Sabres sign Ryan McLeod to a 4 year extension

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

 

The price has the potential to be ugly Helenius perhaps 

eww no, they can trade from their wealth of defense prospect but Helenius is probably their only C prospect in the entire system.

[Carmel Corn]

6 hours ago, dudacek said:

2Cs on playoff teams (based on ice time):

• Draisaitl 106 points, +32, 21:31
• Tavares 74 points, +10, 18:14
• Hischier 69 points, +9, 20:23
• Hintz 67 points, +18, 16:53
• Dubois 66 points, +27, 17:18
• Hertl 61 points, -3, 17:07
• Rossi 60 points, +15, 18:15
• Cirelli 59 points, +30, 18:41
• McLeod 53 points, +13, 16:50
• Bennett 51 points, -15, 17:27
• Schenn 50 points, +3, 17:34
• Danault 43 points, +20, 17:40
• Staal 36 points, +15, 15:26
• Lowry 34, +18, 15:26
• *Mittelstadt 34 points, -12, 17:00
• *Norris 33 points, -5, 18:20
• Dach 22 points, -29, 15:40

Interesting exercise and kinda eye-opening.
*Short-season totals. Each was traded at the deadline and Nelson and Cozens took over.

Thanks for this info.  Wondering if you have the time or ability to factor out PP points for any of these players.  I am assuming McLeod has limited PP time and that his points are mainly even strength, but if other guys on this list had PP minutes, maybe their points totals reflect that?  Maybe not, just wondering to myself.

[LGR4GM]

9 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

Thanks for this info.  Wondering if you have the time or ability to factor out PP points for any of these players.  I am assuming McLeod has limited PP time and that his points are mainly even strength, but if other guys on this list had PP minutes, maybe their points totals reflect that?  Maybe not, just wondering to myself.

McLeod had 3sh goals and 3 sh assists. He only had 2 pp assists. That's 8 points on special teams. No idea how that compares to others. 

[Taro T]

19 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

 

The price has the potential to be ugly Helenius perhaps 

Make it Östlund or Wahlberg and we can talk.  Really don't want to see them lose Helenius.

Is Roslovic still available as a UFA?  Maybe time to switch gears.

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Doesn't change the fact that McLeod is not just a 3c. Which is your argument. 

Why can't McLeod be a 2c on a playoff team? What's your reasoning other than "he's a 3c because that's what he was in Edmonton"

Well for one, Edmonton was a playoff team so there's your example. 

He's just not as good as you want him to be. Offensively he's not even better than Casey Mittelstadt was. Casey Mittelstadt is a 2C. Not a particularly good 2C because he's lazy but a 2C. I simply do not think McLeod is as good as you think he is. 

9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

This is a disingenuous argument because every C wasn't good enough to overcome this. They literally won the Cup. McDavid lines up against Barkov, he lost the series... does that make Barkov better than McDavid? 

What about other playoff teams?

In some ways yes, Barkov is better than McDavid. 

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, PerreaultForever said:

Well for one, Edmonton was a playoff team so there's your example. 

He's just not as good as you want him to be. Offensively he's not even better than Casey Mittelstadt was. Casey Mittelstadt is a 2C. Not a particularly good 2C because he's lazy but a 2C. I simply do not think McLeod is as good as you think he is. 

In some ways yes, Barkov is better than McDavid. 

So Mitts is a 2c but Ryan McLeod isn't?

I think that take is ***** nuts.

Mittelstadt has 1yr with more total points than McLeod and 0 years with more goals. 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

So Mitts is a 2c but Ryan McLeod isn't?

I think that take is ***** nuts.

It ONLY makes sense if viewed from a traditional 1st line top scoring line; 2nd line 2nd scoring line; 3rd line checking line; 4th line energy/spare parts viewpoint.  McLeod IS your defensive C (but so was Drury back in the day and he was considered the 1B C).  Mitts is your 2nd scoring C in most situations.  (He wouldn't be in Edmonton either.)

Personally, liked Mittelstadt and thought he was better than folks around here would give him credit for.  That said, would take McLeod for Mitts straight up every single day and twice on Sunday.

[PerreaultForever]

5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

So Mitts is a 2c but Ryan McLeod isn't?

I think that take is ***** nuts.

Mittelstadt has 1yr with more total points than McLeod and 0 years with more goals. 

As I said, Mittelstadt is not a particularly good 2C.

When he wants to be however, Mittlestadt is better than McLeod. When he wants to be. (Unfortunately that's not very often)

Let me ask you this, and be honest, 2 years ago if Adams decided to  trade Mittelstadt for McLeod straight up what would have been your reaction? I imagine you'd have wanted him fired on the spot. 

[LGR4GM]

Just now, PerreaultForever said:

As I said, Mittelstadt is not a particularly good 2C.

When he wants to be however, Mittlestadt is better than McLeod. When he wants to be. (Unfortunately that's not very often)

Let me ask you this, and be honest, 2 years ago if Adams decided to  trade Mittelstadt for McLeod straight up what would have been your reaction? I imagine you'd have wanted him fired on the spot. 

Hmm. Maybe? Idk, Mittelstadt has been a slacker for a bit. I didn't love the Byram trade because it didn't make team building sense. That said, you're probably right that 2yrs ago I wouldn't have been happy. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

It ONLY makes sense if viewed from a traditional 1st line top scoring line; 2nd line 2nd scoring line; 3rd line checking line; 4th line energy/spare parts viewpoint.  McLeod IS your defensive C (but so was Drury back in the day and he was considered the 1B C).  Mitts is your 2nd scoring C in most situations.  (He wouldn't be in Edmonton either.)

