Time to trade Peterka

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Pimlach said:

What exactly is his agent doing?   What is the nonsense he is stirring?   

The rumors that JJP wanted out go back to last season just prior to the deadline and he has switched agents since then.   

Byram was the one who switched agents, not JJ.

JJ's agent is feeding Frank Seravalli info about the Sabres not being able to sign him, that he's highly likely to be traded, and that the Sabres are broken and ripe for the picking in order to create a market for a better contract and/or a trade.

[Pimlach]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Byram was the one who switched agents, not JJ.

JJ's agent is feeding Frank Seravalli info about the Sabres not being able to sign him, that he's highly likely to be traded, and that the Sabres are broken and ripe for the picking in order to create a market for a better contract and/or a trade.

OK, thanks.  

The old "agent feeds the media in order to broker a deal" routine.   

[DarthEbriate]

If you're the Sabres, you only trade JJP to get a better player in return. He's the Tuch, someone else is the Eichel.

At the moment, that "available" player is Roberston. If you're Dallas, you can't pay Robertson and Rantanen both 10+, even with the cap going up. But you could pay JJP 8, and he will learn to play a better all-around game or his teammates will break him -- it's a conference final contender every year.

[ponokasabre]

41 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

If you're the Sabres, you only trade JJP to get a better player in return. He's the Tuch, someone else is the Eichel.

At the moment, that "available" player is Roberston. If you're Dallas, you can't pay Robertson and Rantanen both 10+, even with the cap going up. But you could pay JJP 8, and he will learn to play a better all-around game or his teammates will break him -- it's a conference final contender every year.

This all day, if trading Peterka gets you Robertson you have to do it, and pay whatever the extra sweetner is

 

Robertson is one of the best two way wingers in the game, period. He is a 100 point player and an 80 point player on an off year, he instantly elevates this team 

 

You still need to add 2 defensmen, one for Power and one for Dahlin as likely Byram is out too

[JP51]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Just Over half of JJ Peterka's assists were secondary. He probably is a 30g scorer. You can't trade him for futures, you'd need to find a slightly older player with better metrics defensively. That's a tall order and unless Jason Robertson is coming this way, idk who that player would be, so you keep jjp.

I agree 100% At this point no more prospects or lesser pieces... you wanna trade JJ fine, but you better be getting the best player in the trade...  (more likely is Adams moves him for a lesser player and a pick... JJ goes on to be Reinhardt and we are left to wallow in our GMs own incompetence..) you wanna bring in Robertson that might work... I honestly don't know who I would move him for that makes us better and takes into account what I think is his likely upside... but hey... find me that person and we can talk... otherwise... JJP stays. 

I think I have said this before... there is no player on this team i would not trade... as long as we are getting the best player back... Dahlin... fine... but he better be a piece in a trade to get a superstar like MacKinnon or Drasaitl or McJeebus or something crazy like fine trade Turgeon but you better be getting back LaFontaine...  

[mjd1001]

12 hours ago, dudacek said:

As far as I'm concerned JJ is an avatar for the team: young, talented and more interested in the sizzle than the substance.

The nonsense being stirred by his agent is proof of that.

Far better to move Peterka now when his value is probably as high as it will ever be, than to sign him to a long-term $8M deal and watch him go on to a Jeff Skinner-esque career.

You aren't going to get what you need trading Östlund or Rosen, and the team is better served giving JJ's minutes to players that understand winning hockey.

If you believe in Kulich or Benson, then this provides them an opportunity. Same goes for Quinn.

I'm a little tired of people whining about the Sabres not taking any big swings then immediately shutting down any proposals other teams might actually bite on.

This is where we have both value and the depth to overcome trading it for what we need.

This is the right move.

I hate to be the guy who says this but... It depends both on the return... And what you would have to pay him to keep him here. 

That's really the cop-out answer, but it's true for me.

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I hate to be the guy who says this but... It depends both on the return... And what you would have to pay him to keep him here. 

