Kirill Marchenko - the here and now addition needed imho

[sabresouth]

Who wouldn't want Kirill "The Thrill" on their team

[mjd1001]

2 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

You asked 4 or 5 questions, made a statement about being close to the cap (which the numbers show is patently false) and then  gave an example where you were questioning whether he’d be better than Quinn (which again, he’s already proven he is, 65 to 75 point player consistently, something Quinn hasn’t remotely sniffed), asked what it would take to sign him, which I gave a baseline projection (11 to 13 mil) in my OP and questioned whether a Russian player would want to come here given they go to larger not smaller markets as well as unsure if he’d be willing to wait for Russian talent we currently have to show up (which again, I addressed as opinion in my OP).

So, which is your general point again?

And I did address much of these questions via my opinion in the OP. Quinn would be the piece he’s replacing that should have been self evident, projected price given in salary/contract. The price in a trade is a discussion worth having since the point/goal increase, type of play and expected ROI is a good conversation, it’s why I asked the question and submitted my view on the increase from 39 pts to 70 avg’ing (the difference currently between Quinn and Marchenko).

And lastly, let’s not ignore the rumors on Quinn’s name being involved in prior attempted moves, I.E. the Hellebuyck trade attempt. Multiple insiders reported that, suggesting Jarmo and staff view him as an asset that is worth just enough to be moved.

My question is did you even read the OP?

I don't even have to get by the first line of your post, so I didn't even read the rest. 

You are wrong and spinning. The Sabres are within  about 2% of the cap. That is close to the cap 

To say someone thinking that within 2% or so of the cap isn't close to the cap and saying it's patently false... You're wrong. 

The rest of your post or the original post doesn't matter. My response to you that started. This was you using the words... Patently false... To respond to me saying they're close to the cap. 

And let's say we want to talk about future years. The Sabres are close to the cap now. Next year they have some room but they have some more young guys to sign. My opinion is they're going to be close to the cap again. You may disagree with that, that's fine. 

But if you do disagree with it, you're disagreeing with an opinion. You can't say somebody is patently false for saying something that is true now and may or may not be true in the future. 

You're just wrong on so many levels by saying a statement that I made that is true... Is patently false, you're spinning. And you're spinning out of control.

I'll try to dumb this down for you and make it simple by asking you one simple question... I said the sabers are close to the cap. You said that's patently false. I didn't use future tents many times in responding to you. I said they are close to the cap. Tell me how that statement is patently false?

Because I don't care about the original post at this point. I just want to know how being less than $3 million from the current cap is patently false and saying that they're not close to the cap?

 

Edited September 26 by mjd1001

[Scottysabres]

16 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I'm not even going to get by the first line of your post. They are close to the cap. They're within a couple percentage points of the cap. 

Let me start out by saying something. I'm going to say a couple of times in this post. They're within 2% of the cap this year. That is close. They might be the same next year, you don't know for sure and I don't know for sure. But you can't say something as blatantly false if it hasn't happened yet.

When you are going to be within two percentage points of the cap, I, and I'm sure many other people consider that close to the cap.

If you want to argue about future years, we don't know. I tend to think with who they have to sign. They will be close to the cap again next year. Maybe you don't. But you know what, until next year comes we can't prove that. So for you to say, my statement is utterly false... That's just blatantly ignorant because nobody knows whether it's going to be true or false. I happen to believe it's going to be true.

You are so thick and hard-headed and you are wrong, you don't want to admit it. I didn't even read the rest of your post. You're not worth it. You're wrong. They are close to the cap. They are within two percentage points of the cap. Argument done. 

You're the one who responded to me saying it's patently false that they're close to the cap. They are. We don't know about next year but they are likely to be with other deals that need to get done. 

It's not just that you're wrong. You are so unequivocally blatantly incorrect for sticking to that point, sometimes this board utterly amazes me with the stubbornness and the ignorance and this is a good example of that.

I stopped reading after the 1st couple of lines. 3.3 to 3.85 is negligible. Marchenko’s cap hit this season has 0 to do with going forward, as a re-signing was the basis of convo in the OP.

Having an issue with a 550k increase from Quinn’s to Marchenko’s contracts for this season, while going from 40 to 70 pt projection, a 30 point increase in projected offensive production for $550k is a no brainer. You do it every day and twice on Sunday.

