Friedman believes changes are coming to Sabres Front Office; UPL Available?

[JohnC]

29 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Zucker put up 53pts and 21g. That's almost the very definition of a 2nd line forward. 

Norris is gonna slot in as 1c and doesn't count towards this except to make it less likely they add 2 top 6 forwards.

Norris, Thompson, Tuch, Peterka, Zucker are all top 6 guys with Benson, McLeod, Kulich right on the doorstep and we could argue McLeod is a top 6. Unless they move out one of the 8 players above, they aren't adding two top 6 guys. One sure, they need that.

If you trade Byram, you need a defender back. 

I agree with you that Zucker put up second line numbers. What did the Sabres give up to get him? If I recall correctly he was a free agent working on a one-year deal to restore his value for his next contract, which he did do with the Sabres. The point I'm making here is that if our GM (whoever it will be) is enterprising and creative enough can find another player who would be considered a second-line talent. 

I'm not so sure that Norris will be a 1C. If he turns out to be a 1C I'm not going complain. That would make the Cozens's trade even more favorable for us. You listed a number of players who can play on the two top lines. If there is a surplus of second-line players, that is not something to lament as it is something to celebrate. How about putting together a high yield third line? And also having a surplus of second-line players, whether they play on the top two lines or not provides depth.

In general, I don't see us disagreeing that much. What's apparent to me is that with some smart maneuvering this team could be better constructed. It would take just a few smart and consequential moves. In my view, a capable GM could accomplish that this offseason. 

[PASabreFan]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

Terry was never that cool.  He’s a square’s square, man.

He does drink Ovaltine, though.

That's gold!

[Doohickie]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

Terry was never that cool.  He’s a square’s square, man.

He could prolly use some good dope.

[LGR4GM]

45 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I agree with you that Zucker put up second line numbers. What did the Sabres give up to get him? If I recall correctly he was a free agent working on a one-year deal to restore his value for his next contract, which he did do with the Sabres. The point I'm making here is that if our GM (whoever it will be) is enterprising and creative enough can find another player who would be considered a second-line talent. 

I'm not so sure that Norris will be a 1C. If he turns out to be a 1C I'm not going complain. That would make the Cozens's trade even more favorable for us. You listed a number of players who can play on the two top lines. If there is a surplus of second-line players, that is not something to lament as it is something to celebrate. How about putting together a high yield third line? And also having a surplus of second-line players, whether they play on the top two lines or not provides depth.

In general, I don't see us disagreeing that much. What's apparent to me is that with some smart maneuvering this team could be better constructed. It would take just a few smart and consequential moves. In my view, a capable GM could accomplish that this offseason. 

The disagreement comes from the 2 players added. There isn't room for 2 players in the top 6 without trading someone away. 

I don't think Norris is 1c, I think that's how Buffalo will use him. 

Edited 3 hours ago by LGR4GM
Sorry, should say top 6.

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The disagreement comes from the 2 players added. There isn't room for 2 players in the top 9 without trading someone away. 

I don't think Norris is 1c, I think that's how Buffalo will use him. 

Of course there is.  You already know you're going to miss a full season's equivalent of a player from Norris and Greenway being on IR.  If you ONLY have 9 top 9 F's, you're going to spend a significant portion of the year with only 7 of them as those two aren't likely to be kind enough to make sure they only miss time when the other is out and they aren't going to be the only 2 injured throughout the season either.

And if somehow miraculously Norris and Greenway stay healthy all season, well, you now have a good team problem to deal with.

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Of course there is.  You already know you're going to miss a full season's equivalent of a player from Norris and Greenway being on IR.  If you ONLY have 9 top 9 F's, you're going to spend a significant portion of the year with only 7 of them as those two aren't likely to be kind enough to make sure they only miss time when the other is out and they aren't going to be the only 2 injured throughout the season either.

And if somehow miraculously Norris and Greenway stay healthy all season, well, you now have a good team problem to deal with.

