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 11 hours ago 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 2 hours ago 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.