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

[JohnC]

45 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

And without him isn't there a glaring hole in it? Who would be our sixth d-man? Bryson? 😩

Without Byram you are losing a good defender from an offensive standpoint. The Sabres are not a complete team with Byrum or without. The issue then becomes what positions need shoring up more than others. Is it better to subtract a good defenseman for a top six winger? I would say yes. What I don't want to see happen is that Byram gets traded for a less than credible top two-line player. 

As far as who would be our sixth defenseman, it could be another functional player from the market or maybe bringing Docker back or moving up Johnson from the AHL. It's a juggling act within your roster limitations. 

[bob_sauve28]

44 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Without Byram you are losing a good defender from an offensive standpoint. The Sabres are not a complete team with Byrum or without. The issue then becomes what positions need shoring up more than others. Is it better to subtract a good defenseman for a top six winger? I would say yes. What I don't want to see happen is that Byram gets traded for a less than credible top two-line player. 

As far as who would be our sixth defenseman, it could be another functional player from the market or maybe bringing Docker back or moving up Johnson from the AHL. It's a juggling act within your roster limitations. 

I consider the sixth d-man an important position. If he gets run over, your team loses. 

 

 

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

I consider the sixth d-man an important position. If he gets run over, your team loses. 

 

 

I consider the sixth d-man to be a replaceable player. I'm not saying that that slotted position is unimportant, but I'm not saying he is a critical player whose loss can't be compensated for. 

Edited Wednesday at 01:46 AM by JohnC

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I consider the sixth d-man to be a replaceable player. I'm not saying that that slotted position is unimportant, but I'm not saying he is a critical player whose loss can't be compensated for. 

Remember, for about 1/2 of the season the 6 is the 5 and for 10 games or so, he's your 4.  He isn't completely replaceable.  At least not when the next man up is Jacob Bryson.

[The Jokeman]

7 hours ago, JohnC said:

Without Byram you are losing a good defender from an offensive standpoint. The Sabres are not a complete team with Byrum or without. The issue then becomes what positions need shoring up more than others. Is it better to subtract a good defenseman for a top six winger? I would say yes. What I don't want to see happen is that Byram gets traded for a less than credible top two-line player. 

As far as who would be our sixth defenseman, it could be another functional player from the market or maybe bringing Docker back or moving up Johnson from the AHL. It's a juggling act within your roster limitations. 

Docker signed with Detroit.

[thewookie1]

No interest in Andersson; he did a nose dive last year stats wise and I have zero interest in trading Byram for a rental that we may end up trading at the deadline or having to use as a rental of extreme cost.

 

10 hours ago, dudacek said:

These things are in the eye of the beholder, but I’d say he’s better.

This sets a benchmark and is line with what similar players have returned in the past

 

I'd say Byram is better to be honest but value wise they are likely close if not equal.

A 2026 1st with some protection, a 2026 2nd and a lesser roster player. Depending on the offers an offer-sheet compensation could be preferable due to the lack of conditions on the 1st.

 

8 hours ago, Justin C said:

Jeremy White retweeted this. Not sure how credible.

 

Terrible targets seeing as most of the players are either rentals who want to be UFAs or Bot 6 guys akin to the Peterka trade.

Ideally if you can pull off a Miller-esc trade return you could turn that 1st and Rosen into Rakell and call it an offseason unless someone comes knocking for Muel. 

[Turbo44]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

No interest in Andersson; he did a nose dive last year stats wise and I have zero interest in trading Byram for a rental that we may end up trading at the deadline or having to use as a rental of extreme cost.

 

 

I'd say Byram is better to be honest but value wise they are likely close if not equal.

A 2026 1st with some protection, a 2026 2nd and a lesser roster player. Depending on the offers an offer-sheet compensation could be preferable due to the lack of conditions on the 1st.

 

Terrible targets seeing as most of the players are either rentals who want to be UFAs or Bot 6 guys akin to the Peterka trade.

