NHL trade deadline 2024: Should Sabres, Kevyn Adams buy, sell or hold?

[Porous Five Hole]

15 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Trading Reino tells me we don't want to let Mitts go.

My initial reaction to that is the Reino trade worked.
If the Sabres were going to roll with Jack, they would have held onto Reino.  But that wasn’t going to happen. Reino would have been miserable here after the Eichel reset.

The return of Kulich & Levi appears to be a nice deal for us. I think Levi is going to be a stud one day. 

The Mitts deal just cannot be for futures.   Mitts and a future for a top 4D.
 

 

[Doohickie]

2 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

My initial reaction to that is the Reino trade worked.
If the Sabres were going to roll with Jack, they would have held onto Reino.  But that wasn’t going to happen. Reino would have been miserable here after the Eichel reset.

The return of Kulich & Levi appears to be a nice deal for us. I think Levi is going to be a stud one day. 

The Mitts deal just cannot be for futures.   Mitts and a future for a top 4D.

All the reasons you say Reino wanted to go are reasons Mitts wants to stay.  If they trade Mitts it'll go down as one of the worst trades ever.

[ska-T Chitown]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

John, I agree with quite a bit of this.   Blowing it up again is drastic and making huge changes is risky.  

My one big issue is the coaching staff.   I dont see any indication that this coaching  staff is up to the NHL level.   The team is almost always not ready to play at game time.   First period stats tell the story.   Adjustments are lacking, the power play being the biggest example of a huge failure with no answers.   
 

Another abysmal home record haunts the team and its relationship with the fans.  The roster is still way too young and lacks the leadership and accountability to even string 3 good games together.  

I think DG has reached his max level, and if I owned this team I would ask Adam’s to start looking at everyone and everything to finally take the next to step.   
 

 

Not directed at you, but I saw the bold and got 'triggered' as the kids say ... I agree we are too young, and it seems like a lot of folks 'round these parts do, too. BUT, if you lurk in pretty much any thread there are far too many "let Girgs/EJ/KO* walk and replace them with [insert 21 yr old barely cutting it ROC guy]" ... which is not going to move the age/experience needle in the correct direction. 

*Disclaimer: Those three might be the "swap depth for the correct depth" that @dudacek pointed out Van did. But, letting the three oldest guys walk without quality veteran replacements is not going to make anything better.

[Pimlach]

11 minutes ago, ska-T Chitown said:

Not directed at you, but I saw the bold and got 'triggered' as the kids say ... I agree we are too young, and it seems like a lot of folks 'round these parts do, too. BUT, if you lurk in pretty much any thread there are far too many "let Girgs/EJ/KO* walk and replace them with [insert 21 yr old barely cutting it ROC guy]" ... which is not going to move the age/experience needle in the correct direction. 

*Disclaimer: Those three might be the "swap depth for the correct depth" that @dudacek pointed out Van did. But, letting the three oldest guys walk without quality veteran replacements is not going to make anything better.

Agree.  We are younger on average this year than we were last year.  It could happen again next year as well.  
 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, Taro T said:

To the bolded, the PP WAS effective, for ALL OF 6-7 WEEKS.  End of October through mid-December it was hitting at 34%, the absolute best in the league.  It was below 15% on either side of that BRIEF span when it was all-world.

And IF a PP can hit at 34% for a month and a half, it shouldn't be absolute trash the rest of the year.  But yet, here we are.  Replace that coach.  He doesn't know what he's doing.

We are in agreement that our PP can be better. In this season, our paltry production has been the difference between being in the middle of a genuine playoff pursuit as opposed to being in a deep hole that needs extra effort just to get out of. I agree with you that it's unreasonable to expect to match the sterling PP percentage that we had in our end of season run. However, if we could have gotten it to an average plus level this year, our perception of the season would be dramatically different. 

Is coaching the underpinning problem for this PP unit? I'm not sure? The players need to make the adjustment to get this unit back on track. I hold them mostly responsible for the struggles. 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, Pimlach said:

John, I agree with quite a bit of this.   Blowing it up again is drastic and making huge changes is risky.  

My one big issue is the coaching staff.   I dont see any indication that this coaching  staff is up to the NHL level.   The team is almost always not ready to play at game time.   First period stats tell the story.   Adjustments are lacking, the power play being the biggest example of a huge failure with no answers.   
 

Another abysmal home record haunts the team and its relationship with the fans.  The roster is still way too young and lacks the leadership and accountability to even string 3 good games together.  