 

and here is the actual quote in the op on salary cost…..clearly knowing we have the space for him this season but it was addressing longer term concerns with my opinion on it given the cap knowns.

”Contract cost is all over the board to sign him him long term, but at 26 yrs old, 11 to 13 a season is what I see as his projected ask. You all can fill in what your thoughts are on this.”

 

Your nit-picking over $550k this season, who the hell cares about $550k when your going from a 40 pt to a 70 pt a season player? And you’re ignoring the context of the OP subject matter in this clearly avoiding its intent to address it given the subsequent announcement from the NHL on the next 2 seasons cap ceiling rise. So again, I ask, what is your general point?

Edited September 26 by Scottysabres

[mjd1001]

Just now, Scottysabres said:

I stopped reading after the 1st couple of lines. 3.3 to 3.85 is negligible. Marchenko’s cap hit this season has 0 to do with going forward, as a re-signing was the basis of convo in the OP.

Having an issue with a 550k increase from Quinn’s to Marchenko’s contracts for this season, while going from 40 to 70 pt projection, a 30 point increase in projected offensive production for $550k is a no brainer. You do it every day and twice on Sunday.

Still not the point.

I am not even arguing with the intent behind your thoughts on the thread.

I responded to you when you said they are not close to the cap. You can't say that my statement is 'patently false' when they are that close to the cap.

You are now spinning to other opinions on the player that I may very well agree with some of them.

My issue is you responded to my posted, highlighted when I said they are close to the cap and called that patently false? In what world is STARTING the season with less than $3m in cap space when the cap is well over $100m patently false?

[Scottysabres]

4 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Still not the point.

I am not even arguing with the intent behind your thoughts on the thread.

I responded to you when you said they are not close to the cap. You can't say that my statement is 'patently false' when they are that close to the cap.

You are now spinning to other opinions on the player that I may very well agree with some of them.

My issue is you responded to my posted, highlighted when I said they are close to the cap and called that patently false? In what world is STARTING the season with less than $3m in cap space when the cap is well over $100m patently false?

The entire subject matters context was based beyond this season, again. I ignored nothing, you did apparently.

[mjd1001]

9 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

The entire subject matters context was based beyond this season, again. I ignored nothing, you did apparently.

So lets look at next season. Cap should be $113.5m.

Sabres have committed already $84.3 (with Skinner's hit being reduced but still there) They have about $29m left

Lets say you DON'T pay Quinn because he goes out as the main peice for Marchenko, and you pay (as others have speculated) Marchenko $112m per yer (the middle point of what you speculated).  That gives you $17m left.

What is Crevalier going to cost?  I have seen conservative estimates at close to $3.5m.  If he plays well it could be higher. If he is AWFUL, you need to replace him with someone good enoug to pay at least $3.5m. So lets go with a conservative $3.5m. You are left with $13.5m at best.

Staying on the D, Timmins needs to be resigned or replaced, as well as a couple journeyman/rookie 7th and 8th guys. That could run you anywhere from $3m (on the VERY low end) to close to $6m. Lets go closer to the low end with $4m. Now you have no more than $9.5m left

You need a backup goalie. If Lyon is going to to be the guy, or Ellis plays so well he supplants Lyon, you are looking at at LEAST close to $2m. (a slight inflation raise for Lyon, or a new deal for Ellis that isn't entry level but still low).  Down to at best $7.5m

So forwards? Kulich is a top 9 guy. What is he going to get paid out of that $7.5M left? $4m (probably too low if he plays well). If he has a decent year, you are looking at $6m?  Thre would be almost your remaining cap.

Then you STILL need replacements for Zucker (letting him go), a 4th line guy or two, and a spare part or two.

Even if you don't make this deal and re-sign Quinn, he is likely to get a raise to the level of the other recent sign-ees (if not more) and that gives you a few million dollars more than what is laid out above, but you are regardless going to be close to the cap still.

I think my estimates above are realistic, maybe even slightly low in some cases. But even with that, you are still CLOSE TO THE CAP.  There is no way in the world I can see them NOT being close to the cap (meaning at least, and probably more than 5% away from the cap.)

Edited September 26 by mjd1001

[EM88]

As far as the close-to-the-cap topic goes, barring a total collapse or career ending injury, I do envision Buffalo being close to the cap for the near to mid future.

