Sabres Trade JJ Peterka to Utah for Defenseman Michael Kesselring and Forward Josh Doan

[Jorcus]

41 minutes ago, jad1 said:

The deal is based on an offer sheet.  Offer sheets usually max out at five years.  You can't spread the money out more than 5 years on an offer sheet.

Armstrong probably let Adams and Peterka's agent know he was going to offer sheet Peterka.  He let Adams know the number and Adams didn't want to pay , and didnt want the the draft pick compensation, so they figured out a trade.

After the trade, Utah still had to sign Peterka, so Peterka's agent probably held them to the offer sheet numbers.  Peterka could have refused to sign a longer term contract, and would have still been open to offer sheets from other teams.

 

Utah was not the only game in town so the offer sheet method could have been countered by a trade to another team. It seemed like the Rangers may have been lining up an offer sheet but now they are SOL. You have to admire Peterka's agent. He sure worked the system.  

[JohnC]

39 minutes ago, MISabresFan said:

I wonder, if all these players saying, I don't want to be here, has anyone asked them why?  What is the reason...

 

Everyone knows why. It’s not a mystery to anyone inside and outsize of this discredited franchise. When you dig a deep hole you have to climb out of it. There’s no magical and quick solutions. It’s about making smart decisions on a day to day basis. 

[K-9]

47 minutes ago, MISabresFan said:

I wonder, if all these players saying, I don't want to be here, has anyone asked them why?  What is the reason...

 

Can’t say for sure, but if I had to make a guess in JJ’s case, I’d say Ruff’s coaching style, tough practices, and absolutely ripping players new ones during film reviews and holding them accountable didn’t rub JJ the right way. It was a complete 180 from Granato’s TLC approach and something JJ didn’t hadn’t experienced in his career before.

[SwampD]

I just really hope that these two players make the Sabres better next year. We deserve it.

 

I deserve it.

[CTJoe]

2 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I just really hope that these two players make the Sabres better next year. We deserve it.

 

I deserve it.

we can hope they have a simialr impact that McLeod did.  He surprised in a good way, I would say

[dudacek]

13 minutes ago, CTJoe said:

we can hope they have a simialr impact that McLeod did.  He surprised in a good way, I would say

I wonder how much this has to do with more Sabre fans OK with this one more than I thought, and more than the average NHL fan?

[Thorny]

15 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Lol, so it’s all JJP’s fault that this team didn’t make the playoffs.  Not the bad coaching, poor management, defensemen who can’t play defensemen or the crap goaltending.  No it’s JJP’s fault because he was out for himself.  I’m sorry, but that’s really funny.  

Yes he did.  He’s also only 23.  

What a change a day makes. Today, arguing Peterka is a good player makes your opposition the entire board. Yesterday we wouldn’t deal him for less than a star.

What a world 

Edited 4 hours ago by Thorny

[Thorny]

13 hours ago, ... said:

Now that we've had some time to collect ourselves, is Sabrespace undervaluing big, RHD-defensemen who can put up a few points?

I find the argument (that big, RHD-defensemen who can put up a few points have more value) compelling. I mean, I am loath to give Adams credit, but, again, the argument is compelling.

 

We traded a point a game winger for depth pieces, the reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and you STILL think we are selling the return short? Masterclass; potentially 

[Thorny]

4 hours ago, Jorcus said:

 

Marty Biron had commented a few times that if Peterka were to hold out during camp or into the season that it would have been bad for this team who is needs to get off to a good start. The Sabres were in no position to go though that this year so away he goes. We often talk about extending players with contracts that did not work out. I remember Adams talking about extensions last summer but nothing happened. Peterka because of his 2nd round contract was the lowest paid player on the team. We certainly could have signed him for what he left for so it's safe to say he really did not want to be here. It seems as if there were a lot of discussions so this trade was not a knee jerk reaction trade. I think a lot of the other players thrown around were probably Peterka plus something or did not fit into Adams plan for roster construction. He was a fun player to watch but if we win more games this year then we did the right thing.  

Ah so Peterka was likely to hold out 

That’s what I’ve heard too

1 hour ago, MISabresFan said:

I wonder, if all these players saying, I don't want to be here, has anyone asked them why?  What is the reason...

 

Nah

Edited 4 hours ago by Thorny

[CTJoe]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We traded a point a game winger for depth pieces, the reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and you STILL think we are selling the return short? Masterclass; potentially 

Time will tell.  A day gave time to research the two new guys and realize that the "off the ice" Peterka maybe wasn't as good as the "on the ice" Peterka.  Tage certainly gave the thumbs up to the guys to Adams - Character sometimes trumps talent.

