Report: Sabres sign Bowen Byram to a two year 6.25 million dollar AAV contract extension

[Thorny]

7 hours ago, inkman said:

 

 

 

 

 

Y’all were told the only successful course of action was trading Byram for offense.  Which could still happen.  Unfortunately, WGR and Sabres Twitter mandated that it was the only path to success. Now, just like the WR situation with the Bills, things took a turn in a different direction and we are calling it a failure based on predetermined expectations set by outside influences. 

lol absurd. I’ve posted countless times the multitude of tacts the team could take and not once did i specify we must move Byram for a forward. Go on - pull up my posts. Or, you can just go with the fact I’m being spoon fed my opinions from others and incapable of forming my own thoughts 👍

Good grief. 

I’m happy the board has shifted so smoothly to “absolute win by Adams” and “definitively improved”. That’s great - but please, please leave me out of your gaslighting “oh and if you don’t like it it’s cause you were brainwashed into expecting different”

totally miss me with that. This is just going way, way too far now. Utter lack of respect for the discussion/poster

Edited 12 hours ago by Thorny

[Doohickie]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

I just bought a new 2025 car. I still can’t figure out how to fully operate the radio and sites associated with the onboard computer. Can’t they simply design basic cars for us archaic people??!!  These freaking gadgets make me more grouchy than I usually am. 

It took me a few days to adjust.  I'm still learning (just got the car at the end of June and spent a week after that out of town), but I'm figuring it out.  

My dealer actually sets up appointments for a week or two after delivery of a car to go over all the stuff it does and give the new owner to ask how to do things he hor she can't figure out.  My appointment is Friday.

I've got it mostly figured out, but for the media selection there is a horizontal list of all the options that's wider than the screen.  I'd like AM, FM, Andriod Auto (which jumps to Pandora on my phone) and USB (CD Player) together.  Instead, USB is at the other end of the list and I can't switch between Pandora and USB without scrolling horizontally.  I need to see if there's a way to edit or rearranged those options.  I'm not going to renew SiriusXM when the trial ends so I'd like to push that off to the end instead and move USB closer to AM/FM/Pandora.

Maybe there's a way to do that and I will find out how Friday.

Edited 12 hours ago by Doohickie

[Thorny]

6 hours ago, tom webster said:

I guess we have to give KA credit for working around the system and calling their bluff as well as understanding that Bo was alright with staying here 

“Good call, Thorny” never in the equation, eh, Tom? The master predictor lol.

I can only have been brainwashed by the incorrect group think 

[tom webster]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

“Good call, Thorny” never in the equation, eh, Tom? The master predictor lol.

I can only have been brainwashed by the incorrect group think 

You are right. I should have acknowledged your accuracy. It really was a good call, almost dead on.

[Doohickie]

5 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

It took me a few days to adjust.  I'm still learning (just got the car at the end of June and spent a week after that out of town), but I'm figuring it out.  

My dealer actually sets up appointments for a week or two after delivery of a car to go over all the stuff it does and give the new owner to ask how to do things he hor she can't figure out.  My appointment is Friday.

I've got it mostly figured out, but for the media selection there is a horizontal list of all the options that's wider than the screen.  I'd like AM, FM, Andriod Auto (which jumps to Pandora on my phone) and USB (CD Player) together.  Instead, USB is at the other end of the list and I can't switch between Pandora and USB without scrolling horizontally.  I need to see if there's a way to edit or rearranged those options.  I'm not going to renew SiriusXM when the trial ends so I'd like to push that off to the end instead and move USB closer to AM/FM/Pandora.

Maybe there's a way to do that and I will find out how Friday.

By the way, if anyone is interested in adding a USB CD player to their car, this is the one I got.  It's plug and play in my car just by plugging it into the USB A port, and the cord is long enough to put the player out of sight in the glove box.  So far it hasn't skipped even when going over nasty train tracks.

[Rasmus_]

2 hours ago, SwampD said:

When healthy, he's worth $2 MM.

I'm definitely not a Greenway guy, but he's here.  So go Sabres.  He does add some size and physicality.  I just feel they could find this player in someone cheaper. 

[In The Buff]

seeing the comparisons people are making with Byram & Montour just makes me die a little inside. It just reminds me of how terrible we've been with building this team & our asset management. Because we had Brandon Montour, we traded a 1st rd pick & Guhle for him. But then we had Montour play on his offhand side, which likely had a part in Montour's decreased offensive production, so we cut him loose to Florida & traded him for a 3rd rd pick. Great asset management there. Brandon's point totals doubled his 1st season with FLA & then doubled again to 73 pts the following year. The Sabres drought continued & the Panthers with Reinhart, Montour & Rodriguez are now back to back Cup champs. And now after another offseason with minimal moves to improve the team, now we're hoping we've found another Montour with Byram? Well what if we have? What difference would that make since we had the real Montour & bungled it badly? The issues that plague this team are still present, whether Byram becomes better or not. But this spinning around in circles & never moving forward is just really grating to the soul.