If the team collapses then all bets are off. But if the team plays well it will very likely be due to guys who are going to be up for a contract playing well, therefore the market rate they will be paid to keep them here will keep Buffalo in the vicinity of the cap.

That is how this works and how it is supposed to work.

It does not mean they cannot make trades for guys who want to be paid. It just means they are going to have to be more judicious in those potential trades than the would have needed to be a few seasons ago.

To @Scottysabres point, this potential trade can be made.

To @mjd1001 point, the team is near the cap and is likely to stay there.

Edited September 26 by EM88

[Archie Lee]

Next season Marchenko will be paid more than Dahlin, possibly much more.

Eventually the Sabres will need to give out, or trade for, such a contract. After getting Doan, Benson, and Östlund locked up long-term on what seem to be team-friendly deals, I don't see Marchenko (a Russian who wants out of a small market) being the player that they break their current contract-mold for. 

[Scottysabres]

5 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

So lets look at next season. Cap should be $113.5m.

Sabres have committed already $84.3 (with Skinner's hit being reduced but still there) They have about $29m left

Lets say you DON'T pay Quinn because he goes out as the main peice for Marchenko, and you pay (as others have speculated) Marchenko $112m per yer (the middle point of what you speculated).  That gives you $17m left.

What is Crevalier going to cost?  I have seen conservative estimates at close to $3.5m.  If he plays well it could be higher. If he is AWFUL, you need to replace him with someone good enoug to pay at least $3.5m. So lets go with a conservative $3.5m. You are left with $13.5m at best.

Staying on the D, Timmins needs to be resigned or replaced, as well as a couple journeyman/rookie 7th and 8th guys. That could run you anywhere from $3m (on the VERY low end) to close to $6m. Lets go closer to the low end with $4m. Now you have no more than $9.5m left

You need a backup goalie. If Lyon is going to to be the guy, or Ellis plays so well he supplants Lyon, you are looking at at LEAST close to $2m. (a slight inflation raise for Lyon, or a new deal for Ellis that isn't entry level but still low).  Down to at best $7.5m

So forwards? Kulich is a top 9 guy. What is he going to get paid out of that $7.5M left? $4m (probably too low if he plays well). If he has a decent year, you are looking at $6m?  Thre would be almost your remaining cap.

Then you STILL need replacements for Zucker (letting him go), a 4th line guy or two, and a spare part or two.

Even if you don't make this deal and re-sign Quinn, he is likely to get a raise to the level of the other recent sign-ees (if not more) and that gives you a few million dollars more than what is laid out above, but you are regardless going to be close to the cap still.

I think my estimates above are realistic, maybe even slightly low in some cases. But even with that, you are still CLOSE TO THE CAP.  There is no way in the world I can see them NOT being close to the cap (meaning at least, and probably more than 5% away from the cap.)

I disagree, and I’ll go high side of my projection in the op and say 13 mil for 7 yrs. That leaves 16 mil in space for 7 contracts as he would be 16 if all 4 UFA’s weren’t re-signed.

That’s Zucker, Danforth and Carrick, all at or just months under 35 yrs old at end of this season. So one top 9 winger, 2 4th liners. Kozak will be up full time next season, that’s 1 4th liner under a million, Jake Richard or Trevor Kuntar could be in the mix but let’s say they go outside for a fourth liner, that’s 3 mil and that’s probably a tad high but we’ll go with that. So 4 mil to replace the fourth liners, I have 0 doubt they’ll go internal to replace Zucker in the top 9 with Helenius who is already on the 13 forward roster under 1 mil. So that’s 5 mil total to replace your forward ufa’s.

That sits you at 17 mil out 29 mil used with a 13 mil Marchenko contract (remember, I went high side, hell, I’m rounding all of these up). 
 

That leaves Crevier, Kulich and Ellis (to maintain 2 goalies as Lyon would be another mid 30’s Ufa so I’m assuming they let him walk). In my opinion Kulich and Crevier get 3 to 3.5 bridge deals or just get qualifying offers depending on this seasons performance. Ellis short term, as I feel they’ll let him get his 28 games taking him out of G-6 status and back to rfa for that last year. They’d almost have to regardless of cap in any event since they failed to address the met minder situation. 1.5 to 2.5 mil. All of these are rfa #’s are guesses but still puts them 4 to 5 mil under the cap. And this without any movement.

[EM88]

7 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

Next season Marchenko will be paid more than Dahlin, possibly much more.

