Time to start backfilling?

[kenfury]

With the deadline and an upcoming draft, is it time to start looking at backfilling the pipeline as compared to getting more picks? Due to a deep 1st round draft teams may be hesitant to move picks for 2015 draft. As compared to moving players for picks should we look at postions of need in overage players or AHL. There are questions in team depth in net, do you go after a Demko/Fucale/Jarry as compared to a 2nd/3rd round pick at the deadine? What about a gamble for a scoring winger such as Kamenev or a checking center like MacInnis or Gauthier? Should the team look at creating competition in Rochester or fill the pipe line for a few more years?

Click to read more...

 

[Bps21*]

4 firsts have already moved in this draft. 5 moved all last draft and that's including the islanders trading back into the round on the day of...and we haven't even gotten to the deadline yet.

I don't think I buy the narrative that teams won't move 1s in a strong draft. Being strong means that more teams will want them and more **** might be on the table.

 

[Paxon]

By overage players do you mean actual overagers, players who are over 20 in the CHL? Because hardly any of them are worth taking.

These players we have to move at the deadline aren't worth much. Picks are the best way to get value for them. Picks can also be used in part to acquire other players in separate deals.

 

[kenfury]

By overage players do you mean actual overagers, players who are over 20 in the CHL? Because hardly any of them are worth taking.

These players we have to move at the deadline aren't worth much. Picks are the best way to get value for them. Picks can also be used in part to acquire other players in separate deals.

By overagers I mean 20-21 year olds in the AHL/Europe. My poorly articulated question was "would you rather send Stafford for a late 2nd, or Stafford and a 3rd, for 20-21 year old who was drafted in the 2nd/Fasching type?" Is it time for more McNabb/Fasching type deals?

 

[Chainshot]

By overagers I mean 20-21 year olds in the AHL/Europe. My poorly articulated question was "would you rather send Stafford for a late 2nd, or Stafford and a 3rd, for 20-21 year old who was drafted in the 2nd/Fasching type?" Is it time for more McNabb/Fasching type deals?

I'm much more interested in them indentifying prospects or younger players from other organizations, using the bank roll of picks and prospects they have already amassed to pry some of those guys out for their own team. So yeah, I'd rather they backfill. And it need not be 20-ish year olds, but guys in their early 20's who are already playing in the NHL interest me much more than yet another 2nd or 3rd round pick. Whatever they need to add to a deal within reason, fine.

 

[ZeroPT*]

We have picks out the ass, if Murray can trade stafford or Stewart for a prospect he likes, go ahead.

 

[Husko]

Murray said in a recent interview (WGR yesterday) that our only prospect that is close to NHL ready is Reinhart. That's especially true on the defensive side of things, where the cupboard gets really really bare after Pysyk and McCabe. I definitely think, at the very least, he brings in a defensive prospect that is 20-21 that can go to the AHL. As far as forwards, not sure. The forward lineup is going to look pretty jammed at the NHL level next year, and we should have a few junior and college prospects at forward moving into the AHL next year, so not sure if he will target any AHL age forwards.

 

[JLewyB]

Murray said in a recent interview (WGR yesterday) that our only prospect that is close to NHL ready is Reinhart. That's especially true on the defensive side of things, where the cupboard gets really really bare after Pysyk and McCabe. I definitely think, at the very least, he brings in a defensive prospect that is 20-21 that can go to the AHL. As far as forwards, not sure. The forward lineup is going to look pretty jammed at the NHL level next year, and we should have a few junior and college prospects at forward moving into the AHL next year, so not sure if he will target any AHL age forwards.

he was talking about the2014 draft prospects only

 

[Paxon]

By overagers I mean 20-21 year olds in the AHL/Europe. My poorly articulated question was "would you rather send Stafford for a late 2nd, or Stafford and a 3rd, for 20-21 year old who was drafted in the 2nd/Fasching type?" Is it time for more McNabb/Fasching type deals?

I'd rather have a Fasching, but I don't envision that quality of prospect being available for the guys we're offering up even with a pick thrown in. I think it's more likely we wind up with a borderline NHL/AHLer which doesn't really interest me over just taking the picks. The picks can be used separately to acquire an older prospect, trade up, or keep the cupboards stocked (especially if we get 2016 picks), which is something that still needs to be done going forward even if we've over-stocked previous years.

 

[Jim Bob]

The other thing to consider in this regard is the 50 contract limit.

Without looking it up, I'm unsure how many contracts are likely to free up this summer. That could affect their approach to things, as well.

 

[Matt Ress]

However it's done, I think moving moving perishables (FAs) and assets(low picks, prospects) for quality will be the key. Condensing assets if you will. I don't think it's crazy to look to the NCAA for a tweener blue liner. A late bloomer in college probably has more prospect than a CHL overage imo.

There will be an influx of forwards at the NHL and AHL levels so, unless there's real quality there, I don't see TM bringing anyone in.

The more I think about it, the more I can see Ullmark up with the Sabres next year. I understand the argument(s) against it but, with a strong possibility of one or none of the starters returning, I think he may be our best option. Of course, bringing in a ringer could change everything if he is the 2nd best option, he'll most likely end up in ROC for more playing time.

 

[Jame]

I'm much more interested in them indentifying prospects or younger players from other organizations, using the bank roll of picks and prospects they have already amassed to pry some of those guys out for their own team. So yeah, I'd rather they backfill. And it need not be 20-ish year olds, but guys in their early 20's who are already playing in the NHL interest me much more than yet another 2nd or 3rd round pick. Whatever they need to add to a deal within reason, fine.

agreed. Ii dont even care about the age range (as long as it's not "old" guys). If the contract term is in place, or RFA status remains, get guys that allow us to ice a competent roster next year.

