Chad D’s Latest Mock Offseason

[shrader]

21 minutes ago, Taro T said:

There is ALWAYS a spot for another top 6 winger.  It might be on the 3rd line, but that is a 1st World problem that would be a very nice problem to have.

You also have to give something to get something. 

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, shrader said:

You also have to give something to get something. 

Yes.  But the Sabres don't ALWAYS have to be the team giving up the best player.  What's the point of having too friggin' many prospects to ever have them all in the lineup if you aren't willing to use some of them as the proverbial sweeteners to actually be the team giving up quantity for quality.

[Mr. Allen]

15 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Yes.  But the Sabres don't ALWAYS have to be the team giving up the best player.  What's the point of having too friggin' many prospects to ever have them all in the lineup if you aren't willing to use some of them as the proverbial sweeteners to actually be the team giving up quantity for quality.

So a player I’ve been thinking about is Kulich.  He’s a center, right?  And he’s not really a bottom 6 type of center.  If we go and get a 2C then what are we going to do with Kulich?  He’s not a 4th line guy.  Do we send him back to Rochester?  
i think he’s possibly going to be a big piece going out in a trade because there’s not really a place for him.  

[shrader]

51 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Yes.  But the Sabres don't ALWAYS have to be the team giving up the best player.  What's the point of having too friggin' many prospects to ever have them all in the lineup if you aren't willing to use some of them as the proverbial sweeteners to actually be the team giving up quantity for quality.

If a move of Peterka leads to a top 6 forward or a #2 center, are they really giving up the best player though?

[Turbo44]

46 minutes ago, Mr. Allen said:

So a player I’ve been thinking about is Kulich.  He’s a center, right?  And he’s not really a bottom 6 type of center.  If we go and get a 2C then what are we going to do with Kulich?  He’s not a 4th line guy.  Do we send him back to Rochester?  
i think he’s possibly going to be a big piece going out in a trade because there’s not really a place for him.  

Fair but kulich can play wing too

[The Jokeman]

8 hours ago, shrader said:

If a move of Peterka leads to a top 6 forward or a #2 center, are they really giving up the best player though?

If you get Robertson or E40 than you get the better player. That said who is the other top6 you add? As they might be less than JJP.

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, shrader said:

If a move of Peterka leads to a top 6 forward or a #2 center, are they really giving up the best player though?

Peterka is already a top 6 forward with plenty more upside. So why give him up? To see him thrive somewhere else and see his name etched on the SC for another team?

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, Mr. Allen said:

So a player I’ve been thinking about is Kulich.  He’s a center, right?  And he’s not really a bottom 6 type of center.  If we go and get a 2C then what are we going to do with Kulich?  He’s not a 4th line guy.  Do we send him back to Rochester?  
i think he’s possibly going to be a big piece going out in a trade because there’s not really a place for him.  

You are right that Kulich is a top two line center in the making. That’s why I wouldn’t deal him. Aren’t you tired of being a farm team for other teams? If he were in an early stage of development, I would be receptive to trading him for a return that was immediate help. But based on what I saw last year he is ready to contribute right now as a second line player.

[Mr. Allen]

57 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You are right that Kulich is a top two line center in the making. That’s why I wouldn’t deal him. Aren’t you tired of being a farm team for other teams? If he were in an early stage of development, I would be receptive to trading him for a return that was immediate help. But based on what I saw last year he is ready to contribute right now as a second line player.

Oh I completely agree.  But if the reports out there are correct that Adams is looking for a 2C then there’s no room for Kulich (unless they bring in a vet for a year or two until Kulich is ready).  I really like Kulich and think he’s going to be a very good cost effective player.  Maybe if we don’t get that top 6 winger he can play wing.  

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Allen said:

Oh I completely agree.  But if the reports out there are correct that Adams is looking for a 2C then there’s no room for Kulich (unless they bring in a vet for a year or two until Kulich is ready).  I really like Kulich and think he’s going to be a very good cost effective player.  Maybe if we don’t get that top 6 winger he can play wing.  

My understanding is that he can play wing. His versatility is something to appreciate. Tage has played center and wing. And has been successful playing both positions. Considering the factor of injuries, versatility is something that should be considered a valuable asset. I'm so tired of seeing our former players thriving wearing other uniforms. I'm not against making deals. Trading a player like Byram (I like a lot), prospects and draft assets for immediate help makes a lot of sense. But dealing off young players who can contribute now and have the potential to even get better doesn't resonate with me. 