Eventually the Sabres will need to give out, or trade for, such a contract. After getting Doan, Benson, and Östlund locked up long-term on what seem to be team-friendly deals, I don't see Marchenko (a Russian who wants out of a small market) being the player that they break their current contract-mold for. 

I too would surmise he wants to go to a large market city.

It was mentioned above he wants to play with other Russian players. But isn't Columbus near the top of the list already with the number of Russians? In addition to Marchenko, they have Nichuskin, Voronkov, and Provorov. Mateychuk I think is actually Canadian but he has Russian Heritage I believe. Plus they have another Russian goalie in the minors that they recently drafted.

[Scottysabres]

Just now, EM88 said:

I too would surmise he wants to go to a large market city.

It was mentioned above he wants to play with other Russian players. But isn't Columbus near the top of the list already with the number of Russians? In addition to Marchenko, they have Nichuskin, Voronkov, and Provorov. Mateychuk I think is actually Canadian but he has Russian Heritage I believe. Plus they have another Russian goalie in the minors that they recently drafted.

Yea EM, it was only worth mentioning as far as a rumor. No one knows if he wants a big market or just a different market as neither he nor his agent have given any indication as such. That’s being based purely on some prior Russian players choices, key word being some.

And I hate to clarify in a post to you, but I personally don’t consider 4 or 5 million as close to the cap, given that’s still a lot to maneuver with in season or at the dead line as the expenditure deadline number is consistently ticking upward as contracts are paid out less in season performance bonuses which we none according to Puckpedia.

[mjd1001]

3 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

I disagree, and I’ll go high side of my projection in the op and say 13 mil for 7 yrs. That leaves 16 mil in space for 7 contracts as he would be 16 if all 4 UFA’s weren’t re-signed.

That’s Zucker, Danforth and Carrick, all at or just months under 35 yrs old at end of this season. So one top 9 winger, 2 4th liners. Kozak will be up full time next season, that’s 1 4th liner under a million, Jake Richard or Trevor Kuntar could be in the mix but let’s say they go outside for a fourth liner, that’s 3 mil and that’s probably a tad high but we’ll go with that. So 4 mil to replace the fourth liners, I have 0 doubt they’ll go internal to replace Zucker in the top 9 with Helenius who is already on the 13 forward roster under 1 mil. So that’s 5 mil total to replace your forward ufa’s.

That sits you at 17 mil out 29 mil used with a 13 mil Marchenko contract (remember, I went high side, hell, I’m rounding all of these up). 
 

That leaves Crevier, Kulich and Ellis (to maintain 2 goalies as Lyon would be another mid 30’s Ufa so I’m assuming they let him walk). In my opinion Kulich and Crevier get 3 to 3.5 bridge deals or just get qualifying offers depending on this seasons performance. Ellis short term, as I feel they’ll let him get his 28 games taking him out of G-6 status and back to rfa for that last year. They’d almost have to regardless of cap in any event since they failed to address the met minder situation. 1.5 to 2.5 mil. All of these are rfa #’s are guesses but still puts them 4 to 5 mil under the cap. And this without any movement.

You are assuming Kulich and Crevier get $3-$3.5?  If they have even decent years they are going to be slightly more than that. Potenital much more with Kulich. Don't forget, they will be re-signing next year, where the cap will be up another $10%, so even entry level guys will be getting more this year than next year.  

But even if they do sign for as little as you say, $4-$5m under the cap is CLOSE TO THE CAP (which is my entire point.)

In a $113.5m cap, that puts them 3.5%-4.5% under the cap. That is close to the cap.

[EM88]

4 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Yea EM, it was only worth mentioning as far as a rumor. No one knows if he wants a big market or just a different market as neither he nor his agent have given any indication as such. That’s being based purely on some prior Russian players choices, key word being some.

And I hate to clarify in a post to you, but I personally don’t consider 4 or 5 million as close to the cap, given that’s still a lot to maneuver with in season or at the dead line as the expenditure deadline number is consistently ticking upward as contracts are paid out less in season performance bonuses which we none according to Puckpedia.

What is close to the cap seems to be the issue that you are both arguing about.

I will agree that 4 or 5 million does give you a bit of room to maneuver.

