Éditer l'avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • La grandeur minimale recommandée se veut de 800px par 800px
  • Grandeur maximale: 1MB
Glisser l'image pour repositionner
Sauvegarder
Annuler

DDossett

Membre depuis
10 sept. 2020
Équipe favorite
Sabres de Buffalo
Messages dans les forums
425
Messages par jour
0.94
Sujets de discussion
33
Forum: Armchair-GMdim. à 11 h 19
Forum: Armchair-GM13 sept. à 17 h 46
Sujet: Next
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TheEarthmaster</b></div><div>Trocheck is better than Henrique, Vatrano than Byron and Manson than Gardiner, that's all very true. But you don't NEED good players to fill those roles next year. In fact, it's probably preferable that you don't. You need the team to be bad so that you have the best chance of picking high. If that's the goal, then Henrique etc. are better kinds of players to fill that role now, and then his contract falls off in a couple years when you are ready to take the next step, unlike Trocheck who will be close to Henrique's age now when you're actually competitive and on the decline like Henrique is now. You don't want that. Just because overpaying Manson or Trocheck or whoever is a smaller problem than what Buffalo is dealing with right now, that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to avoid those problems through the rebuild.

Look at Arizona. They're rebuilding, just like Buffalo. They're not going out and spending a bunch in free agency, because that's an inefficient way to get good players who probably aren't even going to be good by the time the rest of the team is good, given the way most of the free agent contracts go (most of them are bad!). They didn't sign Jamie Oleksiak, or Brandon Saad or whoever, because those guys are going to be non factors in a few years. They went to Philly and got Shane Ghostisbehere+ a 2nd round pick for their trouble, and they can probably get another asset in a few years for him again. They took on Anton Stralman, the type of steady RHD that you're talking about for Dahlin. And when they are ready to contend, they can go out and target better, younger guys to fill those roles, because they won't have committed to players long term during the rebuild- Ghost and Stralman are gone in two years, max.

Now contrast that with Vancouver, who keeps handing out these huge contracts in free agency for guys who are going to "guide them through the rebuild" or whatever, and all it does is hurt them when they're trying to be competitive. They're paying six million to Louie Eriksson? Bummer, now they don't have enough to pay Tyler Toffoli, a guy who was great for them and could have continued to be a good piece coming out of the rebuild. They're paying six million to Tyler Myers? Well bummer, now they can't sign Chris Tanev, who had an elite defensive season for Calgary last year.

My point being: handing out long term contracts is always a dangerous games, because you're almost certainly tying yourself into some bad years at the end there. You're getting good years now, which is why you see contending teams tying themselves to guys like Brayden Schenn, Gabriel Landeskog, RNH, etc. But if Buffalo isn't going to be good, why spend the money to waste Trocheck's good years on a team that isn't going anywhere, especially if you might be saddled with aging ineffective vets when you're trying to extend Power or whoever you draft in the future? Why not wait and get a guy who is 50-70% of Trocheck now and then in a few years when you're ready to contend go get the Trocheck equivalent in that free agency class? You may not even have to overpay if players see a roster that is ready to take the next step.

Build your team however you want, but the situation you're describing as being super satisfied with is a similar one to Vancouver and they're maybe only a few notches above Buffalo in the list of how ready NHL teams are to contend.</div></div>