[Brawndo]

15 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So what he's saying is Darche fired after one season? No way Islanders are that stupid unless Hagens is still there at 9. Then maybe. The SJ deal I could see happening. 

This is what exactly needs to happen 

[dudacek]

17 hours ago, Thorny said:

 

I struggle to see a world where the Sabres can add 2 top 6 forwards and not trade multiple pieces this board does not want them to trade.

They have neither the roster space, nor the cap space.

Also, where do the UPL, Byram, Clifton and Muel upgrades come in?

 

[Thorny]

54 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I struggle to see a world where the Sabres can add 2 top 6 forwards and not trade multiple pieces this board does not want them to trade.

They have neither the roster space, nor the cap space.

Also, where do the UPL, Byram, Clifton and Muel upgrades come in?

 

I‘m not the board, though.

we can’t trade futures to get it done? And trade the guys we need to for futures, to make room? 

[Thorny]

I’ve said it a million times and they obviously agree,( in fact I’ve seen a definitive shift in how they’ve been operating in the last year or so, increasingly so, where they their thinking is starting to get well closer to mine, finally.) it’s a BPA offseason. We can, and should if possible, add everywhere

the wish list says two top 6 forwards cause it should. It should read:

2 Top 6 forwards 

2 bottom 6 forwards

2 top 4 D

2 goalies

2 bourbon 

2 scotch 

2 beer

 

seriously tho. Ditch the guys WE don’t want to be here. The scent of desperation has never in the history of time been attractive 

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

I‘m not the board, though.

we can’t trade futures to get it done? And trade the guys we need to for futures, to make room? 

Maybe the Zegras trade puts to rest the idea that teams aren’t selling right now, but conventional reportage right now is that there’s not a lot of teams angling to be the seller in a Reinhart-type trade.

Maybe there are teams looking to dump a Zegras in order to chase a Marner?

I just think it’s unrealistic to see the Sabres as having the “winning bid” in 4 or 5 separate transactions. Especially if they aren’t including a Tuch or a Peterka or a Kulich in order to get it done.

[Thorny]

39 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Maybe the Zegras trade puts to rest the idea that teams aren’t selling right now, but conventional reportage right now is that there’s not a lot of teams angling to be the seller in a Reinhart-type trade.

Maybe there are teams looking to dump a Zegras in order to chase a Marner?

I just think it’s unrealistic to see the Sabres as having the “winning bid” in 4 or 5 separate transactions. Especially if they aren’t including a Tuch or a Peterka or a Kulich in order to get it done.

Of course not, why would they? You shoot for the moon and when you miss you land among the stars

Maybe I’m not making my point clear, again: you are looking to add everywhere because you are more likely to get the best player outright if you expand the horizon of what you are looking for 

there isn’t anywhere the sabres don’t have room. There isn’t anywhere the sabres have less room. Vegas added their best player in a deal after already being perennials 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thorny

[PerreaultForever]

44 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Maybe the Zegras trade puts to rest the idea that teams aren’t selling right now, but conventional reportage right now is that there’s not a lot of teams angling to be the seller in a Reinhart-type trade.

Maybe there are teams looking to dump a Zegras in order to chase a Marner?

I just think it’s unrealistic to see the Sabres as having the “winning bid” in 4 or 5 separate transactions. Especially if they aren’t including a Tuch or a Peterka or a Kulich in order to get it done.

How the Zegras trade ends up will be interesting to see. I've talked before about comparing Philly's rebuild with Buffalo's. We were skilled young players first and then build the culture and add leadership. They were build the culture first and then add the talent. It will be interesting to see if that culture (if it is rebuilt) can contain Zegras and make him into the player he's always had the skill to be but never shown the desire or work ethic to actually become. It was certainly a low price paid. 

[Brawndo]

I am worried they are going to pass up the best return for Byram if it involves mostly futures. Make the best deal possible and flip those assets for established NHL players if needed. 

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I‘m not the board, though.

we can’t trade futures to get it done? And trade the guys we need to for futures, to make room? 

 

39 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

I am worried they are going to pass up the best return for Byram if it involves mostly futures. Make the best deal possible and flip those assets for established NHL players if needed. 

Exactly 

[LGR4GM]

45 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

I am worried they are going to pass up the best return for Byram if it involves mostly futures. Make the best deal possible and flip those assets for established NHL players if needed. 

That would involve Adams having both a plan, and the ability to think 2-3 steps ahead. 

[Brawndo]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

That would involve Adams having both a plan, and the ability to think 2-3 steps ahead. 

That’s Jarmo’s Job. 
 

Whispers I hope