On the other hand, I personally do consider that close to the cap. JK has said he like to go into the season with a couple million in cap space available just for minimal flexibility. But if you are in a position where you would have trouble going out and trading for a signing a 'good' player at the deadline without making moves, then I doo consider that close to the cap.  Just my opinion and I would not argue with someone over a small difference personally.

4-5 million dollars under the cap is not crippling. But I would agree it is 'close'.  But it is a matter of semantics.

The words being used can be viewed so subtly different by two people its not that big of a deal. 

The Sabres could decline to make one deal because they say they are close to the cap, but make another deal and find a way to fit it in. Again, semantics.``1

Edited September 26 by EM88

[Scottysabres]

Just now, mjd1001 said:

You are assuming Kulich and Crevier get $3-$3.5?  If they have even decent years they are going to be slightly more than that. Potenital much more with Kulich. Don't forget, they will be re-signing next year, where the cap will be up another $10%, so even entry level guys will be getting more this year than next year.  

But even if they do sign for as little as you say, $4-$5m under the cap is CLOSE TO THE CAP (which is my entire point.)

In a $113.5m cap, that puts them 3.5%-4.5% under the cap. That is close to the cap.

As I said to EM, I disagree, 4 to 5 mil is not close to the cap. Close to the cap for me 2 mil. It begins to tunnel the organization on moves in season at that time imo. 4 to 5 mil affords a great deal of flexibility, again, imo.

[Scottysabres]

Just now, EM88 said:

What is close to the cap seems to be the issue that you are both arguing about.

I will agree that 4 or 5 million does give you a bit of room to maneuver.

On the other hand, I personally do consider that close to the cap. JK has said he like to go into the season with a couple million in cap space available just for minimal flexibility. But if you are in a position where you would have trouble going out and trading for a signing a 'good' player at the deadline without making moves, then I doo consider that close to the cap.

4-5 million dollars under the cap is not crippling. But I would agree it is 'close'.

This is of course all based on the organization remaining static roster wise. And a great deal of that will depend on their performance this season. I don’t see maturation of the existing roster, specific to the forward ranks, as enough to both make up for the Tuch lost offensive capacity and growth across the top 6 in that regards. These are still some very young guys, there is bound to be growing pains.

10 to 15 mil for 70 pt forwards is most likely going to be the new norm going forward as well I suspect, leaving myself to believe getting a guy like this now goes aways in staving off further contract inflations down the road. 4 to 5 mil in space now is flexible, 2 years from now not so much. Just my take on it is all.

[Taro T]

38 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

You are assuming Kulich and Crevier get $3-$3.5?  If they have even decent years they are going to be slightly more than that. Potenital much more with Kulich. Don't forget, they will be re-signing next year, where the cap will be up another $10%, so even entry level guys will be getting more this year than next year.  

But even if they do sign for as little as you say, $4-$5m under the cap is CLOSE TO THE CAP (which is my entire point.)

In a $113.5m cap, that puts them 3.5%-4.5% under the cap. That is close to the cap.

Not to get in the middle of your discussion with @Scottysabres, and could've just as easily have put this as a response to 1 of his posts.  Personally, have considered close to the cap to be within $2MM of the cap when we were in the $80MM-$95MM cap era.  So, would say $3MM is close to the cap, anything more than that and there's enough room to do what you need without too much juggling because as we've all seen, you're NEVER going into a season completely healthy, you won't get completely healthy in-season, and though it's been more than a decade since the Sabres used it, BF-LTIR is a tool that lets teams that aren't right up against the cap do what they need to have a full roster and the Sabres will almost certainly be using that tool moving forward.

Having more than $4MM in cap space, especially when combined with the way early season cap space accrues and can be used later and when it's used up BF-LTIR becomes a useful tool, is IMHO enough to keep the cap from significantly constraining the GM from mid-season / deadline dealing.  YMMV and from the discussion you've already been in, it does.  😉 

[kas23]

19 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

If he does want to play with some other Russians, I'm not sure he wants to wait a couple more years for them to arrive here. Plus my impression is that Russian players tend to leave smaller markets NOT for other smaller markets, but they like bigger markets.

This in a nutshell. I don’t know why he wants out of Columbus. Maybe it is winning. Or maybe not. I’m not sure, being down on Columbus, he would want to come to Buffalo.

