So, about that salary cap

[PerreaultForever]

They're not in 'cap trouble". That is utter nonsense. They choose to spend under the cap, but in no way shape or form are they in cap trouble. 

Also going to have tons of cap space when Dahlin demands a trade. 🙂

 

[Darryl Shannon's +/-]

10 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

They're not in 'cap trouble". That is utter nonsense. They choose to spend under the cap, but in no way shape or form are they in cap trouble. 

Also going to have tons of cap space when Dahlin demands a trade. 🙂

 

Who was or is available that they could spend the money on?  On likely a one year deal if you want to extend Tuch?  Would people be happy if we tossed oloffson 4m for one year?

There are teams with almost 20m of cap space right now.   5M is a rounding error for an nfl owner.

[Archie Lee]

6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Nonsense. Good teams with competent management extend their young good players and figure out the cap issues later. They could have extended JJP and traded Jack Quinn. They could have extended JJP and traded Samuelsson. Lots of ways to get JJP under contract. You write this like there was no possible solution, when there were 100 options. Hell, they could have done NOTHING else but extend JJP and would still be under the cap because you are forgetting the 2.325 that's going to Doan and Kesselring. Adams could have been smart and not signed Greenway to 4million bucks when he's worth half of that.

They had the space to sign JJP, they wanted to trade him instead or at the very least he didn't want to sign but it the cap was not a hinderance to it happening. 

No we aren't. That is included in the Sabres current cap number. They have 5.19 million in cap space left including Skinner's 4.44million. 

https://puckpedia.com/team/buffalo-sabres

Sorry, I guess I didn’t make my point very well. You’ve made it better. Yes, they could have easily kept Peterka (or added Marner, or Ehlers, or Gavrikov, or all of them), from a cap perspective, but not without moving out other pieces. They could have traded Quinn or Greenway or Samuelsson. But they weren’t going to do that. I’m not defending Adams as a victim of the cap. There was no way to keep all the RFA’s AND enhance the line-up with additions, unless Adams was willing to move out players more meaningful to him than Clifton and Lafferty. Even now they could add a Peterka level contract or higher, but not without Adams having the courage to trade a more core piece. He continues to be the author of his own demise. 

Edited 8 hours ago by Archie Lee

[Archie Lee]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

Why is it that a stretched-out cap team like Vegas with a lot more talent than Buffalo is always able to stay within the cap and keep winning? As an example, this offseason, they signed Marner to an extended rich contract. Vegas has had to ship out a lot of talent in order to bring in additional talent that allows their SC team to continue to compete for the SC year in and year out. Vegas is a serious franchise while Buffalo is a third-rate franchise that muddles along to be mediocre. 

Because they don’t tie themselves to waiting for players like Quinn and Samuelsson and Power to earn their roster spots and contracts. They trade them for players who are good now. And then they dump those players when someone better is available. 

[PerreaultForever]

35 minutes ago, Darryl Shannon's +/- said:

Who was or is available that they could spend the money on?  On likely a one year deal if you want to extend Tuch?  Would people be happy if we tossed oloffson 4m for one year?

There are teams with almost 20m of cap space right now.   5M is a rounding error for an nfl owner.

Rust was supposed to be on the block. Rumor has it that Pavel Zacha is on the trade block. There are players out there that could fill in for Peterka's loss and give the kids a little more time and ease. 

[JohnC]

31 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

Because they don’t tie themselves to waiting for players like Quinn and Samuelsson and Power to earn their roster spots and contracts. They trade them for players who are good now. And then they dump those players when someone better is available. 

You don’t make progress when you trade away NHL stars such as Eichel and Reinhart to teams where they become instrumental players for SC teams. The problem isn’t the young players you listed. The setbacks that this franchised has endured are self-inflicted.  An accumulation of bad decisions has created a deep hole that we are still climbing out of. 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:

. Even now they could add a Peterka level contract or higher, but not without Adams having the courage to trade a more core piece. He continues to be the author of his own demise. 

The first part of your post was excellent but I have to quibble bit with this one:

I can think of three absolute core players traded in the NHL over the past 5 years (Rantanen, Tkachuk and Eichel, and Adams traded one of them. They just don’t get traded unless GMs are forced.

if your broadening your definition of core, Adams has traded 3 top six forwards in the past 18 months. How many GMs can say that?

He certainly is the author of his demise, but I think this particular concern has kinda faded.

56 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Rust was supposed to be on the block. Rumor has it that Pavel Zacha is on the trade block. There are players out there that could fill in for Peterka's loss and give the kids a little more time and ease. 

Again, I agree with the gist of this post, just questioning whether it’s time to move past a detail:

Kulich and Doan are heading into their 2nd NHL seasons, Benson his third, Power and Quinn their 4th. There should be no rookies on the roster come October. These are “the kids.”

When does the statute of limitations run out on them “needing more time”?

Edited 7 hours ago by dudacek

[Archie Lee]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:
 

If your broadening your definition of core, Adams has traded 3 top six forwards in the past 18 months. How many GMs can say that?

 

Yes. I’m referring to players who Adams would consider core players. And you are right, he traded Eichel, Reinhart, and Peterka. Now, which of those players did he decide to trade with the goal of being better in the moment?  

[Archie Lee]

33 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Again, I agree with the gist of this post, just questioning whether it’s time to move past a detail:

Kulich and Doan are heading into their 2nd NHL seasons, Benson his third, Power and Quinn their 4th. There should be no rookies on the roster come October. These are “the kids.”

