept that he used it. It’s a faulty premise that you refuse to surrender and I refuse to accept, so it renders further discussion moot.

 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You have missed my point on my comments on KA. What I have said about him is that he is fully transparent about what he is going to do. There is no hidden agenda. He has repeatedly publicly stated on what his strategy is to rebuild this roster. If you disagree with it, then that is fine. But what he is doing and the direction he is taking in this endeavor should not be a mystery to anyone. He is doing exactly what he said he would be doing since his installation. 

and you missed my point earlier. Never trust a word they say, any of them . (How many times have you heard a GM say the coach is safe before he got fired lol)

The plan is the plan until it isn't, and the plan can still be the plan even with additions. Go back to Taro's comment, he understood what I was saying and nailed it. 

[Brawndo]

Elliotte Friedman mentioned on 32 Thoughts this AM the belief is that Jack Campbell can get five years on His Next Deal. 
 

That’s prohibitive for the Sabres 

[Porous Five Hole]

13 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Elliotte Friedman mentioned on 32 Thoughts this AM the belief is that Jack Campbell can get five years on His Next Deal. 
 

That’s prohibitive for the Sabres 

It might be. Ryan Miller was the Amerks starter for two full seasons, and was the Sabres backup in year three. 
 

With Levi committing to another year in college, and then following the above path (which is reasonable), then he is the Sabres backup in year four of Campbell’s potential deal. 
 

I don’t see this as an issue or a block at all. If Levi outplays the Sabres free-agent signing sooner, that’s even better. But it would be risky to count on that. 

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Porous Five Hole said:

It might be. Ryan Miller was the Amerks starter for two full seasons, and was the Sabres backup in year three. 
 

With Levi committing to another year in college, and then following the above path (which is reasonable), then he is the Sabres backup in year four of Campbell’s potential deal. 
 

I don’t see this as an issue or a block at all. If Levi outplays the Sabres free-agent signing sooner, that’s even better. But it would be risky to count on that. 

For me, the argument is less about blocking and more about the fact that Campbell's track record doesn't warrant a 5-year deal.

[tom webster]

31 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Elliotte Friedman mentioned on 32 Thoughts this AM the belief is that Jack Campbell can get five years on His Next Deal. 
 

That’s prohibitive for the Sabres 

Yeah, I don’t think they touch that and frankly I don’t blame them. 

[Porous Five Hole]

47 minutes ago, dudacek said:

For me, the argument is less about blocking and more about the fact that Campbell's track record doesn't warrant a 5-year deal.

Can’t argue with you there!

[French Collection]

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Elliotte Friedman mentioned on 32 Thoughts this AM the belief is that Jack Campbell can get five years on His Next Deal. 
 

That’s prohibitive for the Sabres 

I am not a huge Campbell fan but if the alternative is Tokarski, Subban, UPL then I would give him term. I am of the opinion that he would play well enough to move that contract in 3-4 years if he gets pushed out by a young goalie. The cap will go up and his numbers will be decent on an improving club. UPL would be the only guy above ELC $ for a few years anyway.

It is a good year to be a UFA goalie, there are more chairs than players. A guy like DeSmith may not demand term so I would consider him. Holtby could be had on short term, I believe.

I think KA is exploring trades as well so that increases the chances of landing someone.

As an old boss of mine used to say, just do something!

[Radar]

8 minutes ago, French Collection said:

I am not a huge Campbell fan but if the alternative is Tokarski, Subban, UPL then I would give him term. I am of the opinion that he would play well enough to move that contract in 3-4 years if he gets pushed out by a young goalie. The cap will go up and his numbers will be decent on an improving club. UPL would be the only guy above ELC $ for a few years anyway.

It is a good year to be a UFA goalie, there are more chairs than players. A guy like DeSmith may not demand term so I would consider him. Holtby could be had on short term, I believe.

I think KA is exploring trades as well so that increases the chances of landing someone.

As an old boss of mine used to say, just do something!

Not to be pessimistic but I don't think we'd be on the short list of any free agent goalies. You possibly could offer more to try and entice one but wouldn't that be contrary to KA mantra, "we want players who want to be here"?

Edited July 5, 2022 by Radar

[aristocrat]

17 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Lance Lysowski on the Maintenance Day Podcast said a source told Him that Jack Campbell is not a option for the Sabres. 
 

Husso as well, He feels Holtby will prefer to sign with a contender. 
 

He feels the most logical trade partner is San Jose for Adin Hill or James Reimer 

Everyone wants to sign with a contender but that's not as easy as you think since there is a cap. The contenders have little cap space. 

[Marvin]

2 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Everyone wants to sign with a contender but that's not as easy as you think since there is a cap. The contenders have little cap space. 

Then let us hope we put together a roster which a player looks at us as an up-and-coming, soon-to-be contender.