That's really the cop-out answer, but it's true for me.

It's true for all trades.

I think @Porous Five Hole nailed it: the question is whether or not Peterka is a core player you are going to invest in long-term, considering his contract situation.

Edited yesterday at 03:44 PM by dudacek

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I want to trade JJ because I think the chances of improving the team are better down that path, than by crossing our fingers he's going to be better than he was during his breakout year.

I agree the same logic can be applied to Byram and I am very willing to trade him in order to make the team better.

Where the 2 differ in my mind is I think the majority of Byram's next 7 years will be better than this year and the majority of JJ's will not. I also think JJ's minutes can be at least partially replaced by players already in the organization, while that's not the case for Byram at all.

 

It's also classless, me-first and damaging to the organization you are asking to give you $60M. It happens, but it is not standard practice.

Right, just shut up and eat your gruel.

Agents acting aggressively on behalf of their clients is standard practice in all pro sports. Why you are surprised at that is surprising

[dudacek]

17 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Agents acting aggressively on behalf of their clients is standard practice in all pro sports. Why you are surprised at that is surprising

Who said anything about surprised?

It didn’t happen with dahlin, Power, Thompson, Samuelsson, Cozens, Zucker, UPL, or Greenway, and it’s not happening with Byram, Quinn, McLeod or Tuch.

The tactics being employed by JJ’s agent certainly happen, but they are also classless and hardly standard practice.

Edited yesterday at 04:29 PM by dudacek

[darksabre]

3 hours ago, DarthEbriate said:

I'd bet you could get NYI's 1st (Schaefer) easily enough with that, plus some current pieces to stay at the cap floor and help the Isles stay compliant. Then move those.

Then, re-sign Byram long-term and roll out a top-4 LHD machine:

Byram-Dahlin
Power-Schaefer

It's just what JBott and Housley always wanted!

 

Joke all you want, but the Sabres are a team of losers and they're all available. I don't care what their stats are. 

[sabremike]

This thread is Peak Whiner Line.

[JohnC]

57 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Who said anything about surprised?

It didn’t happen with dahlin, Power, Thompson, Samuelsson, Cozens, Zucker, UPL, or Greenway, and it’s not happening with Byram, Quinn, McLeod or Tuch.

The tactics being employed by JJ’s agent certainly happen, but they are also classless and hardly standard practice.

 Not all representations are the same for individual clients and circumstances. It varies on a case by case situation. We simply disagree on this issue. That’s okay.

[French Collection]

There are no untouchables on this team, the only guy I would keep is Dahlin because he is a core piece that is not easily replaced. He is more than a one trick pony.

If JJP returns a good piece, not futures, I move him. If he brings back a solid RHD or a #1 goalie then it is a net gain in my mind. If the return is not a forward, I would go all out to get Ehlers, a similar player but with playoff experience and more maturity.

If he is part of a Robertson deal, then we get the better player.

Moving JJP, Power or Byram, UPL, Quinn, Samuelsson and #9 pick could bring back some good pieces as well as a needed change of attitude.

 

[Archie Lee]

Perhaps food for thought.

Peterka just finished his D5 season (5th year post-draft). No current Sabre player who was drafted by the team, has had a more uniform and straight-forward rise. In his D1 he played well against men in Germany. In D2 he had an excellent AHL season. In D3 he played a middle 6 role in his rookie NHL season and played to a 34 point pace. In D4 he played a top 6 role and had 50 points. In D5 he played a top 6 to top-line role and played to a 72 point pace.  He has improved year over year.

Peterka was tied for 51st in NHL scoring this year. There are 24 players who are primarily wingers, who finished ahead of him in scoring; of those players, only Lucas Raymond is younger (by 2 months).

