Alex Tuch contract talks

[LGR4GM]

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

[Flashsabre]

21 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Jacob Bryson😝😁

[Taro T]

59 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

And why presume, if they don't pay Tuch, that they'll pay ANYBODY the money that he would've been getting?

Wouldn't have minded the Peterka trade as much had they been sitting at $1MM in cap space now rather than $5.1MM.

Trading Tuch (because he'll be the best player in the trade going either way) or letting him walk is the proverbial "canary in the coal mine."  Still have time to sign him; but have little faith that Adams will be able to adjust capably to the Kaprisov signing and what it implies for new contracts moving forward.

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Who said he's not getting paid?

[mjd1001]

14 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

I keep on going back and forth whether or not I want him extended at a high dollar. It seems like each day I wake up. I'm thinking the other side of things. 

But to answer your question directly... You have him this year. Is he going to be a consistent 65 point winger if you sign him to a big deal the year after that, and the year after that, and the year after that? As he approaches his mid-thirties? 

The more direct answer is, with the money that you would not pay him, you hope that one of your up-and-coming youngsters fills that role and you pay them, or you go out on the free agent or trademark it and pay money that you have available. 

If they announce they signed him to an 8-Year extension at $75 million tomorrow, I won't be too upset. 

On the other hand, if they decide to let him play the year out and see how things go, I'm not going to be upset about that either. I think losing him next year would be a tiny step back compared to what you could do with that $8 to $10 million... And that is not the biggest problem this team has starting next year.

[JustOneParade]

14 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Exactly. Who? And for how much? Assets(via trade) and/or $$ ( via FA).

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, JustOneParade said:

Exactly. Who? And for how much? Assets(via trade) and/or $$ ( via FA).

Don't know, but now you have to find and get said player in a world where everyone had cap space. 

[French Collection]

Just now, JustOneParade said:

Exactly. Who? And for how much? Assets(via trade) and/or $$ ( via FA).

Factor in the palm trees and tax rates to attract new guys. He’s already here and wants to be here.

I agree that he will not be a great player in 5+ years but they should keep him because their two best players are locked in at lower rates for a long time. The over payment can be absorbed. Heck, Tuch might even transform his game to become a bottom six PK and defensively responsible checker in his mid thirties just to remain a contributing Sabre.

[JP51]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Don't know, but now you have to find and get said player in a world where everyone had cap space. 

There is another piece to this with Tuch on top of exactly what you said... its the human piece... this is the one guy who wants to be here more than anything, home town, live and die etc... he was your real return for giving up Eichel...  you have failed for 14 years, your core players are less than content with golfing every April and you have an effective leader, scorer and pretty good two way hockey player that you let walk.... that to me would be a final straw concern for some of these players... like how can you not pay this guy... how committed are you to winning.... dont exetend him, miss the playoffs again... and I can pretty much promise you some folks are gonna want to be traded... 

[mjd1001]

34 minutes ago, JP51 said:

There is another piece to this with Tuch on top of exactly what you said... its the human piece... this is the one guy who wants to be here more than anything, home town, live and die etc... he was your real return for giving up Eichel...  you have failed for 14 years, your core players are less than content with golfing every April and you have an effective leader, scorer and pretty good two way hockey player that you let walk.... that to me would be a final straw concern for some of these players... like how can you not pay this guy... how committed are you to winning.... dont exetend him, miss the playoffs again... and I can pretty much promise you some folks are gonna want to be traded... 

I am not arguing to not extend him. I'm on the fence and would be okay with either..... If they extend him or if they don't right now.

But you say how do you not extend him? Simple. You have him this year. So if you miss the playoffs this year it will be with him on the roster. 

If you missed the playoffs this year with him on the roster, maybe this organization will be looking at sweeping changes, and having an aging guy getting likely paid $10 million per year who is in his thirties with eight more years on his deal would not be the way to go? 

If you make the playoffs and things are looking up, then you offer him market rate what he's worth. If he wants to be here, he's from the area, and you're giving him what anyone else would give him on a rising team that just made the playoffs, I don't think he would  turn his back on that.

Eichel, Reinhart, and Ulmark are frequently brought up as examples for players. This team let get away in the past because they were cheap and didn't want to extend them. All of those players were on the upside of their career, none of them would be starting a new contract in their early thirties... Not anywhere close to it. 

Again, if they extend him I won't be upset terribly. It's just that.. they have him this year. I don't see an urgency to do it at any cost.

[JP51]

1 hour ago, mjd1001 said:

I am not arguing to not extend him. I'm on the fence and would be okay with either..... If they extend him or if they don't right now.

But you say how do you not extend him? Simple. You have him this year. So if you miss the playoffs this year it will be with him on the roster. 

If you missed the playoffs this year with him on the roster, maybe this organization will be looking at sweeping changes, and having an aging guy getting likely paid $10 million per year who is in his thirties with eight more years on his deal would not be the way to go? 

If you make the playoffs and things are looking up, then you offer him market rate what he's worth. If he wants to be here, he's from the area, and you're giving him what anyone else would give him on a rising team that just made the playoffs, I don't think he would  turn his back on that.