They do not have room, to add 2 top 6 forwards, without shipping someone out. 

They'll use Rochester players to spot duty for injuries. 

[Taro T]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

They do not have room, to add 2 top 6 forwards, without shipping someone out. 

They'll use Rochester players to spot duty for injuries. 

Didn't say they DID have room to add 2 top 6 F's.  Said they have room to add 2 top 9 F's.  They absolutely do have room for that.  YOU said they don't have room for 2 top 9's.  That is incorrect.

[LGR4GM]

14 hours ago, JohnC said:

Adding a Zucker-like player doesn't mean that player is a top two-line player. So, adding a top two line player in addition to a Zucker-like player is doable considering the assets this team has. As an example, trading Byram in a package deal could bring back a top two line player. In addition, Norris is a 2C and will be on the roster. 

 

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Zucker put up 53pts and 21g. That's almost the very definition of a 2nd line forward. 

Norris is gonna slot in as 1c and doesn't count towards this except to make it less likely they add 2 top 6 forwards.

Norris, Thompson, Tuch, Peterka, Zucker are all top 6 guys with Benson, McLeod, Kulich right on the doorstep and we could argue McLeod is a top 6. Unless they move out one of the 8 players above, they aren't adding two top 6 guys. One sure, they need that.

If you trade Byram, you need a defender back. 

 

Just now, Taro T said:

Didn't say they DID have room to add 2 top 6 F's.  Said they have room to add 2 top 9 F's.  They absolutely do have room for that.  YOU said they don't have room for 2 top 9's.  That is incorrect.

The original conversation was about the top 6.

[LGR4GM]

I fixed my post. 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

The original conversation was about the top 6.

And you apparently changed the conversation.

 

15 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The disagreement comes from the 2 players added. There isn't room for 2 players in the top 9 without trading someone away. 

I don't think Norris is 1c, I think that's how Buffalo will use him. 

 

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Taro T said:

And you apparently changed the conversation.

 

 

Yes, it's called a typo

Hence why I noted that in my edit.

[DarthEbriate]

21 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Of course there is.  You already know you're going to miss a full season's equivalent of a player from Norris and Greenway being on IR.  If you ONLY have 9 top 9 F's, you're going to spend a significant portion of the year with only 7 of them as those two aren't likely to be kind enough to make sure they only miss time when the other is out and they aren't going to be the only 2 injured throughout the season either.

And if somehow miraculously Norris and Greenway stay healthy all season, well, you now have a good team problem to deal with.

18 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

They do not have room, to add 2 top 6 forwards, without shipping someone out. 

They'll use Rochester players to spot duty for injuries. 

As many (likely including yourselves) have noted in other threads, IF GMKA remains GM or if he still is in control of the direction of the team, the health of Norris and Greenway at the start of next season will be marketed as the additions of a top 6 and middle 6 forward. The run-it-back clincher will be JBD as the veteran RHD for Power.

GMKA/Pegula have been saving all four seasons' worth of money for this summer's RFAs. That's been the plan. (Though the hope plan probably originally had Levi signing Luukkonen's contract this summer.)

[Archie Lee]

57 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Of course there is.  You already know you're going to miss a full season's equivalent of a player from Norris and Greenway being on IR.  If you ONLY have 9 top 9 F's, you're going to spend a significant portion of the year with only 7 of them as those two aren't likely to be kind enough to make sure they only miss time when the other is out and they aren't going to be the only 2 injured throughout the season either.

And if somehow miraculously Norris and Greenway stay healthy all season, well, you now have a good team problem to deal with.

The flexibility the Sabres have this off-season is almost entirely related to not having any players who currently have significant trade protection. Every player they have under contract can be traded.  They do not, however, have a lot of cap or roster flexibility without trading out contracts that match the contracts coming in. This is not made up.