I think DG has reached his max level, and if I owned this team I would ask Adam’s to start looking at everyone and everything to finally take the next to step.   
 

 

We are in general accord regarding the assessment of the team and franchise. However, with respect to DG having run out of runway for his stewardship, my response is: I'm not sure???? With respect to Adams and his approach, I don't expect major changes. But because he has so many prospects in the system and draft assets, he needs to judiciously use them to improve the team. A couple to few astute moves can make a big difference.  

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, Porous Five Hole said:

My initial reaction to that is the Reino trade worked.
If the Sabres were going to roll with Jack, they would have held onto Reino.  But that wasn’t going to happen. Reino would have been miserable here after the Eichel reset.

The return of Kulich & Levi appears to be a nice deal for us. I think Levi is going to be a stud one day. 

The Mitts deal just cannot be for futures.   Mitts and a future for a top 4D.
 

 

Reinhart trade might work. 

[Porous Five Hole]

The Rangers are shopping Kakko. He’s near elite defensively and a bottom six role with potential middle six upside. A change of scenery may do him well and we don’t have any excellent defensive forwards.  
 

Upcoming RFA and 2.1MM. Rangers could use the cap space for their playoff run (Filip Chytil done for the year and they need cap to find a top six trade partner). 
 

I would take Kakko as a low cost experiment.  

[Thorny]

22 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

imo that's too many names to be a "core" (whatever a core actually is, just a buzz word really).

The team has no VETERAN core. A bunch of young guys with talent doesn't come together into anything unless it has leadership. 

I can never find a way to wrap my mind around the fact people think you can..should?…evaluate whether your core is complete *without an eye to the results.*. Surely, surely, we’d only consider our core “set” by way of the most important metric, results?

Why the heck wouldn’t “aptitude” be a key factor of whether or not a team considered their core set?

It’s not set, it’s not anywhere near set, until we can determine it to be a core worth sticking with 

“Core” only has value under the context of “successful core”. 

Core what? Core of ineptitude? That’s not a core. That’s not traditionally how the word core was used lol

Edited February 4 by Thorny

[Porous Five Hole]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Reinhart trade might work. 

That’s fair. I like the chances.

If the chicken head man can predict a Mitts trade would be ‘one of the worst trades ever,’ I predict Levi will be a stud, Kulich will be a 25 goal scorer who won’t suck defensively, and the deal will be well worth it.

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

That’s fair. I like the chances.

If the chicken head man can predict a Mitts trade would be ‘one of the worst trades ever,’ I predict Levi will be a stud, Kulich will be a 25 goal scorer who won’t suck defensively, and the deal will be well worth it.

From your mouth to Chris Cornell’s ears in heaven 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

We are in agreement that our PP can be better. In this season, our paltry production has been the difference between being in the middle of a genuine playoff pursuit as opposed to being in a deep hole that needs extra effort just to get out of. I agree with you that it's unreasonable to expect to match the sterling PP percentage that we had in our end of season run. However, if we could have gotten it to an average plus level this year, our perception of the season would be dramatically different. 

Is coaching the underpinning problem for this PP unit? I'm not sure? The players need to make the adjustment to get this unit back on track. I hold them mostly responsible for the struggles. 

It is INCREDIBLY rare for a player to flat out say to management, the way you are doing things HAS to change, and here is what SHOULD happen.  Chris Drury told management that Satan was a cancer and with the end of the lockout letting teams get out of contracts and simply walk away from players management was able to listen to him and let Miro walk.  It was the right move.

The season after Bob Woods left, the PP still had pretty much the same talent but it wasn't nearly as good as it had been the previous year.  Pretty sure the players took it upon themselves to go back to what Woods had been having them do and it started excelling again.  It ALSO was the right move.  But without a Ryan O'Reilly to push for that change, nothing improves.

Does anybody see the players led by Okposo going to management or the coaches and telling them the system is f'd?  Personally don't see that happening with the current cast.  And without a leader that will tell the emperor he has no clothes, the PLAYERS aren't going to make the adjustments.  That's not how things work unless you have a REALLY strong personality in that leadership role.  As an aside to highlight this point, how often did your boss tell you to do things one way and things weren't quite going right following his plan and you simply made "the adjustments to get (your team) back on track" without having the boss buy-in ahead of time?

If it doesn't usually happen in the "real world" why would it happen in this environment except under extreme circumstances?

Edited February 4 by Taro T

[pi2000]

Hold.

This team is more than one or two players away.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Thorny]

21 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

Hold.

This team is more than one or two players away.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Well then they should add one if they can. Have to start somewhere 

[Norcal]

Seasons over.

