Roster Construction Ideas & Workshopping

[dudacek]

42 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 

This is the Vegas way.

Go get the best players available, pay the price even if it’s Nick Suzuki and you’ll be fine: winning will beget winning.

[Nacho Libre]

Trading for Thomas if it’s just costing futures is a no-brainer yes but at the same time a non-necessity. Probably non-likely. But if Tuch is out the door it changes the equation, I think we need to add someone of significance 

[Nacho Libre]

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

This is the Vegas way.

Go get the best players available, pay the price even if it’s Nick Suzuki and you’ll be fine: winning will beget winning.

The older I get the more I do think winning begets winning.

One of the most convincing arguments I’ve seen you make is one which had such a high degree of difficulty and it was opposition to the idea that “making the playoffs isn’t hard because half the league makes it”. Long story short you pointed out how it’s always the same teams in there and the ones who “drop out” are the rub and it’s a small portion

doesn’t it often feel like if you are good you’re good and if you are bad you’re bad? Philly always has bad goaltending? Etc etc? (Frankly the sabres were always “good” and had good goaltending. Of course as usual we went against trend and flipped it. What the heck did we do to anger the gods? Trading Miller?)

Speaking of Boston, Boston is always right there. Maybe winning does beget winning: or maybe it’s *at least* as predictive as prospect ceilings 

I mean, we know losing begets losing. First hand. The inverse must be true. 

Edited June 10 by Nacho Libre

[Weave]

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

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.

Assuming it isn’t Debrusk specifically? Yeah.  Kulich needs to beat out a (insert proven top 6 player here), or be part of the acquisition cost. Its not like we don’t have a couple more 1st contract bullets in the chamber.

[...]

I don't understand how Krebs makes it into these conversations about the futute roster. Relying on Östlund, Helenius, and Kulich makes more sense than keeping him.

[dudacek]

2 hours 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.” 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

I agree with the principle of this.

I’d absolutely trade any of Helenius/Östlund/Kulich in a package for Robert Thomas, because Thomas is a helluva player on a helluva contract.

I also see a universe where signing Tuch to a $10.5M deal makes us worse because it gets in the way of moves that actually could make us better.

I also believe that acquiring “a veteran” to fill Tuch’s spot could also make us worse because there is every chance  that veteran won’t be significantly better than any of those three youngsters as early as this year. Coupled with the opportunity cost of said veterans contract and it’s a mistake.

Most players come with some degree of risk. How good is Kulich? How good is Jake Debrusk? 

There is such a thing as having too many young players. I’m not sure that applies to the 2026/27 Sabres like it has in the past, not after this season.

It’s more about the player himself than his age.

Im not convinced the Sabres can acquire a player as good as Tuch. If they can they should. If they can’t Im not bringing in a Debrusk before seeing whether or not Kulich can do the job.

[#freejame]

I think we need a 1C, so neither Tuch nor DeBrusk are the answer 

[thewookie1]

Just now, dudacek said:

I agree with the principle of this.

I’d absolutely trade any of Helenius/Östlund/Kulich in a package for Robert Thomas, because Thomas is a helluva player on a helluva contract.

I also see a universe where signing Tuch to a $10.5M deal makes us worse because it gets in the way of moves that actually could make us better.

I also believe that acquiring “a veteran” to fill Tuch’s spot could also make us worse because there is every chance  that veteran won’t be significantly better than any of those three youngsters as early as this year. Coupled with the opportunity cost of said veterans contract and it’s a mistake.

Most players come with some degree of risk. How good is Kulich? How good is Jake Debrusk? 

There is such a thing as having too many young players. I’m not sure that applies to the 2026/27 Sabres like it has in the past, not after this season.

It’s more about the player himself than his age.

Im not convinced the Sabres can acquire a player as good as Tuch. If they can they should. If they can’t Im not bringing in a Debrusk before seeing whether or not Kulich can do the job.

This aside from Helenius, his golden goal and performance in both the AHL and NHL playoffs gives me clutch vibes. That is something that is difficult to acquire and can’t be taught. 
 

Frankly I don’t look to highly on Debrusk, he’s softish and apparently has a laziness issue according to Canucks fans. Plus he has some batshit insane stalker in Boston.

[dudacek]

33 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

The older I get the more I do think winning begets winning.