When does the statute of limitations run out on them “needing more time”?

This is year two of this argument. That the Sabres are not a group of kids on ELCs who nobody should have expectations for.  You are right. They are not kids. But it remains that they will be one of the 2-4 youngest teams in the league. There is no question that they could all be transplanted to a playoff or contending team and play a meaningful role; in some cases they could play the very role on a contender that is expected of them with the Sabres. But collectively they lack age, leadership, and experience. Maybe this is the year where they reach a critical mass of key players reaching a point where skill overcomes collective youth and from here they are on their way. Maybe. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Archie Lee

[Archie Lee]

58 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You don’t make progress when you trade away NHL stars such as Eichel and Reinhart to teams where they become instrumental players for SC teams. The problem isn’t the young players you listed. The setbacks that this franchised has endured are self-inflicted.  An accumulation of bad decisions has created a deep hole that we are still climbing out of. 

I agree. I like all of those young players also. I’m not suggesting we dump them for futures. It’s time to move a younger player or two (or three) for a good veteran or two who can help us win now. This doesn’t have to be about sacrificing the future. A good GM can manage winning now while not forsaking the years to come. 

[dudacek]

36 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

Yes. I’m referring to players who Adams would consider core players. And you are right, he traded Eichel, Reinhart, and Peterka. Now, which of those players did he decide to trade with the goal of being better in the moment?  

Actually, I was referring to Mittelstadt, Cozens and Peterka.

And he would say all three (I just watched him say it in the case of Peterka) although he’s probably lying to himself in the case of Peterka.

Edited 6 hours ago by dudacek

[Archie Lee]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Actually, I was referring to Mittelstadt, Cozens and Peterka.

And he would say all three (I just watched him say it in the case of Peterka) although he’s probably lying to himself in the case of Peterka.

Fair enough.  Adams has been willing to trade younger core players for similarly aged players, when the team is out of it at the deadline or when the player makes it clear he doesn’t want to be a Sabre. 

Of course, for all I know he is working the phones daily trying to move Quinn and Samuelsson and a prospect or two for more experienced players. 

[Pimlach]

5 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Yes. It is. You're young and rich and you like to party or play golf. Where's it better?

Sure, you can party there but Golf?   You can’t golf there in the summer, it’s ungodly hot and $hitty, most of the players are probably elsewhere.  The hockey season is fall, winter, spring - no time for golf.  

Edited 5 hours ago by Pimlach

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

The first part of your post was excellent but I have to quibble bit with this one:

I can think of three absolute core players traded in the NHL over the past 5 years (Rantanen, Tkachuk and Eichel, and Adams traded one of them. They just don’t get traded unless GMs are forced.

if your broadening your definition of core, Adams has traded 3 top six forwards in the past 18 months. How many GMs can say that?

He certainly is the author of his demise, but I think this particular concern has kinda faded.

Again, I agree with the gist of this post, just questioning whether it’s time to move past a detail:

Kulich and Doan are heading into their 2nd NHL seasons, Benson his third, Power and Quinn their 4th. There should be no rookies on the roster come October. These are “the kids.”

When does the statute of limitations run out on them “needing more time”?

Time is up for Quinn. imo he was rewarded for failure with the deal they gave him. So yes, there's an expectation, but I do not have the faith Adams has in him.

Benson is 20 years old. He is a kid and he should not be top 6. 

We are pushing Kulich too fast and too much and I expect a sophomore slump scenario. Hope that's wrong. 

Power should start to show signs of getting it and maybe Kesselring helps further that but idk as we have not been developing him properly. Sabres are just "get in the deep end and swim kid" and maybe eventually he's good enough to get it on his own but have to see it to know. 

Doan I am not commenting on since I just haven't seen him play as I've said before. 

A veteran top 6 forward allows Benson to play on the third line where he belongs this year.

[thewookie1]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Rust was supposed to be on the block. Rumor has it that Pavel Zacha is on the trade block. There are players out there that could fill in for Peterka's loss and give the kids a little more time and ease. 

The problem is there are about 3 teams actually selling and the rest are in either holding or buy stances.

Could we beat an offer for Rust or Rakell, sure; but I sure as hell wouldn't bother because they'll be looking for our unprotected 1st or a protected 1st and Helenius.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

The problem is there are about 3 teams actually selling and the rest are in either holding or buy stances.

Could we beat an offer for Rust or Rakell, sure; but I sure as hell wouldn't bother because they'll be looking for our unprotected 1st or a protected 1st and Helenius.

idk, we never know. I just don't see the urgency or the true commitment to trying to win now. Doing everything possible. I see a hole in the line up.

I see these things as all potential recipes for disaster:

1) Reliance on young scoring players emerging rather than going with proven vets.

2) Hope the goaltending rebounds.

3) Hope the injury prone roster stays healthy.

4) Hope that Power develops given a better partner to play with. 

I see all of these as potential flaws.

Now the die hard optimist might say:

1)Quinn will rebound and emerge. Benson and Kulich will become solid NHLers.

2)UPL will rebound and Lyon will give us a solid reliable tandem

3)Norris, Zucker, Greenway etc. will actually stay relatively healthy and provide solid veteran play

4)Power and Kesselring will click and arguably become a top pairing giving us a solid D for the first time in years.

Possible, but I'd say improbable. 

Could be some mix of both scenarios but I guess I see the probability of the bad much more than the good. I just don't feel optimistic about this line up.