I realize there are more factors that make up a player’s effectiveness than just points. Goals are more valuable than assists. Primary assists are more valuable than secondary. Defensive acumen needs to be considered. Attitude and leadership abilities are factors. Can a guy drop the gloves if needed?  Will he “accidently” elbow the opposition goalie in the head while pretending to be pushed over in a playoff game? All factors. But, points are still, generally, a primary point of measurement for where a player is placed in the line-up and for how much he gets paid.

Of the 24 wingers who had more points than Peterka this past year, here is the post-draft year that they first played to the 72 point pace that Peterka just played to in his D5 season (this is not meant to be an exhaustive list of elite wingers; for example, due to injury this past season, Kaprizov is not on this list).

D1: none

D2: Ovechkin* (There was no NHL season in Ovechkin’s D1) 

D3: Pastrnak, Rantanan, Marner

D4: Robertson, Raymond

D5: Kucherov, Kyle Connor, Guentzel, Konecny, Boldy, Peterka is in this grouping

D6: Necas, Filip Forsberg, Bratt, Nylander, Keller, Caufeld, Kyrou, Panarin* (Panarin was not drafted; had he been drafted in his first year of eligibility, then he would have reached the 72 point or greater level in D6, which was also his rookie NHL season)

D7: Marchenko, Rakell

D8: Reinhart, Hagel

D9: Kempe    

There are 7 players on this list who have been traded. Of those, there is only one example where the player had established himself as an NHL player and the trading team was intending to improve immediately, as a result of the trade. That was Necas, traded this season for a truly elite winger in Rantanan. 

Generally, teams don't trade players like Peterka when they are 23 years old.

[Archie Lee]

After posting some background data that I think, mostly, supports the argument to not trade Peterka, I should share my opinion that I think the Sabres could trade him (and Byram) for lesser players AND actually get better.  I don't think our issue is talent. I think our issue last year was a combination of being too young, too inexperienced, not having the right mix of skill and physicality and toughness, not having the right leadership on and off the ice, and generally bad coaching.

I think if you swapped* (as examples) Peterka, Byram, Clifton, Luukkonen, for Bryan Rust, Cody Ceci, Mario Ferrero, and a healthy Thatcher Demko, that the Sabres could actually change their roster make-up enough to be a playoff team. Not a contender, but a 96-97 point Ottawa Senator or Minnesota Wild level WC team.

(*Not straight up trades. The Sabres are moving the two best players in this example, and should also get back some significant futures.)

Though, I should add, success is unlikely with a Lindy Ruff and Kevyn Adams HC/GM combo. Over their combined last 16 years in their respective roles (11 for Ruff, 5 for Adams), they have produced 3 winning and 3 playoff seasons, for around an 18% success rate. They could fluke a WC playoff spot (we are due for at least such a fluke), but until they produce two playoff seasons in a row, making the playoffs should be viewed with skepticism at it relates to potential long-term success. Both are bad at their jobs. So, any comments or thoughts on roster changes that I make should be considered in the context that I think there is limited possibility of a successful outcome, for reasons that go far beyond the talent level of the players.    

 

 

[dudacek]

46 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

Generally, teams don't trade players like Peterka when they are 23 years old.

According to Chad D, the Sabres have no intention of trading Peterka either.

He says they have fielded calls but nothing has gained traction and the most likely result is JJ signing a bridge.

My question is if they are trading Byram for lesser pieces and not trading Peterka, how are the Sabres intending to get better this off-season?

It's very clear that if they intend to add a forward, another forward has to go.

It's not likely to be Thompson, Norris, McLeod, Greenway, or Zucker. Krebs, Malenstyn and Lafferty don't move the needle. They don't want to move Tuch and if they did it wouldn't be for an upgrade. That leaves Kulich and Benson (who nobody wants to move) and Quinn (who probably won't get a great return).

Are we really running back the forwards?

 

[ponokasabre]

17 minutes ago, dudacek said:

According to Chad D, the Sabres have no intention of trading Peterka either.

He says they have fielded calls but nothing has gained traction and the most likely result is JJ signing a bridge.