[Thorny]

Just now, CTJoe said:

Time will tell.  A day gave time to research the two new guys and realize that the "off the ice" Peterka maybe wasn't as good as the "on the ice" Peterka.  Tage certainly gave the thumbs up to the guys to Adams - Character sometimes trumps talent.

Peterka wanted out. Given that fact pretty much any return is a +, not sure how we can construe it any other way. In that sense the return is found money. 
 

when you are trying to recover from the chasm a guy like Botterill left us in, it takes time. Can’t remember who the poster was but someone mentioned when you look at teams like Florida etc it can sometimes take even as long as 10 years or so to rebuild that and get yourself out of that hole. Some players like Peterka who don’t have the maturity to wait are going to be to the casualty  

[mjd1001]

13 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We traded a point a game winger for depth pieces, the reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and you STILL think we are selling the return short? Masterclass; potentially 

Great, except Peterka has never been a point per game winger. Not over his career (0.63), not over last season (0.88), not the season before (0.61). The closest he got in one season was last year's 0.88, but  if he plays 82 games over an 82 game season that still causes him to come up 10 short.

Now, will he BECOME a point per game winger on Utah? Maybe, Maybe not. But on the Sabres, he isn't, and never has been one....even last year with the most Powerplay ice time on the team among forwards and lots of time on the first line, 18+ minutes per game.

Edited 4 hours ago by mjd1001

[CTJoe]

2 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Great, except Peterka has never been a point per game winger. Not over his career (0.63), not over last season (0.88), not the season before (0.61). The closest he got in one season was last year's 0.88, but  if he plays 82 games over an 82 game season that still causes him to come up 10 short.

Now, will he BECOME a point per game winger on Utah? Maybe, Maybe not. But on the Sabres, he isn't, and never has been one.

And I don't think he'll be playing with a better talent in Utah than Tage?? Combine that with historically high 14% shooting percentage and.......

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Great, except Peterka has never been a point per game winger. Not over his career (0.63), not over last season (0.88), not the season before (0.61). The closest he got in one season was last year's 0.88, but  if he plays 82 games over an 82 game season that still causes him to come up 10 short.

Now, will he BECOME a point per game winger on Utah? Maybe, Maybe not. But on the Sabres, he isn't, and never has been one.

Sorry, .88 at 23. Was only using “point a game” because it was often the term of choice leading into the deal.

70+ points. Call it the “Josh Norris” points per game pace 

Just now, CTJoe said:

And I don't think he'll be playing with a better talent in Utah than Tage?? Combine that with historically high 14% shooting percentage and.......

And he’s actually not very good. Didn’t I say it already? Masterclass  

You should post about these things before! Not just after the fact depending on the result. People may learn from you 

[krakensabr56390]

27 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We traded a point a game winger for depth pieces, the reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and you STILL think we are selling the return short? Masterclass; potentially 

Its clear that kesselring is going to be a top 4 D on this team - and a lot of smart analytics folks think that he is going to be very good in that role and already has been good in that role. I’m not sure how that qualifies as a depth piece? We’ve been missing a partner for power for like three years and it’s the number one need on the team. 
 

doan will be better than you think and is a very young good third liner… I guess you could argue that more in the depth range but when I think of depth, I think of a fourth liner or an extra and not a person who is going to play 15 to 20 minutes a game and likely a 20/20 hard to play against winger 

what’s the last top 4 rhd traded that people argued was a “ depth player” - these are primo depth pieces 

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, krakensabr56390 said:

Its clear that kesselring is going to be a top 4 D on this team - and a lot of smart analytics folks think that he is going to be very good in that role and already has been good in that role. I’m not sure how that qualifies as a depth piece? We’ve been missing a partner for power for like three years and it’s the number one need on the team. 
 

doan will be better than you think and is a very young good third liner… I guess you could argue that more in the depth range but when I think of depth, I think of a fourth liner or an extra and not a person who is going to play 15 to 20 minutes a game and likely a 20/20 hard to play against winger 

what’s the last top 4 rhd traded that people argued was a “ depth player” - these are primo depth pieces 

You are literally a sabres employee dude 

Like I don’t just throw these things out there - I’m not trying to insult you/throw that out as shade

i am aware. No interest 

Edited 4 hours ago by Thorny

[krakensabr56390]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

You are literally a sabres employee dude 

Like I don’t just throw these things out there - I’m not trying to insult you/throw that out as shade

i am aware. No interest 

I’m not sure why you get so out of shape when someone disagrees with you? I actually am very frustrated by the Sabres and all of their failures the last 14 years… Is there a rule against presenting intelligently thought out arguments on this message Board?

