Sabres Expansion Draft Protection Discussion (Skinner waives NMC for Draft)

Status
Not open for further replies.

SnuggaRUDE

Registered User
Apr 5, 2013
8,946
6,479
(In a hushed voice) This is the wrong target for handwringing. We are the worst team in the NHL over the last 3 years. William Carrier wouldn’t have saved us and the difference between Bjork and Asplund won’t either.:sarcasm:

Oh, god the: why did they protect Ullmark over Carrier arguments have not aged well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N.Y. Orangeman

OkimLom

Registered User
May 3, 2010
15,120
6,577
Oh, god the: why did they protect Ullmark over Carrier arguments have not aged well.

Thing is, we needed, and need both players. Unfortunately, management didn't see the need to bring in any sort of coverage for either guy after the decision. The important part of protection and making a decision on which guy to keep isn't to decide which player, but the actions taken when you lose the player. If you're able to bring in a goaltender duo that is capable of backstopping the team, then losing Ullmark doesn't hurt, and if you're able to bring in an effective forechecking player or something better, losing Carrier doesn't hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elchud

TehDoak

Chili that wants to be here
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
31,239
8,135
Will fix everything
Trade Ristolainen for Copp and then work a deal with Seattle

Yeah no, Winnipeg isn't doing that deal. Copp is producing a decent offense while taking heavy D zone starts.

If we can anything for Risto pre expansion draft, take it. If not, simply expose him and let Seattle take him. The net goal is cap space and keeping the young d-men. I doubt many teams will be adding D-men pre expansion simply because it likely means they have to expose a d-man they don't want to lose in the process.
 

HogtownSabresfan

Registered User
Jan 13, 2010
6,619
1,694
These are my favourite flesh wounds:
The Fasching/Deslauriers trade (McNabb+2 2nds for a couple of scrubs).
Trading a 3rd for Vesey twice and getting a phone call as the best return.
Downgrading our own draft pick to do Toronto a favour.

It's kinda like how an addict wears you out over time with constant incidents that makes you worry and then every other year creates a catastrophic event that somehow makes you forget about them stealing your shit and hitting your mom...

Just so many to choose from really through multiple GMs. Even when it works out, I'm convinced we likely overpay. Original O'Reilly trade is case in point. Murray told the entire league he was after him, there was almost no negotiating position left. He gave up a smidge more than he had to and Ryan really got the top top range of salary at the time.

I can point to almost every deal/contract since Regier and make a strong argument for overpayment. Darcy stood still a lot and assets dropped in value so there is another side to it but we are not good negotiators. I always think Regier as a team prez would have been good, just one last set of conservative eyes.
 

slip

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 19, 2005
16,024
4,484
Thompson is not aware enough to be a top six player and too timid to be effective in the bottom six. I wouldn’t protect him. I doubt anyone would trade anything of value for him.
I saw real growth of out Thompson this season. He's on the cusp of being a steady 20-25 goal scorer with size. And I don't like admitting any of this, as I despised the trade that brought him here and want Thompson to fail so I can hate Botterill that much more. But blind, vindictive rage aside, I think getting rid of giraffe boy at this state would be a mistake.
 

Tatanka

Registered User
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2016
4,363
2,791
I saw real growth of out Thompson this season. He's on the cusp of being a steady 20-25 goal scorer with size. And I don't like admitting any of this, as I despised the trade that brought him here and want Thompson to fail so I can hate Botterill that much more. But blind, vindictive rage aside, I think getting rid of giraffe boy at this state would be a mistake.
He doesn’t use his size and he makes his linemates worse. A bag of pucks will suffice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brian_griffin

tmack224

Registered User
Aug 18, 2009
1,505
2
Buffalo, NY
With talk that Sam may want to go west and the expansion draft. what do you guys think a deal with Seattle would look like for Sam? Sam for 2021 1st? This draft isnt anything special so I would think we could get more or at least put in the deal a player for the draft.

To Seattle:
Sam Reinhart
Agreement that Seattle takes Kyle Okposo

To Buffalo:
2021 1st

Sam gets to go closer to home.
Seattle gets a top line player in his prime and able to sign him long term. He can be the face of the franchise to start it off.

Buffalo takes a chance on the draft pick while getting rid of Okposos contract and not worrying about Seattle taking anyone.

I feel like the Sabres might need to add a draft pick in there but with this draft not being anything special I think its a solid deal
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
55,614
34,433
Rochester, NY
With talk that Sam may want to go west and the expansion draft. what do you guys think a deal with Seattle would look like for Sam? Sam for 2021 1st? This draft isnt anything special so I would think we could get more or at least put in the deal a player for the draft.

To Seattle:
Sam Reinhart
Agreement that Seattle takes Kyle Okposo

To Buffalo:
2021 1st

Sam gets to go closer to home.
Seattle gets a top line player in his prime and able to sign him long term. He can be the face of the franchise to start it off.