Ideally if you can pull off a Miller-esc trade return you could turn that 1st and Rosen into Rakell and call it an offseason unless someone comes knocking for Muel. 

If we do still intend on trading Byram (I would not) what teams do we think are still in the mix/could give us a good return. With the prices d are getting in UFA, I wouldn’t trade him without a very good return + Orlov is really the last UFA I’d be interested in and he may be fading 

If we could sign Suter and Orlov I wouldn’t might getting a 1st round pick + for Byram

given the market and available players I’m re-upping Byram (who has very good stats with Dahlin) and signing a winger who can play top 6: Suter, Ehlers (pipe dream), nyquist

Edited Wednesday at 10:12 AM by Turbo44

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, The Jokeman said:

Docker signed with Detroit.

I liked Docker. But he’s a replaceable player whose loss is inconsequential.

[JohnC]

10 hours ago, Taro T said:

Remember, for about 1/2 of the season the 6 is the 5 and for 10 games or so, he's your 4.  He isn't completely replaceable.  At least not when the next man up is Jacob Bryson.

As I said in prior posts, I liked Docker. I would have preferred to have kept him. I’m baffled as to why he was dispatched. I strongly suspect that this was a Ruff influenced decision. However, this wasn’t a significant loss in the grand scheme of things.

[Turbo44]

Just now, JohnC said:

As I said in prior posts, I liked Docker. I would have preferred to have kept him. I’m baffled as to why he was dispatched. I strongly suspect that this was a Ruff influenced decision. However, this wasn’t a significant loss in the grand scheme of things.

Not a significant loss, but I rather have him as #7 than Bryson. Not sure what the love for him is

[WhenWillItEnd66]

21 minutes ago, JohnC said:

As I said in prior posts, I liked Docker. I would have preferred to have kept him. I’m baffled as to why he was dispatched. I strongly suspect that this was a Ruff influenced decision. However, this wasn’t a significant loss in the grand scheme of things.

I am with you on JBD. BUT, i am glad they look like they are finally going to start using Johnson!!! 

[JohnC]

18 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:

Not a significant loss, but I rather have him as #7 than Bryson. Not sure what the love for him is

What love are you talking about? The fringe is getting magnified into something bigger than what it is. If I had to make a choice between having Docker or Bryson, I would decisively take Docker. I suspect that the decision to not sign Docker was primarily a Ruff decision. 

3 minutes ago, WhenWillItEnd66 said:

I am with you on JBD. BUT, i am glad they look like they are finally going to start using Johnson!!! 

 

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, WhenWillItEnd66 said:

I am with you on JBD. BUT, i am glad they look like they are finally going to start using Johnson!!! 

I believe that you hit on what the source of the Docker decision was: a preference for Johnson. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out. The bigger and more consequential decision on the blueline relates to what is the organization going to do with Byram. I'm starting to lean towards keeping him, especially if they can't get a second-line player for him. 

[WhenWillItEnd66]

Johnson got buried for some reason. Hope he plays to the potential that he was showing for a long time.

[LGR4GM]

Hope Nikita Novikov really works on his foot speed all offseason. We'll probably need him at some point. 

[inkman]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Hope Nikita Novikov really works on his foot speed all offseason. We'll probably need him at some point. 

Are Ryan Johnson & Zac Jones ahead of him on the depth chart?  It seems that way. 

[LGR4GM]

12 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

Pospisil is an aggressive centre. Probably 4th line

Zary is basically Krebs.

Hell no to Mews enough with the RHD prospects.

Something around Rasmus Andersen and Pospisil for Byram. 

See if a year with Dahlin changes his mind or if not move him at the deadline.

Mews just put up 82pts in 68 OHL games in his D+1. I will worry about him being an RHD some other time if they want to use him as part of the trade. 

[The Jokeman]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

I liked Docker. But he’s a replaceable player whose loss is inconsequential.