Personally, liked Mittelstadt and thought he was better than folks around here would give him credit for.  That said, would take McLeod for Mitts straight up every single day and twice on Sunday.

That is correct in terms of how to look at it. If you don't look at it that way 2C 3C designations have no meaning. Only match ups will matter along with ice time.

As for the trade, sure, you'd do that now, but you'd have been calling Adams crazy if he did that 2 years ago.

[PerreaultForever]

Just as an aside I think this is a very important year for Mittlestadt in Boston. He will either buy in and apply himself finally and become a serviceable 2C or he will end up discarded and become a skilled but unwanted failure like Skinner is right now. Signed for small amounts late in free agency or not at all. No idea which way that goes, but I suspect he's just a placeholder for Hagens. 

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

 

The price has the potential to be ugly Helenius perhaps 

Doing nothing far uglier 

[Weave]

43 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

As I said, Mittelstadt is not a particularly good 2C.

When he wants to be however, Mittlestadt is better than McLeod. When he wants to be. (Unfortunately that's not very often)

Let me ask you this, and be honest, 2 years ago if Adams decided to  trade Mittelstadt for McLeod straight up what would have been your reaction? I imagine you'd have wanted him fired on the spot. 

 Back when we all thought Cozens was gonna be something?  I’d have taken that trade all day, every day.  Then again, I was never bullish on Mitts.

[PerreaultForever]

19 minutes ago, Weave said:

 Back when we all thought Cozens was gonna be something?  I’d have taken that trade all day, every day.  Then again, I was never bullish on Mitts.

I think you're using hindsight here. In 23/24 Mitts was a 57 pt. plus player. The year before he was a minus player but had 59 pts. McLeod was a 30 pt. player in his best year in Edmonton. McLeod's defensive skills are not enough to make up for that difference. If that trade had happened you'd have been livid like everyone else here. 

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I think you're using hindsight here. In 23/24 Mitts was a 57 pt. plus player. The year before he was a minus player but had 59 pts. McLeod was a 30 pt. player in his best year in Edmonton. McLeod's defensive skills are not enough to make up for that difference. If that trade had happened you'd have been livid like everyone else here. 

Mitts has gotten 50+ points once. Who cares if he paced for that some other time?

Also since his 50+ point season Mitts ain't done *****, meanwhile the second McLeod got more toi, he performed. 

[Weave]

10 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I think you're using hindsight here. In 23/24 Mitts was a 57 pt. plus player. The year before he was a minus player but had 59 pts. McLeod was a 30 pt. player in his best year in Edmonton. McLeod's defensive skills are not enough to make up for that difference. If that trade had happened you'd have been livid like everyone else here. 

I think you are forgetting how pessimistic I was about Casey Mittlestadt .  I always found him to be occasionally dynamic, and frequently disappointing. Given we had an emerging Tage Thompson and Dylan Cozens, I am more than sure the allure of a prototypical 3rd line center would have been plenty of motivation for me to have optimism regarding a deal like that one.

Edit- I would have likely expected the return be McLeod +.  I am not sure what plus would have made me happy to move the better offensive player though.

Edited 11 hours ago by Weave

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

It ONLY makes sense if viewed from a traditional 1st line top scoring line; 2nd line 2nd scoring line; 3rd line checking line; 4th line energy/spare parts viewpoint.  McLeod IS your defensive C (but so was Drury back in the day and he was considered the 1B C).  Mitts is your 2nd scoring C in most situations.  (He wouldn't be in Edmonton either.)

Personally, liked Mittelstadt and thought he was better than folks around here would give him credit for.  That said, would take McLeod for Mitts straight up every single day and twice on Sunday.

Would you have preferred that Mitts wasn’t traded for Byram and then have McCleod and Mitts vying with one another for the 2 and 3C spots?

[thewookie1]

McLeod is a high tier 3C and low end 2C from a traditional view. His contract is spot on for his value. You could do better but also far worse. Plus he has enough talent to fill the 2C role for stints even on a solid team in theory. 

[Taro T]

53 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Would you have preferred that Mitts wasn’t traded for Byram and then have McCleod and Mitts vying with one another for the 2 and 3C spots?

Didn't want Mittelstadt traded for Byram because Mitts was finally getting to his prime and Byram was ~21 at the time of the trade.

Didn't know much about McLeod at the time, but pretty sure would've been very good with the Sabres getting a real 3C for Savoie.  They've needed to have some of their prospects converted into current players since at least that trade deadline that they let pass without any moves when they ended only 1 or 2 (depending upon how you look at it) points out of the playoffs.

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Mitts has gotten 50+ points once. Who cares if he paced for that some other time?

Also since his 50+ point season Mitts ain't done *****, meanwhile the second McLeod got more toi, he performed. 

No you are mistaken. He got 50+ points 2 years in a row. He got a lousy 40 last year in his **** season. 

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, Weave said:

I think you are forgetting how pessimistic I was about Casey Mittlestadt .  I always found him to be occasionally dynamic, and frequently disappointing. Given we had an emerging Tage Thompson and Dylan Cozens, I am more than sure the allure of a prototypical 3rd line center would have been plenty of motivation for me to have optimism regarding a deal like that one.

Edit- I would have likely expected the return be McLeod +.  I am not sure what plus would have made me happy to move the better offensive player though.

Okay that's more reasonable. I can't say I remember what everybody said about Casey and I've never been a fan myself as I do think he's lazy but I do think it's easier to find a McLeod than it is a 50 plus point offensive forward to add to your roster. 

Right now we have a hole where Peterka was and if we do not fill that hole that hole will be part of the reason for next year's failure. 

Realistically, if we were good enough to possibly make the playoffs there'd be no discussion. McLeod would be our 3C.