As an aside: for the power play it makes total sense to put 2D & 3F's out there. Especially with our D whose strengths are their offensive contributions as opposed to their actual D. I really hope we see them try it this year. 14 years of no playoffs, what do we have to lose?

[dudacek]

53 minutes ago, In The Buff said:

.

As an aside: for the power play it makes total sense to put 2D & 3F's out there. Especially with our D whose strengths are their offensive contributions as opposed to their actual D. I really hope we see them try it this year. 14 years of no playoffs, what do we have to lose?

@Thorny has done a good job pointing out the lack of playmaking/passing talent on the roster and how that has handcuffed the power play.

I am of the opinion the three of the 5 best talents in that area on the team are Dahlin, Power and Byram (with Tage and Tuch). 

Power was 9th and Byram 12th in PP TOI/GP

Dahlin led the team in both ice time and PP 1st assists, with 10. Numbers 2 Thompson, 3 Peterka and 5 Tuch in ice time had 5, 2 and 4 1st PP assists respectively. Zucker was 4th in ice time and 2nd in PP 1st assists with 8.

You’ve got all that cap money and draft capital invested on the blue line, why not give it a chance to make plays?

Like you say, the guys you’ve been using aren’t making it happen. What do they have to lose?

Edited 10 hours ago by dudacek

[thewookie1]

8 minutes ago, dudacek said:

@Thorny has done a good job pointing out the lack of playmaking/passing talent on the roster and how that has handcuffed the power play.

I am of the opinion the three of the 5 best talents in that area on the team are Dahlin, Power and Byram (with Tage and Tuch). 

Power was 9th and Byram 12th in PP TOI/GP

Dahlin led the team in both ice time and PP 1st assists, with 10. Numbers 2 Thompson, 3 Peterka and 5 Tuch in ice time had 5, 2 and 4 1st PP assists respectively. Zucker was 4th in ice time and 2nd in PP 1st assists with 8.

You’ve got all that cap money and draft capital invested on the blue line, why not give it a chance to make plays?

Like you say, the guys you’ve been using aren’t making it happen. What do they have to lose?

Egos might be bruised 

[7+6=13]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

lol absurd. I’ve posted countless times the multitude of tacts the team could take and not once did i specify we must move Byram for a forward. Go on - pull up my posts. Or, you can just go with the fact I’m being spoon fed my opinions from others and incapable of forming my own thoughts 👍

Good grief. 

I’m happy the board has shifted so smoothly to “absolute win by Adams” and “definitively improved”. That’s great - but please, please leave me out of your gaslighting “oh and if you don’t like it it’s cause you were brainwashed into expecting different”

totally miss me with that. This is just going way, way too far now. Utter lack of respect for the discussion/poster

No honorable mention that I didn't say "definitely improved"?  Haha

I am a bit surprised at your frustration though, TBH.  SS is dominated with negative opinion and it almost always spills into the ridiculous.  I.E, making things up, etc. Then when it just a smidge, tilts the other way ..... Oh boy.

Obviously you love the Sabres or you'd actually be a bit nuts to be here as much as you are - but man, you don't like when anything positive is posted.  Not that you're hateful about it but it's important to you that others agree with your negativity.  

[pastajoe]

I’m wondering if Tage has another good season, will the team offer him a new deal, or will he demand one. A little over $7 million isn’t going to be enough through 2029-30.

[dudacek]

4 minutes ago, pastajoe said:

I’m wondering if Tage has another good season, will the team offer him a new deal, or will he demand one. A little over $7 million isn’t going to be enough through 2029-30.

Can’t due anything about it. CBA dictates it is what it is for the duration of the contract.

[Taro T]

11 minutes ago, pastajoe said:

I’m wondering if Tage has another good season, will the team offer him a new deal, or will he demand one. A little over $7 million isn’t going to be enough through 2029-30.

He's locked in to his deal unitl the end of the '29-'30 season.  He is not eligible to get another contract signed, to follow the one end ending in '29-'30 but not to modify it in ANY WAY, until July 1, 2029.

So, NO, the team WILL NOT offer him a new deal this Spring if he has another fantastic year.  NOR will he demand one.

And, yes, a little over $7MM IS going to be enough through June of 2030 because that is the deal he signed.

There is NO LEEWAY WHATSOVER IN THAT CONTRACT. 