Eichel, Reinhart, and Ulmark are frequently brought up as examples for players. This team let get away in the past because they were cheap and didn't want to extend them. All of those players were on the upside of their career, none of them would be starting a new contract in their early thirties... Not anywhere close to it. 

Again, if they extend him I won't be upset terribly. It's just that.. they have him this year. I don't see an urgency to do it at any cost.

So I am not actually going to disagree here because of something that you alluded too... the only reason I see not to extend him is if those sweeping changes involve new GM, POHO and a tear down of the team... like literally a complete tear down... Dahlin Thompson Power etc...  like you accept you are going to trade those guys for assets and start all over again... the philosophy "you lost consistently with them, you certainly can lose without them:...."   Not being a proponent of the complete tear down (definitely am a proponent of blow up the FO) I do not want to see this happen...   we have already lost one generational player via trade and one Bona fide Superstar in Reinhardt cause we didnt extend him... so to me if you believe this core has any value you have go to extend him... if not and you wanna see em all outta here then... I get where you are at.... 

[EM88]

I hope the team does not rush into signing him to a large contract.  As others have correctly said, he will be here this year with or without an extension.

Also, the charts and stats are out there regarding players, especially forwards, aging and their production. Unless you are an elite player, and even when you are, your production curve and overall 2-way play plateaus and peaks between the ages of 23-28.  After that in almost all cases you are in decline.  In your late 20's that decline may or may not be all that evident but after age 30, it does become evident in most cases.

Unless a player is elite, someone like McDavid, Pastrnak, McKinnon, Crosby, or Ovechkin, I do not want them on my team with any more than 2 years remaining on their contract at age 32 or later, unless it is a very team-friendly deal.  If a team is in the middle of cup runs like Florida, it may make more sense, however they are still likely to pay for it a couple years down the road. Buffalo is not currently looking like they are contending for the Cup.

I respect those who post that they want an extension done for Tuch, and I know many fans have an emotional connection to him.  I just personally would rather have the Sabres let things take their time if they are not getting a deal that fits the team short and medium term.

[sabremike]

The myopic nonsense in this thread is simply off the charts. 

[sabremike]

1 hour ago, EM88 said:

I hope the team does not rush into signing him to a large contract.  As others have correctly said, he will be here this year with or without an extension.

Also, the charts and stats are out there regarding players, especially forwards, aging and their production. Unless you are an elite player, and even when you are, your production curve and overall 2-way play plateaus and peaks between the ages of 23-28.  After that in almost all cases you are in decline.  In your late 20's that decline may or may not be all that evident but after age 30, it does become evident in most cases.

Unless a player is elite, someone like McDavid, Pastrnak, McKinnon, Crosby, or Ovechkin, I do not want them on my team with any more than 2 years remaining on their contract at age 32 or later, unless it is a very team-friendly deal.  If a team is in the middle of cup runs like Florida, it may make more sense, however they are still likely to pay for it a couple years down the road. Buffalo is not currently looking like they are contending for the Cup.

I respect those who post that they want an extension done for Tuch, and I know many fans have an emotional connection to him.  I just personally would rather have the Sabres let things take their time if they are not getting a deal that fits the team short and medium term.

Playing hardball when virtually no players with options want to come here and you have as bad a rep as an organization as any in the history of pro sports is certainly a choice.

[EM88]

3 hours ago, sabremike said:

Playing hardball when virtually no players with options want to come here and you have as bad a rep as an organization as any in the history of pro sports is certainly a choice.

Plenty of teams across all leagues have a bad rep and manage to turn it around eventually.  I think it was 16 out of 16 teams last year in the NHL that made the playoffs without Alex Tuch on their Roster.  He is nice to have, but signing him now does not make or break the organization.

[PerreaultForever]

The way he played tonight against Pittsburgh I'm down to 6 million tops 🙂

[Pimlach]

15 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

I keep on going back and forth whether or not I want him extended at a high dollar. It seems like each day I wake up. I'm thinking the other side of things. 

But to answer your question directly... You have him this year. Is he going to be a consistent 65 point winger if you sign him to a big deal the year after that, and the year after that, and the year after that? As he approaches his mid-thirties? 

The more direct answer is, with the money that you would not pay him, you hope that one of your up-and-coming youngsters fills that role and you pay them, or you go out on the free agent or trademark it and pay money that you have available. 

If they announce they signed him to an 8-Year extension at $75 million tomorrow, I won't be too upset. 

On the other hand, if they decide to let him play the year out and see how things go, I'm not going to be upset about that either. I think losing him next year would be a tiny step back compared to what you could do with that $8 to $10 million... And that is not the biggest problem this team has starting next year.

This thinking is why the team stinks every year.   Up and coming youngsters like Samuelsson, Power, and Cozens get paid but not proven players like Reinhart and Tuch.  
 

They can forget about signing top end free agents.  