Buffalo takes a chance on the draft pick while getting rid of Okposos contract and not worrying about Seattle taking anyone.

I feel like the Sabres might need to add a draft pick in there but with this draft not being anything special I think its a solid deal

I don't believe Seattle values Reinhart to the point that they are taking on Okposo's deal and giving up a top 5 pick.

Okposo's deal likely costs the Sabres a 1st or more for another team to take on.

So, you are saying that Seattle places the value on Reinhart as multiple 1st rounders and maybe more. I don't see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elchud

elchud

Registered User
Nov 1, 2015
3,094
1,927
Eichel would be the ask for taking on Okposos contract.

The way I see it, unless there is a *solid* plan to make the playoffs next year, no reason to move Okposo if its part of dumping Eichel. Moving Eichel means Reinhart signs for one season and Ullmark doesn't return.

Once we know Seattle's roster a trade proposal would be more easy to define. I doubt they trade their 2022 1st.
 

tmack224

Registered User
Aug 18, 2009
1,505
2
Buffalo, NY
I don't believe Seattle values Reinhart to the point that they are taking on Okposo's deal and giving up a top 5 pick.

Okposo's deal likely costs the Sabres a 1st or more for another team to take on.

So, you are saying that Seattle places the value on Reinhart as multiple 1st rounders and maybe more. I don't see it.

I agree, I do think a pick would need to be added. what about adding our 2nd and 3rd round picks this year? we already have 3 of each.

Sam, okposo, 2021 2nd, 2021 3rd for Seattles 2021 1st with the agreement okposo is the guy they take in the expansion draft. I think Sam would be valued higher then a top 5 pick this year especially with this being an expansion team. Sam could be the guy they start the build around. Okposo's contract is only 2 more years and would help Seattle keep above the minimum salary. a 2nd and 3rd this year would be a solid return with Sam
 

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,618
7,846
In the Panderverse
Comments embedded in [bold].
With talk that Sam may want to go west and the expansion draft. what do you guys think a deal with Seattle would look like for Sam? Sam for 2021 1st? This draft isnt anything special so I would think we could get more or at least put in the deal a player for the draft.

To Seattle:
Sam Reinhart
Agreement that Seattle takes Kyle Okposo

To Buffalo:
2021 1st

Sam gets to go closer to home.
Seattle gets a top line player in his prime and able to sign him long term. He can be the face of the franchise to start it off. [interesting and excellent points]

Buffalo takes a chance on the draft pick while getting rid of Okposos contract and not worrying about Seattle taking anyone.

I feel like the Sabres might need to add a draft pick in there but with this draft not being anything special I think its a solid deal
and

I don't believe Seattle values Reinhart to the point that they are taking on Okposo's deal and giving up a top 5 pick.

Okposo's deal likely costs the Sabres a 1st or more for another team to take on. [except for a team like Seattle who has no current cap constraints and the most amount of flexibility of any team given how they can build their ED roster]

So, you are saying that Seattle places the value on Reinhart as multiple 1st rounders and maybe more. I don't see it.
and

Eichel would be the ask for taking on Okposos contract. [2 years of $6M Okposo to get 5 years of $10M Eichel - pretty sure any team which has the cap space would do that, with or without a subsequent buyout of Okposo, so I disagree and think you're inflating the "return ask" a trade partner would have for taking on Okposo's deal]

The way I see it, unless there is a *solid* plan to make the playoffs next year, no reason to move Okposo if its part of dumping Eichel. Moving Eichel means Reinhart signs for one season and Ullmark doesn't return. [if that happens, which I don't want to happen, I agree with your logic]

Once we know Seattle's roster a trade proposal would be more easy to define. I doubt they trade their 2022 1st. [I agree]

I agree, I do think a pick would need to be added. what about adding our 2nd and 3rd round picks this year? we already have 3 of each.

Sam, okposo, 2021 2nd, 2021 3rd for Seattles 2021 1st with the agreement okposo is the guy they take in the expansion draft. I think Sam would be valued higher then a top 5 pick this year especially with this being an expansion team. Sam could be the guy they start the build around. Okposo's contract is only 2 more years and would help Seattle keep above the minimum salary. a 2nd and 3rd this year would be a solid return with Sam
One would assume as part of this trade that Reinhart signs for more than 1 year. Given the proximity to VAN, I think it's a reasonable risk for SEA to take.

If Reinhart (or Reinhart plus a pick or two) is traded to SEA for their Rd 1 pick, why must SEA take Okposo in the ED? Why can't SEA agree to take a cheaper piece of trash like Eakin or Miller? Sabres won't have a cap issue with Reinhart moved out. Why spend extra picks to take Okposo in that scenario? Make the centerpiece of the deal Reinhart for SEA Rd 1 and leave it at that.

