Chad D: expect a Byram trade at or around the draft

[Taro T]

20 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With Samuelsson's contract, is he tradeable? I have never diminished Byram's talent. I consider him a first pairing caliber of blueliner. My sense is that Byram would prefer being somewhere else where he would be the blueliner who is the #1 player on the unit. And it appears that the organization and player recognize that he is going to be dealt. Sometimes what appears to be doesn't turn out to be; and sometimes what appears to be does turn out to be. 

KA has made a lot of personnel and salary mistakes. His misapplication and judgment in handling contracts have boxed this franchise options in their options in reworking the roster. (As you noted.)

David ####ing Clarkson was tradable.

EVERYBODY is tradable.  The contract will lower the value of the return.  But he's not a guy that doesn't belong in the NHL.  And don't discount the "the Sabres have no idea how to use anybody" factor being figured in on how much value he'd bring to another team.

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

David ####ing Clarkson was tradable.

EVERYBODY is tradable.  The contract will lower the value of the return.  But he's not a guy that doesn't belong in the NHL.  And don't discount the "the Sabres have no idea how to use anybody" factor being figured in on how much value he'd bring to another team.

I don't see it happening. The issue isn't so much the return as it is another team willing to take on the contract. And an interesting question is whether the coach has such a jaundiced view of him as many here do? I'm not so sure he is as negative about him as many people think. We shall see. 

[Carmel Corn]

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't see it happening. The issue isn't so much the return as it is another team willing to take on the contract. And an interesting question is whether the coach has such a jaundiced view of him as many here do? I'm not so sure he is as negative about him as many people think. We shall see. 

Quite simply, Buffalo may have to take on a bad contract in return to get rid of Muel

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

Quite simply, Buffalo may have to take on a bad contract in return to get rid of Muel

If we take on a bad contract, then what's the point of making the deal. The financial handcuffs are still on. It would still hurt the ability to get a Byram deal or deal for another upper tier player. 

[SabreFinn]

There was a Oilers mock trade on PuckGM that suggested they take on Samuelsson and Clifton in exchange for Nurse. They would have bought out Samuelsson and kept Clifton as a 7th for one year. 

[thewookie1]

8 minutes ago, SabreFinn said:

There was an Oilers mock trade on PuckGM that suggested they take on Samuelsson and Clifton in exchange for Nurse. They would have bought out Samuelsson and kept Clifton as a 7th for one year. 

Would rather just buy out Muel than eat Nurse’s contract

[SabreFinn]

3 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Would rather just buy out Muel than eat Nurse’s contract

Absolutely! Another LD with five years 9,25AAV is not what we need.

[Porous Five Hole]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

I don't see it happening. The issue isn't so much the return as it is another team willing to take on the contract. And an interesting question is whether the coach has such a jaundiced view of him as many here do? I'm not so sure he is as negative about him as many people think. We shall see. 

Much like Cozens, I think teams think he has the Sabres stink on him and he can thrive with said new team.  $4MM isn’t expensive for a second pair D when the cap is $100MM the season after next. 

 

1 hour ago, Carmel Corn said:

Quite simply, Buffalo may have to take on a bad contract in return to get rid of Muel

It’s been said a bunch, but the Sabres can also buy him out this summer for 700k a season due to his age.  They’ll do that over taking a bad contact on in a trade.  But I think he’s tradable for the reason I suggested to JohnC. 

Edited Saturday at 09:15 PM by Porous Five Hole

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, SabreFinn said:

There was a Oilers mock trade on PuckGM that suggested they take on Samuelsson and Clifton in exchange for Nurse. They would have bought out Samuelsson and kept Clifton as a 7th for one year. 

WHY?

Totally get why the Eulers might want to do that.  Fail to see what the benefit to the Sabres is.

[SabreFinn]

7 hours ago, Taro T said:

WHY?

Totally get why the Eulers might want to do that.  Fail to see what the benefit to the Sabres is.

It is a common problem among fans on that type of sites. They don't seems to get the whole picture or overvalue. Every now and then I entertain myself reading those, mostly they are frustrating (when thinking all Sabres ever want is draft picks) or hilarious, but there are some good ones. 

[shrader]

6 hours ago, SabreFinn said:

It is a common problem among fans on that type of sites. They don't seems to get the whole picture or overvalue. Every now and then I entertain myself reading those, mostly they are frustrating (when thinking all Sabres ever want is draft picks) or hilarious, but there are some good ones. 

Fan suggested trades? Was it thewookie1.com?

[Flashsabre]

Canucks insiders saying Canucks trying to get Byram.

I’ll say it again: Norris Byram, UPL, prospect for EP40 , Demko, Marcus Petterson 😁😛

I know it’s crazy.

There is a ton of smoke between the Canucks wanting Byram and trying to acquire Norris at the deadline that I’d be surprised if some deal between the two teams doesn’t happen. What it ends up looking like I have no idea.

Edited yesterday at 02:49 AM by Flashsabre

[The Jokeman]

On 6/15/2025 at 10:48 PM, Flashsabre said:

Canucks insiders saying Canucks trying to get Byram.

I’ll say it again: Norris Byram, UPL, prospect for EP40 , Demko, Marcus Petterson 😁😛

I know it’s crazy.

There is a ton of smoke between the Canucks wanting Byram and trying to acquire Norris at the deadline that I’d be surprised if some deal between the two teams doesn’t happen. What it ends up looking like I have no idea.

Why are we trading Norris and Byram in one move and only getting one player even close to their value back in EP40? Sorry Demko and Petterson do nothing to improve this team substantially better if we're giving up what you propose. 

[ponokasabre]

44 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Why are we trading Norris and Byram in one move and only getting one player even close to their value back in EP40? Sorry Demko and Petterson do nothing to improve this team substantially better if we're giving up what you propose. 

Correct! If it was Byram for EP40, then deal, but I am not giving Byram and Norris for EP40, never in a million years, we actually got the much better player in the Cozens deal, I am not trading him for pennies on the dollar for a risky EP40. Byram for EP40, sure!

[dudacek]

Thatcher Demko would be a significant upgrade.

I have no love for EP40, but objectively he’s a much better bet as a 1C than Norris.

And having him and Tage on either side of Ras is a PP even the Sabres shouldn’t be able to ***** up.

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

Thatcher Demko would be a significant upgrade.

I have no love for EP40, but objectively he’s a much better bet as a 1C than Norris.

And having him and Tage on either side of Ras is a PP even the Sabres shouldn’t be able to ***** up.