Roster Construction Ideas & Workshopping

[Weave]

6 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

Ymmv but this would be terrifyingly risky for me. Sacrificing Tuch so we could preserve “most” of what we had but sans our probably actual best forward, when our window is now, seems really dicey 

we should be looking to make the net output of the roster for next year *at least* as apt as this year’s so if we lose our best/one of our best forwards the current roster aptitude should be of paramount concern 

you don’t want to make moves that will handcuff you in the future, but you certainly don’t want to sacrifice anything from the current to prioritize that future, either. The best tact for ensuring the future we want indeed arises lies in continuing to mount strong years in the now for said future to be solidly built upon. Up to and including culture, expectation, and team standard. Our identity as Winners, that we took so painstakingly long to establish, is the priority 

Nothing would say “we aren’t serious about winning the Stanley Cup” quite like running the roster back as is minus Tuch.

The reality is, we were behind Montreal, Carolina, Vegas at least.  And probably Colorado as well.  Add in a healthy Florida.

I am OK with the idea of moving on from Tuch, but it has to include an injection of outside talent.  Relying on player development to close the gap is relying on hope.  And hope ain’t a stretegery.

[Nacho Libre]

Just now, Weave said:

Nothing would say “we aren’t serious about winning the Stanley Cup” quite like running the roster back as is minus Tuch.

The reality is, we were behind Montreal, Carolina, Vegas at least.  And probably Colorado as well.  Add in a healthy Florida.

I am OK with the idea of moving on from Tuch, but it has to include an injection of outside talent.  Relying on player development to close the gap is relying on hope.  And hope ain’t a stretegery.

Agree. I don't really agree with the logic of “it’s ok to run it back this time cause this time we are better.” Yes, better than in 2023 when we ran it back, but the goal and expectations have now changed. Sure, we can probably now reach the 2023 expectation by doing nothing, we could probably make the playoffs next year (tho not guaranteed) doing nothing.

But the relative misfire on strategy would be the same. If the goal now is true contender, the run back could easily have us fall short, of that goal. Unless we are satisfied now with merely making it, if we want improvement we should logically be looking to improve the roster. Counting on merely internal improvement to do that I think is a mistake, attempting to improve while notably *weakening* the roster is I think a fool’s errand 

We made the second round. I think that speaks for itself. The rest is rorschach

[Doohickie]

28 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

Agree. I don't really agree with the logic of “it’s ok to run it back this time cause this time we are better.”

Meh.  A full season of Kulich, Östlund and Helenius could make us much better.  We rarely had all them them playing at the same time.  I think they're all top six talent.

[thewookie1]

My biggest issue comes down to, how do you improve the team without hurting the team’s connection. You don’t want to make too many changes but you do want to better the team.

[Nacho Libre]

Just now, Doohickie said:

Meh.  A full season of Kulich, Östlund and Helenius could make us much better.  We rarely had all them them playing at the same time.  I think they're all top six talent.

I don’t see any one of them contributing close to what Tuch did 

Just now, thewookie1 said:

My biggest issue comes down to, how do you improve the team without hurting the team’s connection. You don’t want to make too many changes but you do want to better the team.

Prospects and picks before current talent 

[Doohickie]

Just now, Nacho Libre said:

I don’t see any one of them contributing close to what Tuch did 

I do.

[Nacho Libre]

Would be kinda funny if once finally reaching the point of not needing to rely on kids for too much we pencil them in to replace our BEST forward by committee 

Just now, Doohickie said:

I do.

Ya it will probably take years for us to break the cycle of the phoney logic 

[Doohickie]

Just now, Nacho Libre said:

Would be kinda funny if once finally reaching the point of not needing to rely on kids for too much we pencil them in to replace our BEST forward by committee 

Ya it will probably take years for us to break the cycle of the phoney logic 

I guess we'll see in the fall who's right.

[Nacho Libre]

Just now, Doohickie said:

I guess we'll see in the fall who's right.

No, we’ll see at the end of the season. Which one of the 3 do you have with the ~70 points? 

2 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I do.

 

[Doohickie]

Just now, Nacho Libre said:

Which one of the 3 do you have with the ~70 points? 

Most of it will come from a full season of Helenius.

[PerreaultForever]

43 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Most of it will come from a full season of Helenius.

I partially agree but that might be a bit lofty. Eventually I see him as a good top 6 and maybe even a 1C but we've seen before how assembling these rookie lines can give you issues. It's a gamble to throw him into that role right now. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

41 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

I don’t see any one of them contributing close to what Tuch did 

Prospects and picks before current talent 

Did you see Doan contributing nearly as much as Tuch did in his first full NHL season?  Did you see Benson dominating in the playoffs while Tuch disappeared when we needed him most? 