Yeah I guess but still you'd like to think he could at least be in the discussion for a 6/7D man. Personally I would have kept him but have a feeling KA didn't because of cap concerns or maybe he didn't want to be here. 

[JP51]

4 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

No interest in Andersson; he did a nose dive last year stats wise and I have zero interest in trading Byram for a rental that we may end up trading at the deadline or having to use as a rental of extreme cost.

 

 

I'd say Byram is better to be honest but value wise they are likely close if not equal.

A 2026 1st with some protection, a 2026 2nd and a lesser roster player. Depending on the offers an offer-sheet compensation could be preferable due to the lack of conditions on the 1st.

 

Terrible targets seeing as most of the players are either rentals who want to be UFAs or Bot 6 guys akin to the Peterka trade.

Ideally if you can pull off a Miller-esc trade return you could turn that 1st and Rosen into Rakell and call it an offseason unless someone comes knocking for Muel. 

I am thinking the same thing, the offers for Byram are not equaling the value of an offer sheet... and Adams is like go ahead and offer sheet him we will take the picks unless its a way low offer then we match and trade down the line... 

[Archie Lee]

11 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Yeah I guess but still you'd like to think he could at least be in the discussion for a 6/7D man. Personally I would have kept him but have a feeling KA didn't because of cap concerns or maybe he didn't want to be here. 

On B-Docker, it is just weird to me that they are obviously placing an emphasis on upgrading right shot D and based on what B-Docker is being paid, he would have been a near perfect 7th D who happens to be right shot.  The Athletic had an article from day one of free agency that included him on a list of cheap value-add d-men who make near league minimum but can play on your bottom-pairing. Losing him should not be considered a season-altering move, but it is odd.     

[JohnC]

18 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Yeah I guess but still you'd like to think he could at least be in the discussion for a 6/7D man. Personally I would have kept him but have a feeling KA didn't because of cap concerns or maybe he didn't want to be here. 

My guess is that this was a Ruff influenced transaction. I really don't think it was a money issue because the player who replaces him will be in the same contract strata. 

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

On B-Docker, it is just weird to me that they are obviously placing an emphasis on upgrading right shot D and based on what B-Docker is being paid, he would have been a near perfect 7th D who happens to be right shot.  The Athletic had an article from day one of free agency that included him on a list of cheap value-add d-men who make near league minimum but can play on your bottom-pairing. Losing him should not be considered a season-altering move, but it is odd.     

It shouldn't be a surprise that a franchise with an odd silent owner who oddly selects an unqualified person to be a GM who makes odd decisions. 

From an overview standpoint, the GM is mostly sticking with his build from within and draft and develop strategy. It is being tweaked with more emphasis on physicality, a Ruff influence. The biggest gamble relates to the goalie position. Was it sufficiently addressed this offseason? I would say no but not at a conclusive level. We shall see. 

[dudacek]

I’ve come around to JBD as simply a case of them not liking his game enough to lean on in the top 6 and feeling confident they had (Bryson Johnson) or could find (Timmins, Jones) better depth choices.

Sometimes a puck is just a puck.They just weren’t that into him.

Edited Wednesday at 01:54 PM by dudacek

[Drag0nDan]

Just now, dudacek said:

I’ve come around to JBD as simply a case of them not liking his game enough to lean on the top 6 and feeling confident they had (Bryson Johnson) or could find (Timmins, Jones) better depth choices.

Sometimes a puck is just a puck.They just weren’t that into him.

I know metrics/optics looked good, but he also really didn't play that much here and most of that time was with power.  

Take him off Power's pair and what do you have?  I guess the opinion was - replacement level defenseman.  

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

I know metrics/optics looked good, but he also really didn't play that much here and most of that time was with power.  

Take him off Power's pair and what do you have?  I guess the opinion was - replacement level defenseman.  

Or leave him on Power's pair and what do you have? I don't understand the notion that we should dump defenders because they worked when paired with another defender... isn't that the point?