One of the most convincing arguments I’ve seen you make is one which had such a high degree of difficulty and it was opposition to the idea that “making the playoffs isn’t hard because half the league makes it”. Long story short you pointed out how it’s always the same teams in there and the ones who “drop out” are the rub and it’s a small portion

doesn’t it often feel like if you are good you’re good and if you are bad you’re bad? Philly always has bad goaltending? Etc etc? (Frankly the sabres were always “good” and had good goaltending. Of course as usual we went against trend and flipped it. What the heck did we do to anger the gods? Trading Miller?)

Speaking of Boston, Boston is always right there. Maybe winning does beget winning: or maybe it’s *at least* as predictive as prospect ceilings 

I mean, we know losing begets losing. First hand. The inverse must be true. 

One of the most compelling arguments for improving this roster is cementing the Sabres as a franchise that has become a regular playoff team, instead of a team that just flashed. So they can take advantage of this.

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

This aside from Helenius, his golden goal and performance in both the AHL and NHL playoffs gives me clutch vibes. That is something that is difficult to acquire and can’t be taught. 
 

Frankly I don’t look to highly on Debrusk, he’s softish and apparently has a laziness issue according to Canucks fans. Plus he has some batshit insane stalker in Boston.

I have no interest in Debrusk whatsoever, or any other veteran scoring winger who could score 30 or 15 depending on how the wind blows.

To me, I’d rather give that role to Kulich or Helenius.

I also push back hard on the idea this is “gifting” a kid a top 6 spot.

If Tuch goes, Tage, Norris, Quinn, McLeod, Zucker, Doan and Benson are 7 names already in front of them. Krebs as well, no matter how hard some want that not to be true.

Kulich, Östlund and Helenius are also battling each other for ice time.

Then there’s also Danforth, Carrick, Greenway, Kozak and possibly Malenstyn In the mix.

The Sabres have a lot of bodies. Nobody will be gifted anything.

[Nacho Libre]

15 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Kulich, Östlund and Helenius are also battling each other for ice time.

Then there’s also Danforth, Carrick, Greenway, Kozak and possibly Malenstyn In the mix.

The Sabres have a lot of bodies. Nobody will be gifted anything.

Some may even have to, dare I say it, hit the floor 

[Doohickie]

12 hours ago, Weave said:

provided someone from the outside is brought in to fill the gap.

But how do you fill that gap and not break the budget?  The whole reason Tuch is imminently leaving is budget.  Any team who has a player with that kind of production at a budget price doesn't want to move him.

I think the Sabres are deep enough at forward that between the kids and the younger vets you can cover Tuch's point production as well as his other duties like PK by committee.

Edited June 10 by Doohickie

[The Jokeman]

11 hours ago, dudacek said:

I have no interest in Debrusk whatsoever, or any other veteran scoring winger who could score 30 or 15 depending on how the wind blows.

To me, I’d rather give that role to Kulich or Helenius.

I also push back hard on the idea this is “gifting” a kid a top 6 spot.

If Tuch goes, Tage, Norris, Quinn, McLeod, Zucker, Doan and Benson are 7 names already in front of them. Krebs as well, no matter how hard some want that not to be true.

Kulich, Östlund and Helenius are also battling each other for ice time.

Then there’s also Danforth, Carrick, Greenway, Kozak and possibly Malenstyn In the mix.

The Sabres have a lot of bodies. Nobody will be gifted anything.

The problem is we need another top end guy if we lose Tuch, Greenway is clearly being over paid so I'd move him for a draft pick just get the $4m in cap space back. Norris is a good 2C but his inability to be healthy is maddening, it reminds me of the Tim Connolly situation. I might move him in a package for 25-30/60-80 pt producer that preferably can Center Tage and whomever (likely Benson) on our top line. 

[Jorcus]

18 hours ago, dudacek said:

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.

 

We will miss a lot by losing Tuch but probably the biggest is the ability to play against the big rugged players. He is 6 foot 4 and can use his shoulder to move people off pucks. Watching the finals makes it clear that when it's the guys who can win the fights for space that are the ones who are getting the job done. I think Kulich can be a tough player but saying that he could grow into a Tuch like role next year is not realistic. DeBrusk would be a lot closer. He is a left wing though so not a direct replacement. Not quite as big but tough enough. I would not put Kulich on the right wing either. So given the choice it's Debrusk. I  guess the issue about trying any of the younger guys is that regular season is one thing, the playoffs are another.