And the CBA just got reupped into September of 2030 at a minimum, so his union head isn't going to be changing the parameters of his contract either.

[Thorny]

40 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

No honorable mention that I didn't say "definitely improved"?  Haha

I am a bit surprised at your frustration though, TBH.  SS is dominated with negative opinion and it almost always spills into the ridiculous.  I.E, making things up, etc. Then when it just a smidge, tilts the other way ..... Oh boy.

Obviously you love the Sabres or you'd actually be a bit nuts to be here as much as you are - but man, you don't like when anything positive is posted.  Not that you're hateful about it but it's important to you that others agree with your negativity.  

The results of the team have been historically bad - unless you feel my reaction has been more extreme than historically negative, I’d deem my general stance as “reflective” before negative or positive

having said that, I agree with your bolded bit after making that substitution 

“the you don’t like when anything positive is posted” is just (I’m hoping intentional) hyperbole - for such a rats ass team i post positive stuff all the time, myself - never mind taking issue in others 

Edited 9 hours ago by Thorny

[Thorny]

On 7/1/2025 at 6:00 PM, Thorny said:

This is the type of deal (the original trade) that remains our hope after the slow start to the offseason. We can split hairs in either direction all day but the roster as constructed more less seems to have been either tweaked at the fringes (Lyon/Reimer, Timmins/Clifton, Danforth/Lafferty) or likely downgraded in talent (Peterka/Kesselring+Doan). We can argue for “identity” upgrade with the later deal but realistically, smart money says an about break-even roster, aptitude wise, is where we sit, provided the Peterka deal doesn’t backfire too badly. 

I was hoping for picks for vets deals, even/especially high picks (looking at 9)…prospects for vets. Haven’t seen those yet. But, as mentioned the McLeod deal represents a template for what could still come - didn’t arrive till July 5 last year

im not sure we’ll see a noted “upgrade” should we move Byram, if we move Byram 

failing something McLeod-esque…I mean right now it does set up nicely as more less “more of the same Sabres”

Like, i like how your reading of this “overly negative.” It’s measured.

Highlighted the McLeod bit because that’s just one topic I’m frequently positive about 

frankly I’m slightly disappointed in myself I’m taking the time to detail this - you are absolutely right: I care about what others think way too much. But I care about my rep here even through it’s pretty damn clear from Inky’s post that no one is really reads my takes or gives them the time of day. Not that anyone should - absolutely do not get me wrong - but it’s the same with the sabres, like I always say: if I am sticking around for them, now, at this point, there’s really no one to blame for it but myself, you basically do have to be a glutton for punishment. If I’m posting as much as I do and it’s going out the window, it’s on me for keeping at it.

Edited 9 hours ago by Thorny

[inkman]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

lol absurd. I’ve posted countless times the multitude of tacts the team could take and not once did i specify we must move Byram for a forward. Go on - pull up my posts. Or, you can just go with the fact I’m being spoon fed my opinions from others and incapable of forming my own thoughts 👍

Good grief. 

I’m happy the board has shifted so smoothly to “absolute win by Adams” and “definitively improved”. That’s great - but please, please leave me out of your gaslighting “oh and if you don’t like it it’s cause you were brainwashed into expecting different”

totally miss me with that. This is just going way, way too far now. Utter lack of respect for the discussion/poster

You may have independently had those ideas. The media has, in concert with your thoughts, pushed their narrative.  Honestly, I can’t remember when or where the swap Byram for offense ideology started. It could have been in this forum by you.  
 

Hope you feel more respected now. 🤷‍♂️

[Thorny]

On 4/2/2025 at 3:07 PM, Thorny said:

It’s “McLeod” (only phonetic) and you are right, it was a great trade. Never mind just “good”.

@7+6=13 this isn’t cherry picking, I just typed thorny and McLeod into search. Works with Dahlin, Benson, plenty of stuff where it fits 

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

lol absurd. I’ve posted countless times the multitude of tacts the team could take and not once did i specify we must move Byram for a forward. Go on - pull up my posts. Or, you can just go with the fact I’m being spoon fed my opinions from others and incapable of forming my own thoughts 👍

Good grief. 

I’m happy the board has shifted so smoothly to “absolute win by Adams” and “definitively improved”. That’s great - but please, please leave me out of your gaslighting “oh and if you don’t like it it’s cause you were brainwashed into expecting different”

totally miss me with that. This is just going way, way too far now. Utter lack of respect for the discussion/poster

This isn't true. In fact it's nonsense. 

Almost the entire board thinks at best we're marginally better. Get off that high horse you're riding. 