I’m seeing a lot of projected rosters from Sabre fans that include Byram and/or Peterka on 2 year deals with an AAV around $5 million. I think this is a fever-dream.  Extending Byram, Peterka, and McLeod, is going to take up much of our cap space, leaving only marginal room for the back-up goalie, Bernard-Docker, Quinn, and whoever they sign or bring back to fill roster spots 21-23. Yes, we can trade Byram to add a forward or a better partner for Power, but that player will likely have a sizeable contract also. We can make space by moving some of the deader-wood, like Samuelsson, Clifton, Lafferty, and, depending on your POV, Luukkonen.  But doing so likely means there is intention to replace them with better players, which means players making at least similar money.

I think there is lots of room for a creative management team to remake the roster. There is not room, though, to just get a better veteran back-up goalie, AND a better partner for Power, AND 2 veteran upgrades to the top 9 forwards, without trading comparable contracts. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Archie Lee

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

The disagreement comes from the 2 players added. There isn't room for 2 players in the top 6 without trading someone away. 

I don't think Norris is 1c, I think that's how Buffalo will use him. 

If it takes trading a player to get a player that makes your roster better then who would be against that? Isn’t that what GMs get paid to do? The last thing most of us are calling for is to maintain the status quo. 

[dudacek]

28 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

As many (likely including yourselves) have noted in other threads, IF GMKA remains GM or if he still is in control of the direction of the team, the health of Norris and Greenway at the start of next season will be marketed as the additions of a top 6 and middle 6 forward. The run-it-back clincher will be JBD as the veteran RHD for Power.

GMKA/Pegula have been saving all four seasons' worth of money for this summer's RFAs. That's been the plan. (Though the hope plan probably originally had Levi signing Luukkonen's contract this summer.)

The funny thing is they saved up all this space to sign Peterka, Byram, Quinn and Levi this summer with the thought they were going to have broken out by now and they were going to need the room.

Then they pivoted (unless I see another shoe drop, I’d say panicked) to re-signing Greenway and Zucker with a chunk of that space, meaning they have to make trades or run it back.

Adams thought he was being prudent, then he kinda wasted all that prudence in 2 risky signings.

Their histories say it’s unlikely Zucker and Greenway combine for the 70 middle-six points and special team success they’re being paid for. Adding the odds of Norris earning his paycheque to that mix, McLeod repeating a career year, and Benson, Quinn and/or Kulich taking a step, and that’s a lot of question marks.

[LGR4GM]

16 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If it takes trading a player to get a player that makes your roster better then who would be against that? Isn’t that what GMs get paid to do? The last thing most of us are calling for is to maintain the status quo. 

I'm fine trading, like Cozens for example, but I just don't expect it. 

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm fine trading, like Cozens for example, but I just don't expect it. 

I do. I just think there is public pressure to do something. This shambolic organization has to at least give the appearance that they are trying to do something. (My opinion.) We shall see.  

[dudacek]

33 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

The flexibility the Sabres have this off-season is almost entirely related to not having any players who currently have significant trade protection. Every player they have under contract can be traded.  They do not, however, have a lot of cap or roster flexibility without trading out contracts that match the contracts coming in. This is not made up.

I’m seeing a lot of projected rosters from Sabre fans that include Byram and/or Peterka on 2 year deals with an AAV around $5 million. I think this is a fever-dream.  Extending Byram, Peterka, and McLeod, is going to take up much of our cap space, leaving only marginal room for the back-up goalie, Bernard-Docker, Quinn, and whoever they sign or bring back to fill roster spots 21-23. Yes, we can trade Byram to add a forward or a better partner for Power, but that player will likely have a sizeable contract also. We can make space by moving some of the deader-wood, like Samuelsson, Clifton, Lafferty, and, depending on your POV, Luukkonen.  But doing so likely means there is intention to replace them with better players, which means players making at least similar money.

I think there is lots of room for a creative management team to remake the roster. There is not room, though, to just get a better veteran back-up goalie, AND a better partner for Power, AND 2 veteran upgrades to the top 9 forwards, without trading comparable contracts. 