Edited June 10 by Jorcus

[GASabresIUFAN]

14 hours ago, Nacho Libre said:

Trading for Thomas if it’s just costing futures is a no-brainer yes but at the same time a non-necessity. Probably non-likely. But if Tuch is out the door it changes the equation, I think we need to add someone of significance 

They aren’t trading Thomas for just futures.  They need an immediate roster player or two in any deal.  Think of the Eichel trade as a model.  
 

Edited June 10 by GASabresIUFAN

[Nacho Libre]

8 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

They aren’t trading Thomas for just futures.  They need an immediate roster player or two in any deal.  Think of the Eichel trade as a model.  
 

Maybe my definition of roster player is different but I’ve seen Mrtka 1st Helenius suggested. Who’s the roster player?  

I’m counting Helenius as a future clearly when I said “futures deal”. He’ll be on the roster for them id assume so he can count as their Tuch component in the deal since he’s so highly thought of. Do we need to throw in a Krebs? Ok throw in Krebs 

(late) 1st, Mrtka, Helenius, Krebs / Thomas

Edited June 10 by Nacho Libre

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, Nacho Libre said:

Maybe my definition of roster player is different but I’ve seen Mrtka 1st Helenius suggested. Who’s the roster player?  

I’m counting Helenius as a future clearly 

Given the Sabres are tight against the cap.  Players will have to go back to make the cap work.  My guess is McLeod or Norris would have to go back the other way.  

 

[Nacho Libre]

Just now, GASabresIUFAN said:

Given the Sabres are tight against the cap.  Players will have to go back to make the cap work.  My guess is McLeod or Norris would have to go back the other way.  

 

Ya I assume Norris is gone in a deal but I’m not sure it needs to be THAT deal for us. We can send Norris anywhere right? Or does he have a ntc 

[PromoTheRobot]

On 5/20/2026 at 2:30 PM, thewookie1 said:

Puckpedia has its PuckGM mode and with the logjam we have in legit players as well as some cap issues I was wondering what everyone was thinking?

For instance here's my first go of it

https://puckgm.puckpedia.com/rosters/1544432

I did a sign and trade with Tuch with Seattle to garner Tampa's 1st (The 8th year is a big deal since otherwise they can only offer, at July 1st, 6 years)

Greenway leaves in a minor pick swap of 27' picks with Chicago

Traded Norris, Mrtka, and our 26 1st for Thomas and a 4th (The idea is, if Brady Tkachuk is actually on the market, what better way to lure him to the Blues than with his great friend)

Then I'm at a loss how to solve the roster spots and goalie issues.

 

My starting lines are

Kulich - Thomas - Thompson

Benson - Östlund - Doan

Quinn - Helenius - Zucker

Krebs - McLeod - Malenstyn

 

I'm keeping Zucker because with Greenway and Tuch departing we still need a vet presence in the day to day lineup  

My expendables are Krebs, McLeod, Greenway, Levi or UPL and Quinn if you must. Trading Mrtka, I believe, would be a massive error. He's going to be a stud in three years. I don't want to be watching a cup final in 4 years, seeing Mrtka destroying people for another team.

[Weave]

3 hours ago, Doohickie said:

But how do you fill that gap and not break the budget?  The whole reason Tuch is imminently leaving is budget.  Any team who has a player with that kind of production at a budget price doesn't want to move him.

I think the Sabres are deep enough at forward that between the kids and the younger vets you can cover Tuch's point production as well as his other duties like PK by committee.

I don’t agree at all that the reason Tuch may be leaving is budget.  I believe it is what the value of that contract will look like in as soon as 2-3 seasons (let alone 8).  And given that I don’t believe it is budget related, I don’t believe we can’t afford to replace him.

[krakensabr56390]

5 minutes ago, Weave said:

I don’t agree at all that the reason Tuch may be leaving is budget.  I believe it is what the value of that contract will look like in as soon as 2-3 seasons (let alone 8).  And given that I don’t believe it is budget related, I don’t believe we can’t afford to replace him.

Agreed - they just have to move off greenway and they have 16 mil of space - if they make a big trade for another player we move off McLeod or Quinn/zucker in that trade to open up space ( depending on which position the traded player coming back is) that’s has us at 20+ mil to cover whoever we get back in the trade, Benson, krebs, beck and a d man that’s kesserling or someone else. We also recoup some draft Trading one of our goalies… likely Levi - that can be used in trades or bring back some of the picks we traded at the deadline

Edited June 10 by krakensabr56390

[dudacek]

19 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

My expendables are Krebs, McLeod, Greenway, Levi or UPL and Quinn if you must. Trading Mrtka, I believe, would be a massive error. He's going to be a stud in three years. I don't want to be watching a cup final in 4 years, seeing Mrtka destroying people for another team.

