Confirmed with Link: [BUF/NYI] Sabres acquire D Boychuk for future considerations

[5 Minute Major]

Exactly, why couldn't Buffalo acquire a draft pick like a 2nd or 3rd? Arizona has been doing this for years to take on salary.

Maybe because we also actually needed the trade?

 

[Jim Bob]

OT & not to nitpick - but they DID try to move up this past draft...

I think if a guy they have in an upper tier becomes attainable, they will try to make that move. Especially if we're talking about two particularly late R1s from Florida / Vegas...

I thought Adams asked the other guys in the room and they shot down the offer because they felt it wasn't good value?

And it wasn't so much about trying to move up as it was a part of the Reinhart talks and it seemed like they were trying to use Sam to get someone they really liked like maybe Eklund.

 

[brian_griffin]

Because it's November and teams might not be looking to do hockey trades at this point. The Sabres needed roster flexibility soon, and this gives it to them.


Players can't be traded for literally nothing, so we have future considerations which are technically something even though in practice, they are nothing.

(and)

Future Considerations usually means "nothing" for all practical purposes.

On a personal level, it's analogous to my "knowledge and experience".

This allows them to trade pending UFA players for picks or even waive them and call up replacements from Rochester.

And, it's the best-valued cap space out there, costing them ~$500k or less in actual dollars vs. the space, less than 10 cents on the dollar...

The future considerations will probably be an expiring minor league player. That's how these usually translate. Best case scenario probably is Bridgeport being out of playoff contention and shipping depth to Rochester. At the end of the day, Buffalo needed this cap hit for when injury recalls are sent back down.

Just say no to Cal O'Reilly if the Flyers / Phantoms trade him to Isles / Bridgeport... anyone else is fine, but not him.

That sure is an economical way to stay above the cap floor.

Now that I think about it this is pretty smart on Adam's part. They barely pay anything in real cash, and get the flexibility to do other things. The cap hit is simply a paper transaction.

It's actually brilliant cap value.

Buffalo still has its 3 salary retentions available to them. I can see them using those closer to the trade deadline as a facilitator of trades. I think that will earn them much better of a return than trying to haggle over cap space right now. I mean, they still have something like $16M in cap space so the flexibility this gives them with the current roster is pretty valuable.

Projected $72M Sabres cap space at the deadline. Can really do some damage then!!!

It just feels weird to not get anything. We helped another team for free.

But BUF needed to do this, so it wasn't altruistic.

Exactly, why couldn't Buffalo acquire a draft pick like a 2nd or 3rd? Arizona has been doing this for years to take on salary.

But BUF needed to take on salary essentially immediately.

 

[Fezzy126]

I get it. It still can feel weird though

It feels weird because of the value one would associate to each of these actions.

For us - we gained cap space and we needed to do so, and depending on when Mitts comes back we needed to do it fast. However, I would say in general the value attached to acquiring space should be negligent, especially in a flat cap world where half the teams are living on LTIR. No one in the league has ever given up assets to acquire cap space to my knowledge.

For them - they can now operate outside of LTIR, which buys them increased roster flexibility at the trade deadline going into the playoffs. In the past, teams would pay anywhere from a 1st to a 5th round pick to get rid of cap space (as others have pointed out, this is typically an offseason thing).

I get that this is a unique situation:

• Again, we needed to acquire cap quickly
• Boychuk only has a year of term
• His cap to cash ratio is phenomenal
• To further the cash point, most of his actual salary is covered by insurance
• Since he's on IR, we don't have to move any bodies around on our active roster

As Dot & JJ have pointed out, the timing here also plays a major role, I completely understand these points here.

I also get that we are both gaining roster flexibility... But I'd still disagree on the value of this move from each team's perspective, from my point of view Islanders' cap flexibility >>> Sabres' cap acquisition. We can acquire cap space from half the teams in the league, how many teams are willing to just take a $6m cap hit?

Ultimately it really doesn't matter, we don't know what else was available out there, so it's an argument based on a hypothetical foundation. But I agree with you, it doesn't feel right because cap space is an asset and it doesn't feel like we used it as one in this case.