Sell all pending FAs.

Promote the kids and let em go. 

Draft at the top again.

Try again next year.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

It is INCREDIBLY rare for a player to flat out say to management, the way you are doing things HAS to change, and here is what SHOULD happen.  Chris Drury told management that Satan was a cancer and with the end of the lockout letting teams get out of contracts and simply walk away from players management was able to listen to him and let Miro walk.  It was the right move.

The season after Bob Woods left, the PP still had pretty much the same talent but it wasn't nearly as good as it had been the previous year.  Pretty sure the players took it upon themselves to go back to what Woods had been having them do and it started excelling again.  It ALSO was the right move.  But without a Ryan O'Reilly to push for that change, nothing improves.

Does anybody see the players led by Okposo going to management or the coaches and telling them the system is f'd?  Personally don't see that happening with the current cast.  And without a leader that will tell the emperor he has no clothes, the PLAYERS aren't going to make the adjustments.  That's not how things work unless you have a REALLY strong personality in that leadership role.  As an aside to highlight this point, how often did your boss tell you to do things one way and things weren't quite going right following his plan and you simply made "the adjustments to get (your team) back on track" without having the boss buy-in ahead of time?

If it doesn't usually happen in the "real world" why would it happen in this environment except under extreme circumstances?

I don't want to over examine this PP issue because it can end up as a futile back and forth. Even within a structure set by the coaching staff, it is not a static event on the ice. Players have the ability to move to the open areas and have the ability to move the puck more quickly. Teams have various strategies on the PP and PK. It isn't so much about outsmarting the opposition because there is a fundamental aspect/strategy to playing on the special teams that all teams follow to a certain extent. 

The persistent problem I see on the PP, and in the game in general, is our inability to have a net presence that can to a degree obstruct the goalie. If there is one identifiable problem that needs to be addressed revolves around having more net presence. The two players who do it the best on this team (my opinion) are Greenway and Benson. Benson is arguably the least imposing player on the team, yet he provides as much net presence than most of the bigger and stronger players on the roster. That's not acceptable!

[Taro T]

44 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't want to over examine this PP issue because it can end up as a futile back and forth. Even within a structure set by the coaching staff, it is not a static event on the ice. Players have the ability to move to the open areas and have the ability to move the puck more quickly. Teams have various strategies on the PP and PK. It isn't so much about outsmarting the opposition because there is a fundamental aspect/strategy to playing on the special teams that all teams follow to a certain extent. 

The persistent problem I see on the PP, and in the game in general, is our inability to have a net presence that can to a degree obstruct the goalie. If there is one identifiable problem that needs to be addressed revolves around having more net presence. The two players who do it the best on this team (my opinion) are Greenway and Benson. Benson is arguably the least imposing player on the team, yet he provides as much net presence than most of the bigger and stronger players on the roster. That's not acceptable!

They are doing what they are coached to do.  And their PP is absolutely pathetic.

And they don't have A persistent problem.  They have the proverbial truckload of them.

They typically get into their "position" and don't move appreciably from there.  They run the PP from the BL with the primary goal to get Thompson "open" for a 1 timer.  How exactly they expect that to work when they don't force defenders out of their lanes remains a mystery.  As you mention, they often DON'T have a netfront presence.  And watch where they are when the puck is at the BL.  Unless Benson is on the ice there is about a 40% chance that not one single Sabres will be below the faceoff dots.  ALL 5 skaters are high in the zone very often.  That is mind numbingly dumb.  They don't often have guys slide below the goal line and the few times they do, they NEVER have that player slide over to the other side of the net.  Why try to cause a defender to lose track of one of the forwards.  When there is a loose puck they rarely if ever have an overmatched situation in their favor.  You have the extra skater, get 2 men in on the loose puck and make sure you win that battle.  Their entry gets laughed at by youth hockey cooaches.  It is slow as sin and the drop pass is beyond telegraphed.  Every person in the building, including the opposition, knows it's coming.  Could go on, but this is already becoming a novella.

THAT all is COACHING.  (Or a lack thereof.)

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

I can never find a way to wrap my mind around the fact people think you can..should?…evaluate whether your core is complete *without an eye to the results.*. Surely, surely, we’d only consider our core “set” by way of the most important metric, results?

Why the heck wouldn’t “aptitude” be a key factor of whether or not a team considered their core set?

It’s not set, it’s not anywhere near set, until we can determine it to be a core worth sticking with 

“Core” only has value under the context of “successful core”. 