Mrtka doesn’t destroy 19-year-olds at the WHL level right now.

Not sure why we should expect him to be destroying 29-year-olds at the NHL level 4 years from now.

People get pictures in their head on draft day that often don’t match reality and it’s easy to hang on to them when the player is mostly out-of-sight, out-of-mind.

So many in hockey fandom didn’t wake up to the fact Benson wasn’t just a small, skilled winger until this spring.

The truth of the matter is he’s always played this way.

And the truth of the matter is Mrtka is much closer to Owen Power than Chris Pronger in terms of style of play.

[PromoTheRobot]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Mrtka doesn’t destroy 19-year-olds at the WHL level right now.

Not sure why we should expect him to be destroying 29-year-olds at the NHL level 4 years from now.

People get pictures in their head on draft day that often don’t match reality and it’s easy to hang on to them when the player is mostly out-of-sight, out-of-mind.

So many in hockey fandom didn’t wake up to the fact Benson wasn’t just a small, skilled winger until this spring.

The truth of the matter is he’s always played this way.

And the truth of the matter is Mrtka is much closer to Owen Power than Chris Pronger in terms of style of play.

I would disagree on the Mrtka take. When he played his early 10 game stint with the Amerks he was quite physical.

[GASabresIUFAN]

If you don’t like the status quo roster, less Tuch, let’s look at this another way since we are talking about roster construction.  The Sabres real cap next season because of Skinner is only $98.55 million.

Would you all agree that Dahlin, Power, Byram, Samuelsson, Doan, Tage and Benson (on a short or long-term deal - I think Jarmo wants to lock him down) are almost certainly Sabres next season?

Assuming a deal similar to Doan’s for Benson, you are looking at 41 mill in cap cost for those 7 roster spots.  Those 7 comprise 3 of our top 6 forwards and our top 4 D and will be Sabres next year.  

I’d add two more depth names to players almost certain to be here next season because of solid play and cheap contracts.  Those are Carrick ($1 mill) and Timmins ($2.2).  Carrick is an ideal 4th line center and PKer who is great in the faceoff circle for barely a league minimum contract and Timmins was solid early in the year before his injury and solid in the playoffs.  I don’t see us finding a better 5th RHD for a cheaper contract.  That two bring us to 9 players for 44.2 mill, leaving 53.35 for 14 players and Jarmo will build from there.

The roster looks like this so far

Forwards
Benson Tage (W) ????

Doan ????  ????

????  ????  ????

????  Carrick ???? 

Defense 
Byram  Dahlin

Power Samuelsson

????  Timmins

Goalies
????, ????

Now how are you filling out the rest of the roster?  (14 players) 

At forward you have 2 veteran centers under contract with M-NTCs in Norris and McLeod.  McLeod’s NTC kicks in when the 2026 season officially ends.  You have 3 C/W kids under contract looking for a full time NHL gig in Östlund, Helenius and Kulich. You also have breakout young forward Quinn under contract for another year.  You have veteran forwards Zucker, Danforth, Greenway (and Kozak) under contract with Greenway and Danforth limited last season by injury.  Utility forward Krebs is a RFA and Tuch and Malenstyn are UFAs who will walk if not signed by July 1.  

Who are your 6th and 7th D? Kesselring is an RFA but wasn’t good when healthy.  Metsa and Stanley are UFAs.  Is this where Jarmo looks elsewhere?

Who are your goalies? - Jarmo made it seem in his end of season presser that the 3 headed goalie monster will return.  That’s UPL, Lyon and Ellis for a cap hit 7.26.  If Jarmo sticks with his goalies that’s now 12 players for nearly 51.5 leaving 46.15 for 11 players - 9 forwards and 2 D.  
 

So what’s your plan?  What are you getting for signed players or RFA’s you trade away?

 

One other note.  If you put all 3 kids in the lineup - Östlund, Helenius and Kulich, it might relegate Zucker or Quinn to the 4th line depending on other moves.  Jarmo won’t do that to either player.  

Edited June 10 by GASabresIUFAN

[freester]

I think Byram will be traded if they can’t sign him to a long term contract.