 

[Djp]

I think it's reasonable to be annoyed that the Sabres didn't do more to take advantage of their available cap space during the off-season, especially since they were planning to trade Eichel and would need to make moves to reach the floor afterwards anyway, but the Sabres didn't do that because they didn't want to make those sort of moves. It's a philosophical difference, not really a question of competence.

it’s also likely teams wanted to unload 2+ yr players, not rentals and he wants flexibility next year

 

[Djp]

It feels weird because of the value one would associate to each of these actions.

For us - we gained cap space and we needed to do so, and depending on when Mitts comes back we needed to do it fast. However, I would say in general the value attached to acquiring space should be negligent, especially in a flat cap world where half the teams are living on LTIR. No one in the league has ever given up assets to acquire cap space to my knowledge.

For them - they can now operate outside of LTIR, which buys them increased roster flexibility at the trade deadline going into the playoffs. In the past, teams would pay anywhere from a 1st to a 5th round pick to get rid of cap space (as others have pointed out, this is typically an offseason thing).

I get that this is a unique situation:

• Again, we needed to acquire cap quickly
• Boychuk only has a year of term
• His cap to cash ratio is phenomenal
• To further the cash point, most of his actual salary is covered by insurance
• Since he's on IR, we don't have to move any bodies around on our active roster

As Dot & JJ have pointed out, the timing here also plays a major role, I completely understand these points here.

I also get that we are both gaining roster flexibility... But I'd still disagree on the value of this move from each team's perspective, from my point of view Islanders' cap flexibility >>> Sabres' cap acquisition. We can acquire cap space from half the teams in the league, how many teams are willing to just take a $6m cap hit?

Ultimately it really doesn't matter, we don't know what else was available out there, so it's an argument based on a hypothetical foundation. But I agree with you, it doesn't feel right because cap space is an asset and it doesn't feel like we used it as one in this case.

I think this wasn’t a 9am thus a,m call but something talked about for months.

buffalo didn’t want to do it before because if they had less need to satisfy the cap floor it might have changed offers on Eichel.

they knew they coukd do it with Tuck but if all they needed was $2.5M then vegas gives a different player and won’t move Tuch.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

I thought Adams asked the other guys in the room and they shot down the offer because they felt it wasn't good value?

And it wasn't so much about trying to move up as it was a part of the Reinhart talks and it seemed like they were trying to use Sam to get someone they really liked like maybe Eklund.

He was willing to use Reinhart + the Philly pick to move up far enough to select Eklund.

That would be akin to him packaging the Florida & Vegas picks in order to get a guy higher up on their board.

 

[PatrikBerglund]

What does future considerations even mean?

 

[dotcommunism]

It feels weird because of the value one would associate to each of these actions.

For us - we gained cap space and we needed to do so, and depending on when Mitts comes back we needed to do it fast. However, I would say in general the value attached to acquiring space should be negligent, especially in a flat cap world where half the teams are living on LTIR. No one in the league has ever given up assets to acquire cap space to my knowledge.

For them - they can now operate outside of LTIR, which buys them increased roster flexibility at the trade deadline going into the playoffs. In the past, teams would pay anywhere from a 1st to a 5th round pick to get rid of cap space (as others have pointed out, this is typically an offseason thing).

I get that this is a unique situation:

• Again, we needed to acquire cap quickly
• Boychuk only has a year of term
• His cap to cash ratio is phenomenal
• To further the cash point, most of his actual salary is covered by insurance
• Since he's on IR, we don't have to move any bodies around on our active roster

As Dot & JJ have pointed out, the timing here also plays a major role, I completely understand these points here.

I also get that we are both gaining roster flexibility... But I'd still disagree on the value of this move from each team's perspective, from my point of view Islanders' cap flexibility >>> Sabres' cap acquisition. We can acquire cap space from half the teams in the league, how many teams are willing to just take a $6m cap hit?

Ultimately it really doesn't matter, we don't know what else was available out there, so it's an argument based on a hypothetical foundation. But I agree with you, it doesn't feel right because cap space is an asset and it doesn't feel like we used it as one in this case.