[Thorny]

5 minutes ago, inkman said:

You may have independently had those ideas. The media has, in concert with your thoughts, pushed their narrative.  Honestly, I can’t remember when or where the swap Byram for offense ideology started. It could have been in this forum by you.  
 

Hope you feel more respected now. 🤷‍♂️

No, I didn’t start it because, like I literally just said, again proving that what I write is worthless, I didn’t have the idea that Byram specifically needed to be traded for a F.

I wasn’t pigeonholed on that position - that’s my point. You grouped me in this group of people that didn’t like it because it wasn’t exactly what I wanted and that’s simply not fair. I detailed a stance with many varied options and my point was only ever to look at the whole.

I will provide a link momentarily 

[LGR4GM]

I'd have loved to trade Byram for a top 6 forward. It would have still opened a hole in the top 4 defense. 

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

This isn't true. In fact it's nonsense. 

Almost the entire board thinks at best we're marginally better. Get off that high horse you're riding. 

Back of the line buddy 

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Thorny said:

No, I didn’t start it because, like I literally just said, again proving that what I write is worthless, I didn’t have the idea that Byram specifically needed to be traded for a F.

I wasn’t pigeonholed on that position - that’s my point. You grouped me in this group of people that didn’t like it because it wasn’t exactly what I wanted and that’s simply not fair. I detailed a stance with many varied options and my point was only ever to look at the whole.

I will provide a link momentarily 

Sure they could have traded Byram for a defender. I think that trade is harder. 

Just now, Thorny said:

Back of the line buddy 

I'm not your buddy,  guy.

 

 

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Sure they could have traded Byram for a defender. I think that trade is harder. 

I'm not your buddy,  guy.

 

 

*read* what he wrote. He said my opinion was crafted by a groupthink and was expressing disappointment only because it didn’t happen exactly the way I wanted.

this is what actually happened - yes I am being hyperbolic when I said the whole board loves it the direction. You get that that’s intentionally so, right? Because I’m somewhat shaken by the fact my position was so badly misconstrued. In fact that’s too light: it was outright claimed to be disappointed only because I was pigeonholed on wanting something and essentially the thread ran with it and I gotta say, it’s not very fair 

Edited 9 hours ago by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

*read* what he wrote. He said my opinion was crafted by a groupthink and was expressing disappointment only because it didn’t happen exactly the way I wanted.

this is what actually happened - yes I am being hyperbolic when I said the whole board loves it the direction. You get that that’s intentionally so, right? Because I’m somewhat shaken by the fact my position was so badly misconstrued. In fact that’s too light: it was outright claimed to be disappointed only because I was pigeonholed on wanting something and essentially the thread ran with it and I gotta say, it’s not very fair 

I have no issue with your Byram opinion. 

[Thorny]

On 7/7/2025 at 10:13 AM, Thorny said:

Timmins on top pair still a pretty big (see: massive) question mark but if anyone can make it work it’s Dahlin. I think I’d prefer the situation where Byram was moved for a top 6 forward and we didn’t make any futures trades to the situation where we re-signed Byram and didn’t make any futures trades, putting my faith in Dahlin if Adams won’t inspire any through actual action 

B : Byram traded for top 6 F (roster remains break even to last year), 2 futures trades made, 1 for an upgrade F and 1 for an upgrade D. OR Byram retained, 2 futures trades made at F (one to get F back to status quo (Peterka), one as an upgrade)

(both of these scenarios under A result in the one F upgrade one D upgrade I thought was bare minimum coming in)

C- : Byram traded for top 6 F, and 1 futures upgrade (BPA) OR Byram retained and 1 futures trade for a F 

(these scenarios result in 50% of the raw upgrades I felt necessary. If Byram is retained and the futures trade backlogs Peterka loss, Kesselring represents the add, etc. If Byram is traded for a F, everything is back square and upgrade TBD, if we make one)

D : Byram dealt for top 6 F, no futures trades (break even squad to last year)

D- : Byram bridged, no futures trades (break even squad to last year, but no shiny new toy)

F : Adams has another press conference 

THIS was my stance on Byram

that I detailed out several days ago, for what I probably thought in moment was a belaboured amount of times but, wrongly, hadn’t been enough, apparently. Note that “Byram retained” features prominently in the high pass B grade I had outlined as an option 

I had a high pass B lined up for the old sabres in the big 2025 lol! (Hater!)

note, as well, that I only didn’t have “trade Byram for a D” mentioned cause that just seemed oddly unlikely 

please note also that my stance was clearly outlined that my overall impression was based on the OVERALL OUTLOOK of the roster 

- - - 

“I think I’d prefer” 

you extremist, hater.

Edited 9 hours ago by Thorny