Core what? Core of ineptitude? That’s not a core. That’s not traditionally how the word core was used lol

I agree with this. If your core isn't successful, as a GM, your first thought has to be how do I change this core or what do I change to get results and not this is my core and I will wait for them to become successful.

The word "core" is a fairly new term for hockey in general. I never remember it being used back in the day. Veterans was used, leadership was used, but never "core". The entire team was seen more as a collective group led by some veterans. I think free agency and the salary cap especially has created this new scenario where teams feel they need a small group (the highly paid) to be the "core" of the team and then they cobble the rest together with lower salaries and entry level deals. So as you say, it's kind of pointless to rally around any "core" if they are not successful. 

Personally I don't see any indispensable parts to this team right now. There is no star goalie. There is just a couple young prospects in UPL and Levi but no core stud. Dahlin is an offensively gifted defenseman and these are a big deal in the modern NHL so he's important since you have him but not indispensable. His defensive game is lacking for that status. He's nowhere near Hedman level imo. None of our forwards have played to core status either imo. Tage can be very good. Cozens was looking good last year but not so much this year. Mitts has actually been our best forward this year and at times Tuch shows me solid leadership (at times) but not one of them is top level core imo. Not right now anyway. 

Leadership, work ethic, and consistency is also part of what makes a good core. We really lack that as a whole. 

[SabreFinn]

17 hours ago, Porous Five Hole said:

The Rangers are shopping Kakko. He’s near elite defensively and a bottom six role with potential middle six upside. A change of scenery may do him well and we don’t have any excellent defensive forwards.  
 

Upcoming RFA and 2.1MM. Rangers could use the cap space for their playoff run (Filip Chytil done for the year and they need cap to find a top six trade partner). 
 

I would take Kakko as a low cost experiment.  

I Like this! He got size too! But we Have wingers already. If we retain half Skinners salary for the next two years maybe Rangers would be interested in a trade??

Edited February 5 by SabreFinn

[Gatorman0519]

14 hours ago, Norcal said:

Seasons over.

Sell all pending FAs.

Promote the kids and let em go. 

Draft at the top again.

Try again next year.

That’s pretty much it. This team is 4-5 years away from being a serious NHL team anyways. Let’s be honest. 

[inkman]

12 minutes ago, Gatorman0519 said:

That’s pretty much it. This team is 4-5 years away from being a serious NHL team anyways. Let’s be honest. 

No team should ever be more than 2 seasons away from competing.  Anything else is sheer incompetence. 

[bunomatic]

2 hours ago, Gatorman0519 said:

That’s pretty much it. This team is 4-5 years away from being a serious NHL team anyways. Let’s be honest. 

They’re always 4-5 years away from being a serious NHL team. Every friggin year.

[Norcal]

2 hours ago, Gatorman0519 said:

That’s pretty much it. This team is 4-5 years away from being a serious NHL team anyways. Let’s be honest. 

 

2 hours ago, inkman said:

No team should ever be more than 2 seasons away from competing.  Anything else is sheer incompetence. 

This is true. Unless you're a Sabres fan.

Then, see above.

[Buffalonill]

19 hours ago, Porous Five Hole said:

The Rangers are shopping Kakko. He’s near elite defensively and a bottom six role with potential middle six upside. A change of scenery may do him well and we don’t have any excellent defensive forwards.  
 

Upcoming RFA and 2.1MM. Rangers could use the cap space for their playoff run (Filip Chytil done for the year and they need cap to find a top six trade partner). 
 

I would take Kakko as a low cost experiment.  

This is drury we're talking about he's going to want a top prospect and two first round picks 😆 

[TRIP65]

On 2/2/2024 at 11:31 AM, Pimlach said:

I’m gonna quote the real Punch (paraphrasing)  “Anytime I can make a trade to improve the club I’m going to do it”.  
 

If there are deadline deals that make us better than you make them.  

Adams, I am sticking with my plan of developing my draft picks internally.

 

YOU MUST COMPLY

On 2/2/2024 at 11:58 AM, GASabresIUFAN said:

We need to look at how Van has handled their business since the last trade deadline

Over the last year, Van’s GM - dumped Horvat, Tanner Pearson and 3 depth players and ended up with Lindholm, Hronek, Zadorov, Lafferty and DeSmith through 10 different important trades.  He also signed UFAs Ian Cole, Blueger and Carson Soucey.

Talk about an aggressively remaking his roster,

We don’t need this drastic of an overhaul, but KA could learn some lessons from a GM willing to do what is necessary to build a winner.

Unfortunately, Adams will say

Remember Murray