Edited September 26 by kas23

[EM88]

19 hours ago, Taro T said:

Not to get in the middle of your discussion with @Scottysabres, and could've just as easily have put this as a response to 1 of his posts.  Personally, have considered close to the cap to be within $2MM of the cap when we were in the $80MM-$95MM cap era.  So, would say $3MM is close to the cap, anything more than that and there's enough room to do what you need without too much juggling because as we've all seen, you're NEVER going into a season completely healthy, you won't get completely healthy in-season, and though it's been more than a decade since the Sabres used it, BF-LTIR is a tool that lets teams that aren't right up against the cap do what they need to have a full roster and the Sabres will almost certainly be using that tool moving forward.

Having more than $4MM in cap space, especially when combined with the way early season cap space accrues and can be used later and when it's used up BF-LTIR becomes a useful tool, is IMHO enough to keep the cap from significantly constraining the GM from mid-season / deadline dealing.  YMMV and from the discussion you've already been in, it does.  😉 

I always thought myself that within $2million of the cap, or less, is not 'close to the cap' but I would rather use the words 'up against the cap'. If last year the cap was $95.5 million and you were, for example, 1.5% away from it, you had less than $1.5 million. Thats really 'up against it.'

Anything to me less than 4% of the cap means you are close to it.

Last year  If you were in that 4% or less range it would equate to being at 91.7 or higher of the 95.5. To me that is close to the cap. Again, as mentioned in my other post, we are arguing about semantics in terms of 1%-2% differences.

[LGR4GM]

21 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

So lets look at next season. Cap should be $113.5m.

Sabres have committed already $84.3 (with Skinner's hit being reduced but still there) They have about $29m left

Lets say you DON'T pay Quinn because he goes out as the main peice for Marchenko, and you pay (as others have speculated) Marchenko $112m per yer (the middle point of what you speculated).  That gives you $17m left.

What is Crevalier going to cost?  I have seen conservative estimates at close to $3.5m.  If he plays well it could be higher. If he is AWFUL, you need to replace him with someone good enoug to pay at least $3.5m. So lets go with a conservative $3.5m. You are left with $13.5m at best.

Staying on the D, Timmins needs to be resigned or replaced, as well as a couple journeyman/rookie 7th and 8th guys. That could run you anywhere from $3m (on the VERY low end) to close to $6m. Lets go closer to the low end with $4m. Now you have no more than $9.5m left

You need a backup goalie. If Lyon is going to to be the guy, or Ellis plays so well he supplants Lyon, you are looking at at LEAST close to $2m. (a slight inflation raise for Lyon, or a new deal for Ellis that isn't entry level but still low).  Down to at best $7.5m

So forwards? Kulich is a top 9 guy. What is he going to get paid out of that $7.5M left? $4m (probably too low if he plays well). If he has a decent year, you are looking at $6m?  Thre would be almost your remaining cap.

Then you STILL need replacements for Zucker (letting him go), a 4th line guy or two, and a spare part or two.

Even if you don't make this deal and re-sign Quinn, he is likely to get a raise to the level of the other recent sign-ees (if not more) and that gives you a few million dollars more than what is laid out above, but you are regardless going to be close to the cap still.

I think my estimates above are realistic, maybe even slightly low in some cases. But even with that, you are still CLOSE TO THE CAP.  There is no way in the world I can see them NOT being close to the cap (meaning at least, and probably more than 5% away from the cap.)

If your gm can't figure out after moving Quinns salary and getting 4mil back from Skinners hit, and the cap going up, how to sign Marchenko, they're stupid. 

I'm not for or against the move but you're acting like we can't afford it and teams have shown for decades you can. Being close to the cap is fine. I know you're not arguing it isn't, I just wanted to reiterate that. 

Edited September 27 by LGR4GM

[dudacek]

 

[Archie Lee]

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

This would have to mean Knies as a return, I would think.  What else do the Leafs have to offer? 

[Scottysabres]

29 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Well, this is not good news for the Atlantic division.

[ponokasabre]

 

[sabrefanday1]

Laughs have no cap space do they? Hope this doesnt happen as having yet another team we need to pass to make the Playofs again is not good...other teams have added while we lost Tuch and Bo and while our defense is still damn good we will miss Tuch

Edited September 28 by sabrefanday1

[Flashsabre]

I mean Knies for Marchenko is pretty much a wash. It’s not making one team way better.

Leafs have been determined to move Knies for a while. Funny if they go for each other when the Habs at different points were considered favourites to acquire both players