[aristocrat]

12 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Then let us hope we put together a roster which a player looks at us as an up-and-coming, soon-to-be contender.

 

There is a difference between a contender and being competitive. Only a few teams are contenders but quite a few are competitive and I think we could fall in there with a legit goalie and adding Power along with another piece or two in the bottom six. 

[Mustache of God]

18 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Everyone wants to sign with a contender but that's not as easy as you think since there is a cap. The contenders have little cap space. 

Plus if you're actually contending for the cup you probably have goaltending locked up because you need a goalie to be a contender. Bit of a catch-22. 

[ddaryl]

18 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Everyone wants to sign with a contender but that's not as easy as you think since there is a cap. The contenders have little cap space. 

This is true, which means patience comes into play. Something many around here have run out of, but if we want solid players at solid value we may have to let FA play out some.

[JohnC]

15 hours ago, dudacek said:

First of all, the bold is not a true statement; the two scenarios are not unavoidably linked. For example, he could theoretically sign Letang and Malkin each to 1-year, $10 million contracts this summer and not hurt his ability to re-sign his young players in the future one iota.

More pertinent, however, is that this is also not exactly what Adams said. What he actually said was that he not willing to make moves today that could disrupt the development of his young prospects today, or tie his hands under the cap down the road when he expects them to be in their prime.

Your posting history has told me that you either don’t acknowledge the nuance, or accept that he used it. It’s a faulty premise that you refuse to surrender and I refuse to accept, so it renders further discussion moot.

 

Yes, theoretically the GM could sign Letang and Malkin and not hurt re-signing his young players in the future. But what is the probability that he would do so? It is very small and improbable. That's the point that I'm making.

Your second paragraph concisely states what almost everyone on the board agrees with. I don't understand the commotion. 

[Marvin]

I think we have to assume that there will be no high-priced mercenaries.  Indeed, I would assume he will not overpay for any UFA, no matter how much he might help; the theory would be that anyone you need to overpay does not "want to be here."

This is as much a concealed subplot as Daleks representing the Nazis in classic Doctor Who or Klingons and Romulans standing in for the Soviet Union and Communist China respectively in classic Star Trek.  No excuses, deceit, or rationalisations are required.  This is out there in the open for all to see.  Those expecting 5 years, $30M for Husso or 2 years $20M for Malkin are dreaming verging on the delusional.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Marvin, Sabres Fan

[Flashsabre]

Casey DeSmith back to Pitt on a 2 year deal. $1.8 per

[Thorny]

17 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This is just what I was worried about. He signed Anderson and then is going to comeback to the fanbase and say "sorry I tried but no one wanted to come here but I'm really bullish on the progress UPL is making."

I have an idea Brandon, make an effort, support the kids and give them good friggin goaltending.

The “sorry I tried” lingo wouldn’t work for me, personally, should it come to that. I’ll have no doubt Adams will have given his full effort within the parameters he himself set, but my argument would be with the set parameters. 

Buying time until Levi arrives is a strategy fraught with potential perils.

“Buying time” presents a multitude of issues, up to and including potential disenfranchisement of players, fans. 

“Until” presents issues, as well. Willingly “waiting” a matter of *years* on someone who is not close to a guaranteed difference maker at the NHL level is... dicey, to say the least. Not to mention, what you are afraid of w/ handing out term right now (under the prism of a trusted talent evaluation) is Levi having competition. I’m not sure when “not blocking” (ie counting chickens) took precedence over healthy competition, but it’s beginning to trend towards the “weird”. Ie, perhaps there’s another motive. 

If we don’t sign a good goalie here, it should be (and I hope it’s) because, in Adams’ estimation, there wasn’t anyone worth paying for, full stop. If a good goalie (again, through the context of KA’s talent eval.) can be had, for term, it’s not something we should be turning down (even at a slight overpay owing to our cap space and multitude of picks) due to the prioritization of a “maybe” down the line. 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Thorny

[dudacek]

That Lysowski/Yerdon podcast did a good job giving me reasons why I should prepare to be disappointed by what materializes on the goaltending front this summer.

But I learned my lesson last year.

I'm not going to judge Adams on what goalies he does or doesn't acquire this summer, I'm going to judge him on how his moves — or lack thereof — affect our results.

The train has started to pick up momentum and that needs to continue. 74 points last year was good enough. This year, it is not.

[Taro T]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

That Lysowski/Yerdon podcast did a good job giving me reasons why I should prepare to be disappointed by what materializes on the goaltending front this summer.

But I learned my lesson last year.

I'm not going to judge Adams on what goalies he does or doesn't acquire this summer, I'm going to judge him on how his moves — or lack thereof — affect our results.

The train has started to pick up momentum and that needs to continue. 74 points last year was good enough. This year, it is not.

Really believe anything short of 90 points should be viewed as an abject failure.  If that means overpaying on a goalie that won't cost them 10 points in the standings, well, then so be it.