I think one of the factors in this seeming to be less value than it should is that the Islanders didn't need to do this. Sure they benefit quite a bit from clearing cap and not having to use LTIR, at least in theory. But that benefit ultimately doesn't mean anything unless they end up using that cap space. Absent any specific plan to use that cap space, it's far less valuable to the Islanders than if they needed it to make a move.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

What does future considerations even mean?

As a kid, I always thought it meant that the other team would consider making a trade again in the future.

I refuse to change from that position.

 

[mouser]

What does future considerations even mean?

It usually means “something less then a 7th round pick”. Otherwise they would have included the pick instead.

 

[missingmika]

It usually means “something less then a 7th round pick”. Otherwise they would have included the pick instead.

Its such a dumb term. We should call it Stephane Beauregard:

In the 1992 off-season, he was traded three times, first to the Buffalo Sabres for Christian Ruuttu and future considerations on June 15, then to the Chicago Blackhawks for Dominik Hašekand future considerations (draft pick Éric Dazé) on August 10, and finally back to Winnipeg for Ruuttu.[2] On October 1 of the same year, he was traded to the Philadelphia Flyers for future considerations. He was then traded back to the Jets by the Flyers for future considerations, June 11, 1993.

 

[brian_griffin]

What does future considerations even mean?

It usually means “something less then a 7th round pick”. Otherwise they would have included the pick instead.

Decades ago NHL trades could include cash from one team to another. The same year the Sabres drafted Pierre Turgeon #1 overall (1987), another rookie, Ray Sheppard, led the Sabres in goal scoring. Two years later Gerry Meehan traded Sheppard to the Rangers for $1 and future considerations. Sheppard was a good goal-scorer and had a legit career in the NHL so never really understood why Meehan sold so cheaply...

 

[Daz28]

Wonder if he'll be ready to play in the game vs Vegas and Eichel?

 

[Jimmybarndoor2]

Didn’t understand it but it is harmless which why no pick

this can be transferred to ltir and used for another trade. Just gives them some free room. Greatly helps the isles too

 

[brian_griffin]

Didn’t understand it but it is harmless which why no pick

this can be transferred to ltir and used for another trade. Just gives them some free room. Greatly helps the isles too

If by "this" you mean Boychuk's $6M cap hit, no, I think you misunderstand LTIR. There is no "free room". Players on either IR or LTIR still count against the cap. Only when a team exceeds the cap can they use the amount of salary over the cap due to players on LTIR to acquire players up to the amount they are over the cap (cap relief).

I agree "Used for another trade" is possible, but the Sabres would need to remain cap compliant after that trade. I fail to conceive a scenario where a team would trade BUF a player, reducing that other team's cap, and in return BUF trade them Boychuk (regardless of whether the acquiring team would place Boychuk on LTIR or not). By trading BUF a player, the other team would be reducing their cap hit and therefore likely not need the cap relief of an LTIR'd Boychuk coming back.

Now, it WOULD be interesting for BUF to acquire another player, somehow (lots of ways possible), to keep them above the cap floor and either in that deal or separately help VGK again to be cap compliant once some of their LTIR players return healthy. It wouldn't solve VGK's entire future problem but would help.

E.g., Boychuk for Theodore , or

Boychuk for Hague, Brisson, BUF 2023 3rd.

 

[Fjordy]

Well we needed a cap

 

[joshjull]

It feels weird because of the value one would associate to each of these actions.

For us - we gained cap space and we needed to do so, and depending on when Mitts comes back we needed to do it fast. However, I would say in general the value attached to acquiring space should be negligent, especially in a flat cap world where half the teams are living on LTIR. No one in the league has ever given up assets to acquire cap space to my knowledge.

For them - they can now operate outside of LTIR, which buys them increased roster flexibility at the trade deadline going into the playoffs. In the past, teams would pay anywhere from a 1st to a 5th round pick to get rid of cap space (as others have pointed out, this is typically an offseason thing).