Eh i don't know about similar to Vancouver. I get your point but im not paying "stars". Mason is probably my worst contract and im not sure its that bad he'll be 36 when its over, i can structure it so it can be reasonably bought out too.
I disagree with being bad for picks that hasn't goteen us anywhere in 5 years. There are plenty of examples of teams who have succeeded by being bad and by being good. The rangers could be a good example of a quick turn around, tampa and boston are examples of doing it with a good core. St. Louis completely rebuilt and won a cup. Without making a single top 10 draft pick. There's a lot of ways to do this and i would prefer over paying a couple of guys to help us along than than hoping i get a natural leader that can pull a bunch of loser together.
As to taking on bad deals i don't know why the sabres aren't taking bad contracts. I'd love to get get picks to take a guy off someones books for a few years but we're not for some ridiculous reason. Apparently detroit and arizona are the only teams aloud to profit from cap space, so i look forward to trading my vets to them when im done with my rebuild in year 3 offseason.
Forum: Armchair-GM13 sept. à 16 h 32
Sujet: Next
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TheEarthmaster</b></div><div>Instead of committing a bunch of money to Trocheck as a "stopgap" solution who is playing in your bottom six, why don't you target some centers that teams don't want on their books anymore and may even pay you to get rid of? Adam Henrique was on waivers this year and is signed for less money with only a few years left, yet is still a 30-40 point center like Trocheck is. Colin White isn't particularly great but he can eat minutes in your middle six for a rebuilding team. Ditto for Scott Laughton if/when Philly gets pressed against the cap next season. And then you're not stuck with these guys in their late thirties when you need the cap space to sign the top prospects you've assembled.


You could extend the logic to a middle six winger someone doesn't want anymore instead of Frank Vatrano (Paul Byron, Carl Hagelin) or an overpaid defenseman someone needs to clear cap on instead of Josh Manson ( Jake Gardiner)</div></div>

I think Trocheck is easily better than both of those players over the next 3 years and maybe beyond. He can play 3rd line center or 2nd line right wing at a more than acceptable level. I think his compete level and character could help in the leadership group and that he'll be interested in the opportunity. I don't think i get anywhere near that value from white or henrique. Henrique 3 years ago, definately. We should have picked him up to our 2nd line center then, now not worth it.
I think vatrano is an upgrade from hinistroza. he is just a fill in. He's way better than paul byron and hagelin and the contract will be up when he reaches thier age. Unlike them Vatrano may still have something to offer if he adds a solid role to his game.
If he doesn't its 3.5 mil for 3, very easy to deal with and i think we have it extra for next 3 years anyway.
I think mason is better than gardiener. I want a stable defense first veteran guy that hold down my right sude for dahlin for a few years. I'm overpaying by 1.5 mil maybe. I'd love to have some one better. Im not getting them without commiting more cap or trading assets and this team needs every asset to focus on rebuilds. If mason making 5.5 4 years from now is this teams biggest problem i'll be super satisfied.
Forum: Armchair-GM13 sept. à 16 h 9
Sujet: Next
Forum: Armchair-GM13 sept. à 11 h 27
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sabres89</b></div><div>Skinner might be worth 4.5 if he can put up 25-30 goals. It would be asinine to pay half of it, a buyout in 2 years makes way more sense. Not a botterill fan, its stuff like this, skinner said he wanted to play here or toronto, 40 goals or not, nobody was offering him 9 long term. Who could you possibly have been negotiating against? Mittelstadt doesnt impress me, he finished the year strong under granato, so theres hope. I think theres still some pretty significant questions about his skating, his offense, and if hes gonna stay a center, his defense too.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>palhal</b></div><div>Thanks for your insight.

I never knew the Sabres reasoning for acquiring a one year rental from Carolina. Sabres were still a lottery team. And then Botterill tried to justified the deal by signing one trick pony Skinner to massive deal(as you suggest who was negotiating against).
I'm still not sure if Skinner and his overall play is worth even 4.5m even he puts up 25 to 30 goals. For the Sabres and their fans...hoping that Skinner plays better.</div></div>

Yes 25-30 goals is worth 4.5 million. Every time. Its a steal for a UFA 25 goal scorer. I can't Believe you're even asking. And skinner does score 25 goal avg. a year thought his career. That being said, 9 mil is ridiculous and paying 4.5 off your cap for him to play elsewhere is even dumber than signing him for 9 on the end of his career in the first place.
Forum: Armchair-GM7 sept. à 12 h 48