GM’s have to project young players into the lineup to remain cap compliant.  
 

I think we have seen enough of Kulich, Östlund and even Helenius to believe they can be solid to high end contributors next fall.  Full seasons from these three should easily replace any lost offense from Tuch.  
 

 

 

 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Nacho Libre said:

Ymmv but this would be terrifyingly risky for me. Sacrificing Tuch so we could preserve “most” of what we had but sans our probably actual best forward, when our window is now, seems really dicey 

we should be looking to make the net output of the roster for next year *at least* as apt as this year’s so if we lose our best/one of our best forwards the current roster aptitude should be of paramount concern 

you don’t want to make moves that will handcuff you in the future, but you certainly don’t want to sacrifice anything from the current to prioritize that future, either. The best tact for ensuring the future we want indeed arises lies in continuing to mount strong years in the now for said future to be solidly built upon. Up to and including culture, expectation, and team standard. Our identity as Winners, that we took so painstakingly long to establish, is the priority 

We don’t have to sign Tuch, but replacing him with players we can say to a near certainly are going to be weaker than him next year would be a mistake in my view 

We waited a long time for the young players actually needing to FORCE their way onto the roster, I’m not looking to get back into the business of granting spots

There is something else GMs of playoff teams sometimes do: they keep their powder dry for the deadline when they see what they actually have.

Can Kulich and/or Quinn adequately replace Tuch?

Can Östlund and/or Helenius make Norris and/or McLeod redundant?

What are we going to get from Benson and Doan and Krebs and Lukkonen next year? Continued improvement or regression? How about Kesselring?

I want the Sabres to re-sign Alex Tuch. I think this team is objectively worse on paper without him. But are they “miss the playoffs worse?”

I’m not sure the best course if he walks is immediately countering with a big swing.

Are you better off mitigating a Tuch loss acquiring a Jake Debrusk, or by giving a Jiri Kulich an opportunity to grow into the role?

Is it too risky to try Kulich first, then shop around for an upgrade if you need it?

Remember the cap squeeze we’re in only exists for this summer.

Not many Plan Bs are going to be Robert Thomas players on Robert Thomas contracts. Your “strike while the iron is hot” mindset is well-earned, but I can’t help but think it comes with an opportunity cost.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

Meh.  A full season of Kulich, Östlund and Helenius could make us much better.  We rarely had all them them playing at the same time.  I think they're all top six talent.

“Could”.  It’s hope because it is uncharted territory.  And to paraphrase Jason Zucker’s warning.  It ain’t a plan.

 

There be dragons.

Edited June 9 by Weave

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Weave said:

“Could”.  It’s hope because it is uncharted territory.  And to paraphrase Jason Zucker’s warning.  It ain’t a plan.

 

There be dragons.

I don’t think we can count on the three young forwards to be top liners either, but I’m not going to dismiss the chance each will be at least as good as they have already shown as a fools hope.

The Sabres traded away a first line winger last summer for a bucket of hope and improved 30 points on the back of youngsters like Benson, Byram, Krebs, Luukkonen and Samuelsson all getting better.

Despite what 2024 showed, young players usually do.

Dragons indeed.

Edited June 9 by dudacek

[Doohickie]

27 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I partially agree but that might be a bit lofty. Eventually I see him as a good top 6 and maybe even a 1C but we've seen before how assembling these rookie lines can give you issues. It's a gamble to throw him into that role right now. 

I trust that Lindy will find the right mix and wouldn't be surprised to find them sprinkled throughout the lineup.

[Doohickie]

22 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

GM’s have to project young players into the lineup to remain cap compliant.  

and this why Tuch is likely playing somewhere else next season.

I think you can take the 3 young Cs, Benson and Doan and project that probably 4 of them will be major contributors at less money than Tuch combined.... for now.

[Doohickie]

12 minutes ago, Weave said:

“Could”.  It’s hope because it is uncharted territory.  And to paraphrase Jason Zucker’s warning.  It ain’t a plan.

 

There be dragons.

Then again, Tuch "could" be losing his step as we speak.  There are no magic formulas or sure things.  The best you can get is "could".

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Then again, Tuch "could" be losing his step as we speak.  There are no magic formulas or sure things.  The best you can get is "could".

“Should” is a plan.  As in, with this roster configuration we should be better.  I don’t think you can reasonably use “should” if Tuchs replacement is a combo of 3 kids.

Again, I am OK with Tuch moving on given the circumstances, provided someone from the outside is brought in to fill the gap.