Edited yesterday at 04:01 AM by Pimlach

[JP51]

20 hours ago, sabremike said:

Playing hardball when virtually no players with options want to come here and you have as bad a rep as an organization as any in the history of pro sports is certainly a choice.

especially when he is not even asking for the bag...  heck, you pay Jordan Greenway 4mm for a half a season... 

[dudacek]

On 9/30/2025 at 3:44 PM, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Jeff Skinner might be available.

All joking aside, Terry Pegula gave Skinner 8x$9M coming off a 63-point season. That was 11% of the cap at the time.

You guys don’t need me to do the math of 11% of a $104M cap.

Interesting perspective there.

[K-9]

On 10/1/2025 at 12:01 PM, mjd1001 said:

… Eichel, Reinhart, and Ulmark are frequently brought up as examples for players. This team let get away in the past because they were cheap and didn't want to extend them. All of those players were on the upside of their career, none of them would be starting a new contract in their early thirties... Not anywhere close to it. …

Agree about Reinhart, who would have signed an extension had he been offered one instead of the bridge deal Botterill gave him. But Eichel was extended for 8x80 and they had a deal in place for Ullmark. 

[JP51]

16 hours ago, K-9 said:

Agree about Reinhart, who would have signed an extension had he been offered one instead of the bridge deal Botterill gave him. But Eichel was extended for 8x80 and they had a deal in place for Ullmark. 

Mentioning Ullmark, I wonder what he would have become if he stayed instead of going to a very solid Bruins team... I am guessing he wouldnt win a Vezina... 

[DarthEbriate]

11 minutes ago, JP51 said:

Mentioning Ullmark, I wonder what he would have become if he stayed instead of going to a very solid Bruins team... I am guessing he wouldnt win a Vezina... 

Vezina? Unlikely.

But here are Ullmark’s career save percentages throwing out the high of that Vezina year: .913, .917, .935, .905, .915, .917, .917, .915, .905.

Most of those numbers are with the Sabres defense in front of him, Housley, Krueger, and Granato teams… stellar defensive lineups. There might not be a more consistent above-average but-not-star goalie in the league.  

Ullmark would’ve been fine.

With him as #1 starter, the Sabres would have had a positive goal differential last season. They’d have definitely ended the drought in 22-23. 

[jad1]

 

On 10/1/2025 at 5:00 PM, EM88 said:

I hope the team does not rush into signing him to a large contract.  As others have correctly said, he will be here this year with or without an extension.

Also, the charts and stats are out there regarding players, especially forwards, aging and their production. Unless you are an elite player, and even when you are, your production curve and overall 2-way play plateaus and peaks between the ages of 23-28.  After that in almost all cases you are in decline.  In your late 20's that decline may or may not be all that evident but after age 30, it does become evident in most cases.

Unless a player is elite, someone like McDavid, Pastrnak, McKinnon, Crosby, or Ovechkin, I do not want them on my team with any more than 2 years remaining on their contract at age 32 or later, unless it is a very team-friendly deal.  If a team is in the middle of cup runs like Florida, it may make more sense, however they are still likely to pay for it a couple years down the road. Buffalo is not currently looking like they are contending for the Cup.

I respect those who post that they want an extension done for Tuch, and I know many fans have an emotional connection to him.  I just personally would rather have the Sabres let things take their time if they are not getting a deal that fits the team short and medium term.

There are plenty of players who have remained productive well into their 30s who are not "top-level" stars.

Hell, Jason Zucker scored 53 points last season at age 33 last season.  Brad Marchand contibuted to the Panthers Cup last season at 37, which motivated them to give him a fugazi 6 year extension.

This isn't an emotional connection. Tuch IS the team's best two way player.  He led the team in blocked shots last year while posting almost 40 goals.  He's a good bet to bring value to the team throughout the life of a new contract.  When his scoring fades, he still has the defensive game and leadership to remain a contributor. 

And with Thompson's contract, the Sabres could lock up their two best forwards until 2030 for  around $18M. That's less than what they're playing their top two defensemen.

 Seeing that there is a zero chance of this organization signing a high-end foward with their unused cap space, inking Tuch to an extension is a no-brainer.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by jad1

[Weave]

7 minutes ago, jad1 said:

 

There are plenty of players who have remained productive well into their 30s who are not "top-level" stars.

Hell, Jason Zucker scored 53 points last season at age 33 last season.  Brad Marchand contibuted to the Panthers Cup last season at 37, which motivated them to give him a fugazi 6 year extension.

This isn't an emotional connection. Tuch IS the team's best two way player.  He led the team in blocked shots last year while posting almost 40 goals.  He's a good bet to bring value to the team throughout the life of a new contract.  When his scoring fades, he still has the defensive game and leadership to remain a contributor. 

And with Thompson's contract, the Sabres could lock up their two best forwards until 2030 for  around $18M. That's less than what they're playing their top two defensemen.

 Seeing that there is a zero chance of this organization signing a high-end foward with their unused cap space, inking Tuch to an extension is a no-brainer.

 

How long Tuch can be a good contributor is going to depend on how long his skating holds on.  If he can keep his legs, he’ll be able to contribute in some form well into his 30s.