My question is if they are trading Byram for lesser pieces and not trading Peterka, how are the Sabres intending to get better this off-season?

It's very clear that if they intend to add a forward, another forward has to go.

It's not likely to be Thompson, Norris, McLeod, Greenway, or Zucker. Krebs, Malenstyn and Lafferty don't move the needle. They don't want to move Tuch and if they did it wouldn't be for an upgrade. That leaves Kulich and Benson (who nobody wants to move) and Quinn (who probably won't get a great return).

Are we really running back the forwards?

 

If JJ is staying, which makes sense, and signing a bridge, which also makes sense, it has to be Quinn out the door, there just isnt room for him Kulich Benson and Peterka, and I do think Quinn could get you a nice defensman like a Hague or Kesserling or the like

 

The bridge deal i like too cause that should open cap space for us to make additions elsewhere

[GoPuckYourself]

Who else fits the bill as a solid 2 way 1st line forward other than Jason Roberstson who's been rumored to be on the trade block? Because right now Robertson is the only player I'm trading him for. I'd definitely not be dealing him for draft picks, I don't think trading him makes much sense unless it's a player of Robertson's caliber.

[Taro T]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

According to Chad D, the Sabres have no intention of trading Peterka either.

He says they have fielded calls but nothing has gained traction and the most likely result is JJ signing a bridge.

My question is if they are trading Byram for lesser pieces and not trading Peterka, how are the Sabres intending to get better this off-season?

It's very clear that if they intend to add a forward, another forward has to go.

It's not likely to be Thompson, Norris, McLeod, Greenway, or Zucker. Krebs, Malenstyn and Lafferty don't move the needle. They don't want to move Tuch and if they did it wouldn't be for an upgrade. That leaves Kulich and Benson (who nobody wants to move) and Quinn (who probably won't get a great return).

Are we really running back the forwards?

 

Byram out for a legit top 4 solid 2 way or defensive D-man that's in or very close to his prime and a 1st makes sense IF that 1st (or the Sabres 1st) is going out the door with Peterka and a piece like Rosen (that ends up the LITTLE bit extra to make the trade happen) for Robertson.

It's the ONLY way trading Byram for pieces makes sense if the goal is to make the Sabres better NOW.

[PromoTheRobot]

13 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Adams and Pegula do.

But here we are saying it should happen with JJ.

Edited 18 hours ago by PromoTheRobot

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

But here's we are saying it should happen with JJ.

Who's we? I've been exceedingly clear I wouldn't trade Peterka for anything short of Jason Robertson. 

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

Perhaps food for thought.

Peterka just finished his D5 season (5th year post-draft). No current Sabre player who was drafted by the team, has had a more uniform and straight-forward rise. In his D1 he played well against men in Germany. In D2 he had an excellent AHL season. In D3 he played a middle 6 role in his rookie NHL season and played to a 34 point pace. In D4 he played a top 6 role and had 50 points. In D5 he played a top 6 to top-line role and played to a 72 point pace.  He has improved year over year.

Peterka was tied for 51st in NHL scoring this year. There are 24 players who are primarily wingers, who finished ahead of him in scoring; of those players, only Lucas Raymond is younger (by 2 months).

I realize there are more factors that make up a player’s effectiveness than just points. Goals are more valuable than assists. Primary assists are more valuable than secondary. Defensive acumen needs to be considered. Attitude and leadership abilities are factors. Can a guy drop the gloves if needed?  Will he “accidently” elbow the opposition goalie in the head while pretending to be pushed over in a playoff game? All factors. But, points are still, generally, a primary point of measurement for where a player is placed in the line-up and for how much he gets paid.

Of the 24 wingers who had more points than Peterka this past year, here is the post-draft year that they first played to the 72 point pace that Peterka just played to in his D5 season (this is not meant to be an exhaustive list of elite wingers; for example, due to injury this past season, Kaprizov is not on this list).