Edited June 10 by Weave

[Nacho Libre]

36 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Did you see Doan contributing nearly as much as Tuch did in his first full NHL season?  Did you see Benson dominating in the playoffs while Tuch disappeared when we needed him most? 

GM’s have to project young players into the lineup to remain cap compliant.  
 

I think we have seen enough of Kulich, Östlund and even Helenius to believe they can be solid to high end contributors next fall.  Full seasons from these three should easily replace any lost offense from Tuch.  
 

 

 

 

Doan did nothing of the sort*. He had 27% less points and was a -4 to Tuch’s +24

Tuch was better than Benson in the first round. What’s the argument here? We needed both just to win one round. We don’t need both to achieve far MORE than last year? 

* (particularly because they infrequently resemble reality) I’m gonna try my best to stay out of these conversations because all anyone wants to do is cherish what we have, regardless of of the evidence to the contrary re: that ever working 

Edited June 10 by Nacho Libre

[Scottysabres]

Just now, Weave said:

“Should” is a plan.

Again, I am OK with Tuch moving on given the circumstances, provided someone from the outside is brought in to fill the gap.

I’m guessing Kyrou given Jarmo and Steen have talked in the past on Paryako and Thomas.

[Nacho Libre]

13 minutes ago, Weave said:

“Should” is a plan.  As in, with this roster configuration we should be better.  I don’t think you can reasonably use “should” if Tuchs replacement is a combo of 3 kids.

Again, I am OK with Tuch moving on given the circumstances, provided someone from the outside is brought in to fill the gap.

People are furrowing their brows to come up with the best way to have their cake and eat it too: “ahead of schedule years” are the ideal. Pushing our chips in for a play at the cup when we are probably never going to win one but we finally have a REAL chance to is too scary

the defence mechanism is keeping the team young and young asset deep enough that we can succeed without it being the true expectation 

The essence is essentially ea sports nhl, Prospect lists and winning trades: The team is more so viewed as a collectible than an avenue to experiencing winning, maybe a generational thing. Counting prospects and winning the big one being possible in theory is more important than actively constructing with the goal of winning. I get it, it’s really easy to understand the psyche, it’s just not for me 

Edited June 10 by Nacho Libre

[dudacek]

46 minutes ago, Weave said:

 

Again, I am OK with Tuch moving on given the circumstances, provided someone from the outside is brought in to fill the gap.

So, to question upthread:

Are you better off mitigating a Tuch loss acquiring a Jake Debrusk, or by giving a Jiri Kulich an opportunity to grow into the role?

count you in the Debrusk camp?

Im using Debrusk as shorthand for any proven veteran winger that could play on a 2nd line and reasonably be acquired.

Edited June 10 by dudacek

[thewookie1]

39 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

People are furrowing their brows to come up with the best way to have their cake and eat it too: “ahead of schedule years” are the ideal. Pushing our chips in for a play at the cup when we are probably never going to win one but we finally have a REAL chance to is too scary

the defence mechanism is keeping the team young and young asset deep enough that we can succeed without it being the true expectation 

The essence is essentially ea sports nhl, Prospect lists and winning trades: The team is more so viewed as a collectible than an avenue to experiencing winning, maybe a generational thing. Counting prospects and winning the big one being possible in theory is more important than actively constructing with the goal of winning. I get it, it’s really easy to understand the psyche, it’s just not for me 

I just don’t see much of an option based on this season’s cap crunch. It wouldn’t be smart to make a plethora of moves since we actually have had some success and you require a large amount of carryover to help assure it follows through. 
 

If Thomas isn’t available, there isn’t much to look at which makes any logical sense. Hischier’s would require Östlund to go back, cap space and we wouldn’t even be guaranteed we could get him under contract based on his supposed ask being around 12mil per. 
 

Is there a sure fire upgrade we can get safely under the cap for 2/3 seasons for some combo of our 1st, Östlund, Mrtka, Kulich among a few other lesser pieces? 

Edited June 10 by thewookie1

[Nacho Libre]

2 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

I just don’t see much of an option based on this season’s cap crunch. It wouldn’t be smart to make a plethora of moves since we actually have had some success and you require a large amount of carryover to help assure it follows through. 
 

If Thomas isn’t available, there isn’t much to look at which makes any logical sense. Hischier’s would require Östlund to go back, cap space and we wouldn’t even be guaranteed we could get him under contract based on his supposed ask being around 12mil per. 
 

 

Agree, I haven’t advocated for moving anyone off the main roster aside from Östlund and even he only played 60 (and I really like Östlund.) My thoughts more so go to keeping what we have intact and adding on the fringes, or adding if we can’t keep Tuch 

I don’t like the idea of losing Tuch or the goaltending and just saying “next man up”.