If I recall, you actually insulted me and said that I should post more than 20 times before putting a stronger opinion out there… So I guess do you want me to post more or do you just want to throw out insults to other posters who disagree with you?

people who happen to like a trade are entitled to their opinions, whether they’re in line with yours or not… It doesn’t mean that we work for the team, which just means that maybe we have a different opinion.

Edited 4 hours ago by krakensabr56390

[Thorny]

7 minutes ago, krakensabr56390 said:

I’m not sure why you get so out of shape when someone disagrees with you? I actually am very frustrated by the Sabres and all of their failures the last 14 years… Is there a rule against presenting intelligently thought out arguments on this message Board?

If I recall, you actually insulted me and said that I should post more than 20 times before putting a stronger opinion out there… So I guess do you want me to post more or do you just want to throw out insults to other posters or disagree with you?

people who happen to like a trade or entitled to their opinions, whether they’re in line with yours or not… It doesn’t mean that we work for the team, which just means that maybe we have a different opinion.

I don’t. I discuss with everyone. Rightly or wrongly I’ve been engaging with many many takes pro-trade and none of them have I called a burner but you. Never in my long years defending Eichel. I am well-familiar with being on my own. It’s not a reactive reaction on my part. I just have no interest in discussing with a plant, I’m sorry 

I don’t know you, I’m not trying to put you down. I just find the idea of team plants to sway the narrative very disingenuous not to mention incredibly lazy 

but that’s not on you - you are on assignment. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Thorny

[krakensabr56390]

Just now, Thorny said:

I don’t. I discuss with everyone. I just have no interest in discussing with a plant, I’m sorry 

Ok bro - whatever issue you have that makes you this way… That is your issue. Good luck with it.

Just now, Thorny said:

I don’t know you, I’m not trying to put you down. I just find the idea of team plants to sway the narrative very disingenuous not to mention incredibly lazy 

but that’s not on you - you are on assignment. 

Sure, bro whatever you say… An emergency doctor from Seattle Washington is a plant by the Buffalo Sabres. But good luck with that idea and whatever other conspiracy theories you have. By the way that noise just heard it’s probably an alien in your backyard.

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, krakensabr56390 said:

Ok bro - whatever issue you have that makes you this way… That is your issue. Good luck with it.

Cheers 

[...]

39 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We traded a point a game winger for depth pieces, the reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and you STILL think we are selling the return short? Masterclass; potentially 

You're assuming that I've been glued here for the past day and half going through a public coping exercise with the rest of y'all. Do we need to attach examples from across the internet, within the time-span of 11:51 PM · Jun 25, 2025 to 12:00 PM · Jun 26, 2025 that demonstrate the initial reaction was definitely not " overwhelmingly positive"?

If people are into it now, why not just say "Why, yes, ..., we generally seem to have accepted the value of the return given the condition of the team and the market. Thanks for asking/checking in/caring!"

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I wonder how much this has to do with more Sabre fans OK with this one more than I thought, and more than the average NHL fan?

Not sure what this means, but JJ was okay. I liked him, but he was no world beater. Was he good for his age, sure. Does he have potential to be great, maybe, but so do the guys coming back.

I’m more upset because of the reasons Thorny brought up. We were sold that we couldn’t spend to the cap because we needed to save that $$ for when our young players got good and we needed to keep them. That was and remains BS.

I hope the trade works out for us. I’ll wait til the season to judge it.

18 minutes ago, krakensabr56390 said:

Ok bro - whatever issue you have that makes you this way… That is your issue. Good luck with it.

Sure, bro whatever you say… An emergency doctor from Seattle Washington is a plant by the Buffalo Sabres. But good luck with that idea and whatever other conspiracy theories you have. By the way that noise just heard it’s probably an alien in your backyard.

Tell Kevyn we say hello. 😂

[Brawndo]

 

[PromoTheRobot]

29 minutes ago, krakensabr56390 said:

 Is there a rule against presenting intelligently thought out arguments on this message Board?

Yes! Yes there is. Don't go against canon.

Edited 3 hours ago by PromoTheRobot

[Weave]

6 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Yes! Yes there is. Don't go against canon.

@krakensabr56390 listen to this one.  He follows the rule religiously.