I agree. I see a path through something like this:

Flip UPL Samuelsson, Quinn, Clifton and futures ($15Mish) for a safer RHD than Clifton, an expensive RHD from a rebuilding team who can be what Samuelsson should be, and a cheaper goalie than UPL to pair with Levi ($12Mish?)

Ideally, that improves 3 roster spots while maintaining or even improving cap space.

You should have space to find a vet to fill Quinn’s spot, particularly if you dump Lafferty, or go shorter term with Byram and/or Peterka.

Or you can use those bigger pieces to make a splashier move if you wish, to shake things up a little more.

Edited 1 hour ago by dudacek

[JohnC]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The funny thing is they saved up all this space to sign Peterka, Byram, Quinn and Levi this summer with the thought they were going to have broken out by now and they were going to need the room.

Then they pivoted (unless I see another shoe drop, I’d say panicked) to re-signing Greenway and Zucker with a chunk of that space, meaning they have to make trades or run it back.

Adams thought he was being prudent, then he kinda wasted all that prudence in 2 risky signings.

Their histories say it’s unlikely Zucker and Greenway combine for the 70 middle-six points and special team success they’re being paid for. Adding the odds of Norris earning his paycheque to that mix, McLeod repeating a career year, and Benson, Quinn and/or Kulich taking a step, and that’s a lot of question marks.

As you stated in your post, there are still a lot of rosters questions to be answered. However, with the Zucker and Greenway signings there was an imperative, that still exists, whereby this young roster couldn't afford to lose experienced players from it. Will that cause complications with respect to re-signing the youngsters as their contracts run out? Yes. (As you note.) And it will probably lead to at least one of them being moved. The cap challenges that the Sabres will soon be facing is the same one that all franchises have to contend with. The problem for this franchise is that the current GM is not very adept at roster construction and cap allocation. 

[PerreaultForever]

FFS there's always "room". 

If you have a way to add someone better you find a way to ship somebody else out. It's not rocket science.

You don't hold spaces for rookies and you don't sit contented with a non playoff team hoping the same team will just somehow be better. 

Unless you're the Sabres. 

(PS - If you think Zucker is a top 6 forward you have already lost)

[Flashsabre]

So Adams is sitting in the GM chair tomorrow night for the draft lottery.

Are they doing nothing or are they making bigger changes that they need time for outsiders to become available?

[Pimlach]

19 hours ago, Thorny said:

you can check out any time you like..

 

18 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

but you can never leave

And I was thinkin' to myself, "This could be hockey heaven but instead this is hockey hell"

[steveoath]

3 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

He does drink Ovaltine, though.

That's gold!

Ovaltine ***** rocks!

[Archie Lee]

I enjoy roster building conversations.  Still, If I had my choice this off-season between these two scenarios:

1.) Adams and Ruff are back in their roles and they make significant roster changes; or

2.) We roll back the roster with no significant changes, but we have a new GM and new HC.

I would choose option 2.

After 5 years of Adams, and in particular after the last two years of failure (featuring Ruff as HC), the most impactful culture change that could be made is Adams and Ruff out and a new GM and HC in.  Give me Karmamos as GM and Ott/Love/Nelson as HC with a new staff, and I will take my chances with our current roster. I would trust 2 newbies to the GM/HC role to get more out of our existing roster, than I trust Adams and Ruff to make the needed roster changes.

 

[LGR4GM]

15 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

So Adams is sitting in the GM chair tomorrow night for the draft lottery.

Are they doing nothing or are they making bigger changes that they need time for outsiders to become available?

If they are making bigger changes, why do nothing now? Who's not available now they would want later? 

I just don't buy the "they're waiting to see who's available" when if that were the case, they'd have fired Adams or moved him already. Letting him make decisions at this point would be insane if you're moving on. I'll bet Ruff picks players and Adams is supposed to acquire them. They aren't hiring external front office staff.