With both Reinhart and Okposo gone, I'm estimating $57-60M in Sabres cap next season with bonuses, still needing 2 goalies, a couple d-men and a 14th forward. Adding Okposo in still leaves $15M for the gaps. It's not a problem.

I'm not in favor of moving Reinhart unless scorched earth is the only option. But that kind of trade I adjusted from your OP makes at least some sense in my mind.
 

Archie Lee

Registered User
Apr 13, 2018
506
555
I don't see any indication that the Sabres are looking to move Okposo. Indeed, if Eichel and Reinhart are moved this off-season, it would not surprise me if Okposo was give the "C". Actually, in that scenario it would surprise me if he was not named captain.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
55,614
34,433
Rochester, NY
I agree, I do think a pick would need to be added. what about adding our 2nd and 3rd round picks this year? we already have 3 of each.

Sam, okposo, 2021 2nd, 2021 3rd for Seattles 2021 1st with the agreement okposo is the guy they take in the expansion draft. I think Sam would be valued higher then a top 5 pick this year especially with this being an expansion team. Sam could be the guy they start the build around. Okposo's contract is only 2 more years and would help Seattle keep above the minimum salary. a 2nd and 3rd this year would be a solid return with Sam

I just doubt that Seattle has any interest in trading their first ever 1st round pick for a player that is one year away from UFA. Plus, while I really like Sam, I don't see him as a "face of the franchise" type player. If the conversation is about Seattle trading with Buffalo for a "face of the franchise" type player, it's Eichel.

If Seattle wants Reinhart, my guess is that they try and figure out an offer with pieces they acquire via the Expansion Draft and not by using either their '21 1st or their '22 1st.

Now if they get a late '21 1st as compensation in the ED process, they might be willing to have that in a deal for Reinhart.
 

HogtownSabresfan

Registered User
Jan 13, 2010
6,619
1,694
I don't believe Seattle values Reinhart to the point that they are taking on Okposo's deal and giving up a top 5 pick.

Okposo's deal likely costs the Sabres a 1st or more for another team to take on.

So, you are saying that Seattle places the value on Reinhart as multiple 1st rounders and maybe more. I don't see it.

Reinhart's contract is worth a 1st once flipped. Maybe more. I might do it but depends if we have confidence in using that $6 Okposo cap money.
 

HogtownSabresfan

Registered User
Jan 13, 2010
6,619
1,694
Eichel would be the ask for taking on Okposos contract.

That's crazy overpayment. Okposo has one ugly contract year left and then his buyout isn't that bad. You're not buying him out this year because it's pretty much same cap savings to ship him to minors.
 

Rastin

Registered User
Jul 14, 2004
660
270
Not sure if this is allowed but what about finding a team to trade Risto to but immediately trade him back to us w/ retention. Something like:

To Chicago: Ristolainen @ 50%
To Buffalo : 4th rd pick

then turn around and do:

To Buffalo: Ristolainen @ 25%
To Chicago: 2nd rd pick (Bostons)

If this kind of thing is allowed the rationale would be that it saves us 1.35 mill towards the cap for this year. If the season goes well, great, we use the cap savings to make ourselves better early and hopefully have room to add at the deadline but in the more likely scenario that things don't go well then Risto is a hugely valuable trade chip at the deadline with a cap hit of only 1.35 mill. Chicago, obviously, is buying an upgraded pick here.
 

UnleashRasmus

Rasmus has gone Super Saiyan VI!
Apr 15, 2012
6,473
1,932
Nashville Tennessee
Trade: Ristolainen, Reinhart and Eichel

Cover: Thompson, Mittelstadt, Asplund, Bjork, Olofsson, Girgensons, Skinner, Borgen, Dahlin, Jokiharju, Ullmark

Leaving: Eakin, Oglevie, Okposo, Smith, Caggiula, Dea, Rieder, Sheahan, Fogarty, Miller, McCabe, Pilut, Irwin, Davidson, Hutton and Tokarski
 

UnleashRasmus

Rasmus has gone Super Saiyan VI!
Apr 15, 2012
6,473
1,932
Nashville Tennessee
Not sure if this is allowed but what about finding a team to trade Risto to but immediately trade him back to us w/ retention. Something like:

To Chicago: Ristolainen @ 50%
To Buffalo : 4th rd pick

then turn around and do:

To Buffalo: Ristolainen @ 25%
To Chicago: 2nd rd pick (Bostons)

If this kind of thing is allowed the rationale would be that it saves us 1.35 mill towards the cap for this year. If the season goes well, great, we use the cap savings to make ourselves better early and hopefully have room to add at the deadline but in the more likely scenario that things don't go well then Risto is a hugely valuable trade chip at the deadline with a cap hit of only 1.35 mill. Chicago, obviously, is buying an upgraded pick here.

This makes zero sense. Just trade Ristolainen for a prospect and a 2nd, and move on. He's been here for 8 seasons and it isn't any better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JesterCheese
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->