We can't have 7 Brian Flynn's next year.

2 years of Patrick Berglund still makes a ton of sense.

 

[Husko]

he was talking about the2014 draft prospects only

Outside of Reinhart and the ones that are basically just about here (Grigs, Larsson, Pysyk) is there anyone can that you could even make a case for being near nhl ready? Maybe McCabe?

 

[Chainshot]

agreed. Ii dont even care about the age range (as long as it's not "old" guys). If the contract term is in place, or RFA status remains, get guys that allow us to ice a competent roster next year.

We can't have 7 Brian Flynn's next year.

2 years of Patrick Berglund still makes a ton of sense.

Yep. For historical context for illustration for Sabre fans, the Hecht deal (going way, way back) is the sort of picks-for-player type of move I'd like to see. Berglund would be a solid bridge guy and would still be capable enough when pushed down the lineup in my opinion. It remains to be seen if he can make something work, though the Sabres availability of ready cap space and relative deep pockets of the owner may make it easier for them to take on potentially bad contract value as an asset in also getting actual NHL bodies -- say bad contract and decent possession player for picks and expiring contract guy.

The build will move from simply selling off players for picks into more structure. The Fasching deal was a great example of Murray working his roster to feel a prospect need, now it would be cool to see that same thing applied to actual roster pieces.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Yep. For historical context for illustration for Sabre fans, the Hecht deal (going way, way back) is the sort of picks-for-player type of move I'd like to see.

The Fasching deal was a great example of Murray working his roster to feel a prospect need, now it would be cool to see that same thing applied to actual roster pieces.

I think you're right, and that ultimately those two trades will go down as inflection points. But they are also really hard to pull off.

 

[Jim Bob]

It's really going to be interesting to see what happens with Saad in Chicago. I can't see them moving him, but that would be awesome if Murray could pry him out of there.

Tomas Jurco in Detroit is an interesting guy, too.

Then there is LA with their 6 25 and under Fs who are RFAs to be.... (Toffoli, Pearson, Nolan, Clifford, Andreoff, and Shore).

 

[Chainshot]

Also from Chicago, Bickell seems like a piece they could land simply enough and slotted correctly, he's a solid player. Oh Capgeek, how I miss thee... would love to look over the Kings body of contracts to see what sort of leverage move would work there.

 

[Jim Bob]

Also from Chicago, Bickell seems like a piece they could land simply enough and slotted correctly, he's a solid player. Oh Capgeek, how I miss thee... would love to look over the Kings body of contracts to see what sort of leverage move would work there.

http://stats.nhlnumbers.com/teams/LAK?year=2015

This doesn't seem bad, the problem is that it doesn't sum up contracts for future seasons.

 

[Jame]

Also from Chicago, Bickell seems like a piece they could land simply enough and slotted correctly, he's a solid player. Oh Capgeek, how I miss thee... would love to look over the Kings body of contracts to see what sort of leverage move would work there.

Not gonna lie... we draft mceichel, then we should put the threat of an offersheet on the table for Toffoli... ****ing love that guy... would rather make a hockey trade for him. But would totally be willing to go bonkers for Toffoli

 

[dire wolf]

Outside of Reinhart and the ones that are basically just about here (Grigs, Larsson, Pysyk) is there anyone can that you could even make a case for being near nhl ready? Maybe McCabe?

Armia, McDavid

 

[dire wolf]

http://stats.nhlnumbers.com/teams/LAK?year=2015

This doesn't seem bad, the problem is that it doesn't sum up contracts for future seasons.

Here's another option: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/cap-central/team.php?team=LA

EDIT: I think it might have some errors, though

 

[Jame]

since i refuse to touch anything associated with hockeybuzz, i've been using:
http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/

it's not capgeek... but atleast it;s not eklund related.

 

[dire wolf]

since i refuse to touch anything associated with hockeybuzz, i've been using:
http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/

it's not capgeek... but atleast it;s not eklund related.

Egads! I forgot that was Eklund's site.

I like your link, although it looks like it doesn't show non-roster players under contract

 

[MayDay]

Outside of Reinhart and the ones that are basically just about here (Grigs, Larsson, Pysyk) is there anyone can that you could even make a case for being near nhl ready? Maybe McCabe?

So basically you are saying that, aside from all our prospects that are nearly NHL-ready, we don't have any prospects that are nearly NHL-ready.

Isn't that a tautology?

 

[Zman5778]

The other thing to consider in this regard is the 50 contract limit.

Without looking it up, I'm unsure how many contracts are likely to free up this summer. That could affect their approach to things, as well.

http://web.archive.org/web/20150102200851/http://capgeek.com/

It'll do for things like this.

It looks like we have the following UFAs/RFAs:

UFA:
Stewart
Stafford
Mitchell
Kaleta
Mesz
Benoit
Strachan
Enroth
Neuvirth
Ellis
Bagnall

RFA:
Grigorenko
Larsson
Flynn
Pysyk
Schaller
D'Amigo
Hackett
Dalpe
JST
Leduc
Sundher
Lieuwen
Varone

27 under contract for next year.

The following could, in theory, slide next year:
Reinhart
Ullmark
Baptiste (would be overage, so it's unlikely)
Bailey


Right now, we're at 46 contracts.

Reinhart, Bailey, Baptiste, Dupuy and Ullmark are all sliding.

The only guy we might have to sign is Possler, everyone else from 2013 is NCAA (Hurley, Petersen, Florentino, Malone).


So contract-wise, we look to be in solid shape.