D1: none

D2: Ovechkin* (There was no NHL season in Ovechkin’s D1) 

D3: Pastrnak, Rantanan, Marner

D4: Robertson, Raymond

D5: Kucherov, Kyle Connor, Guentzel, Konecny, Boldy, Peterka is in this grouping

D6: Necas, Filip Forsberg, Bratt, Nylander, Keller, Caufeld, Kyrou, Panarin* (Panarin was not drafted; had he been drafted in his first year of eligibility, then he would have reached the 72 point or greater level in D6, which was also his rookie NHL season)

D7: Marchenko, Rakell

D8: Reinhart, Hagel

D9: Kempe    

There are 7 players on this list who have been traded. Of those, there is only one example where the player had established himself as an NHL player and the trading team was intending to improve immediately, as a result of the trade. That was Necas, traded this season for a truly elite winger in Rantanan. 

Generally, teams don't trade players like Peterka when they are 23 years old.

This is a terrific analysis. Based on your post, there is a stronger case to keep him. As @PromoTheRobot has frequently stated, it is so aggravating to see some of our young talent on other teams hoisting the cup.

[Taro T]

28 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

But here's we are saying it should happen with JJ.

But with the Peterka rumblings, it seems everyone discussing moving him is doing so with the expectation that it ends up netting the best player in the deal (like all the thoughts on him being the big piece to get Robertson).

It's not like the Byram rumblings where Byram is the best player out of the pieces being speculated upon.  (Which, unless it is tied directly or inderectly to a Robertson-esque move is beyond frustrating.)

[Archie Lee]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

According to Chad D, the Sabres have no intention of trading Peterka either.

He says they have fielded calls but nothing has gained traction and the most likely result is JJ signing a bridge.

My question is if they are trading Byram for lesser pieces and not trading Peterka, how are the Sabres intending to get better this off-season?

It's very clear that if they intend to add a forward, another forward has to go.

It's not likely to be Thompson, Norris, McLeod, Greenway, or Zucker. Krebs, Malenstyn and Lafferty don't move the needle. They don't want to move Tuch and if they did it wouldn't be for an upgrade. That leaves Kulich and Benson (who nobody wants to move) and Quinn (who probably won't get a great return).

Are we really running back the forwards?

 

It does seem that it is the plan to roll the forwards back. I suspect they see a healthy Norris as an addition that has yet to arrive.  Peterka, Benson, Kulich, Quinn, and even Krebs, they will be looking for additional levels from. I'm sure they think (I do), that Thompson has a 50 goal season in him  Tuch could go off in a contract year. 

You mentioned that nobody wants to move Benson or Kulich.  Benson I get, as he brings a sorely lacking element to the team.  He is a rare Sabre capable of dragging others into the fight. Kulich I don't quite get. I like Kulich a lot and am not eager to see him traded; but it seems like an obvious place for an upgrade for a team trying to make the playoffs. Yet, they can't simply trade Kulich++ for a veteran centre, even if such a deal was available, as they would have to move out a contract to make room.

There is also the reality that Adams makes on average only 1.4 trades per off-season that involve at least 1 NHL player (that's with including the Wil Butcher trade). If I get on PuckPediaGM and start making trades that individually seem at least possible, they almost always lead to another trade being needed and next thing I know I have mocked 4-6 trades. It's just not realistic.

I'm thinking realistic moves are:

- Byrum and Quinn to San Jose for Ferrero or Liljegren, Dellandrea (a grittier change of scenery winger) and 30th o/a

- Maybe a depth D-man in free agency; it wouldn't surprise me to see them bring Gilbert back

- Devils depth winger Nathan Bastian is a UFA; I had read that he was a Ruff favourite

- A UFA goalie like Alex Lyon or Dan Vladar

- Lafferty waived.

I'm not trying to sell this, I just don't see them doing much more.

 

[darksabre]

13 hours ago, darksabre said:

Package him up with Thompson and see what we get. 

Lotta people in this place too attached to garbage. Interesting.