I get that this is a unique situation:

• Again, we needed to acquire cap quickly
• Boychuk only has a year of term
• His cap to cash ratio is phenomenal
• To further the cash point, most of his actual salary is covered by insurance
• Since he's on IR, we don't have to move any bodies around on our active roster

As Dot & JJ have pointed out, the timing here also plays a major role, I completely understand these points here.

I also get that we are both gaining roster flexibility... But I'd still disagree on the value of this move from each team's perspective, from my point of view Islanders' cap flexibility >>> Sabres' cap acquisition. We can acquire cap space from half the teams in the league, how many teams are willing to just take a $6m cap hit?

Ultimately it really doesn't matter, we don't know what else was available out there, so it's an argument based on a hypothetical foundation. But I agree with you, it doesn't feel right because cap space is an asset and it doesn't feel like we used it as one in this case.

I think the reason this feels weird is your mistakenly comparing this trade to “selling cap space for assets” trades.

When Leafs traded Marleau it was something they NEEDED to do to get cap complaint. Because of that it gave leverage to the Canes to get paid what they did.

In this trade with the Isles, we are the Leafs trading Marleau not the Canes. We are the team that needed cap space.** In our case it was adding it. You have the power and need dynamics backwards in your evaluation of this trade. Its why you’re focusing so heavily on the Isles benefits. But they didn’t need to make this trade. We did. If anyone could theoretically apply pressure to get more it was the Isles, not us. Though I don’t see why they would due to the benefits you listed. It was a mutually beneficial trade.

If we send Krebs to the AHL without the Boychuk trade. We’re only about 12k over the lower limit. We needed cap space to get injured players back in the lineup.


**EDIT: It is a bit weird to see a team make an in season trade to stay cap complaint with the lower limit. Its certainly not the norm. It’s almost always to get under the upper limit.

 

[littletonhockeycoach]

1.) The NYI team is so strong defensively that their discards are like golden nuggets to the receiving franchise. (Toews comes to mind.)

2.) Every NHL team needs a player whose last name ends in "chuk".
It maintains the Canadian connection. (Except when they're Russian.....)

I.e.; Andreychuk, Hawerchuk, Konowalchuk, Malarchuk, Tkachuk, Matvichuk, uhhhhh. Upchuk, LOL.....

 

[billsandsabres]

i thought this post from the main board was spot on.

Confirmed Trade: - [BUF/NYI] Johnny Boychuk for future considerations

 

[Jim Bob]

What does future considerations even mean?

It means Lou buys Adams’ coffee the next time they have in-person GM meetings.

 

[Buffaloed]

Boychuk's cap hit is $6M, but his actual salary this season is $4M of which $2.75M was already paid as a signing bonus. That leaves the Sabres on the hook for the prorated remaining salary of $1.25M of which 80% is covered by insurance. Adams bought $6M in cap filler for about $200k.

 

[missingmika]

Boychuk's cap hit is $6M, but his actual salary this season is $4M of which $2.75M was already paid as a signing bonus. That leaves the Sabres on the hook for the prorated remaining salary of $1.25M of which 80% is covered by insurance. Adams bought $6M in cap filler for about $200k.

He’s so smart!

 

[truthbluth]

The main board is obsessed with this trade, with about half insisting this alone is proof that Adams is a bad GM. I don't care enough to argue so I'll just note here how weird this infatuation with bagging on Adams is.

 

[Fjordy]

The main board is obsessed with this trade, with about half insisting this alone is proof that Adams is a bad GM. I don't care enough to argue so I'll just note here how weird this infatuation with bagging on Adams is.

I don’t understand how this deal could be bad? We got a very solid prospect, who was always in the mix with Dach, Turkotte, Zegras and Cozens in the draft, but got injured and fell 8-10 positions lower. His high IQ is still there, he is still a great playmaker, good motor, character, hard work and leadership. We also got a local boy, with a good contract, a beast in the playoffs, a player we missed. First round. And this is for the injured Eichel, who has not played hockey for eight months, who has a serious injury and needs an experimental surgery. This cannot be a bad deal on paper, I don’t know how it will be in the future, but I am very pleased with this return.