Forums/Armchair-GM

Bye Jeff

Created by: Sayburrz
Initial Creation Date: Feb 20, 2020
Published: Feb 20 at 9:20 am
Team: 2019-20 Buffalo Sabres
Trades
BUF
  1. Domi, Max
  2. Gallagher, Brendan
  3. 2021 3rd round pick (CHI)
MTL
  1. Skinner, Jeff
  2. Pilut, Lawrence
  3. 2022 2nd round pick (BUF)
BUF
  1. Wood, Miles
NJD
  1. Rodrigues, Evan
  2. 2021 3rd round pick (CHI)
BUF
  1. 2020 5th round pick (PIT)
PIT
  1. Frolík, Michael
BUF
  1. Gibson, John
  2. Rakell, Rickard
  3. Deslauriers, Nicolas
ANA
  1. Luukkonen, Ukko-Pekka
  2. Hutton, Carter
  3. Mittelstadt, Casey
BUF
  1. Oesterle, Jordan
ARI
  1. Sheary, Conor
Buyouts
  • Cody Hodgson: $791,667
  • Christian Ehrhoff: $0
  • Ville Leino: $0
Buried
  • Zach Bogosian: $225,000 ($1,300,000)
DRAFT YEARROUND 1ROUND 2ROUND 3ROUND 4ROUND 5ROUND 6ROUND 7
2020
BUF
BUF
BUF
BUF
PIT
BUF
DAL
2021
BUF
BUF
BUF
BUF
BUF
BUF
2022
BUF
BUF
BUF
BUF
BUF
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES BONUSESCAP SPACE
23$81,500,000$72,936,111$0$3,407,500$8,563,889
Left WingCenterRight Wing
BUF
Olofsson, Victor
$767,500
LW, RW
RFA - 1
BUF
Eichel, Jack
$10,000,000
C
UFA - 7
BUF
Reinhart, Sam
$3,650,000
RW, C
RFA - 1
ANA
Rakell, Rickard
$3,789,444
C, RW, LW
UFA - 3
MTL
Domi, Max
$3,150,000
C, LW
RFA - 1
MTL
Gallagher, Brendan
$3,750,000
RW
UFA - 2
NJD
Wood, Miles
$2,750,000
LW
RFA - 3
BUF
Johansson, Marcus
$4,500,000
C, LW, RW
NTC
UFA - 2
BUF
Vesey, Jimmy
$2,275,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
BUF
Girgensons, Zemgus
$1,600,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
BUF
Larsson, Johan
$1,550,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
BUF
Lazar, Curtis
$700,000
C, RW
RFA - 1
ANA
Deslauriers, Nicolas
$950,000
RW, LW
UFA - 1
BUF
Okposo, Kyle
$6,000,000
RW
NTC
UFA - 4
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
BUF
Dahlin, Rasmus
$925,000
LD
RFA - 2
BUF
Montour, Brandon
$3,387,500
RD
RFA - 1
BUF
Ullmark, Linus
$1,325,000
G
RFA - 1
BUF
McCabe, Jake
$2,850,000
LD
UFA - 2
BUF
Ristolainen, Rasmus
$5,400,000
RD
UFA - 3
ANA
Gibson, John
$6,400,000
G
UFA - 8
ARI
Oesterle, Jordan
$1,400,000
LD
UFA - 2
BUF
Miller, Colin
$3,875,000
RD
UFA - 3
BUF
Jokiharju, Henri
$925,000
RD
RFA - 2
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
BUF
Sobotka, Vladimír
$3,500,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
BUF
Hunwick, Matt
$2,250,000
LD
UFA - 1
BUF
Thompson, Tage
$925,000
C, RW
RFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Feb 20 at 9:25
#1
Habs for 25
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 441
Gallagher > Skinner. That deal is a big nope
OldNYIfan and Jo_Habs77 liked this.
Feb 20 at 9:26
#2
MNBassman
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 4,439
Likes: 1,568
Unless you’re trading Skinner to the KHL...you’re stuck with him.
Bf3351 and OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb 20 at 9:28
#3
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 974
If this team isn't a joke you need to reevaluate that ducks trade, that package doesn't get you near one of Gibson/Rakell, let alone both
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb 20 at 9:28
#4
Hurricane Waddell
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 2,679
Likes: 804
Deal is aging quite well
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb 20 at 9:40
#5
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: Salzy
If this team isn't a joke you need to reevaluate that ducks trade, that package doesn't get you near one of Gibson/Rakell, let alone both


I agree this is crazy but to say that deal wouldnt get Rakell alone is insane
Feb 20 at 9:43
#6
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 974
Quoting: asauer1122
I agree this is crazy but to say that deal wouldnt get Rakell alone is insane


Middlestat, and 2 goalies don't get Rakell, We have two really good goalie prospects and Gibson, we are more than set in net for the foreseeable future

Rakell only gets moved for a top pair RHD, Rakell fills a massive need we have and moving him for that package would be a huge misstep
Bf3351 and OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb 20 at 9:45
#7
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: Salzy
Middlestat, and 2 goalies don't get Rakell, We have two really good goalie prospects and Gibson, we are more than set in net for the foreseeable future

Rakell only gets moved for a top pair RHD, Rakell fills a massive need we have and moving him for that package would be a huge misstep


Like the sabres, you guys have many massive needs and need to hit that rebuild button
Feb 20 at 9:49
#8
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 974
Quoting: asauer1122
Like the sabres, you guys have many massive needs and need to hit that rebuild button


Never said we dont, But we only move Rakell if we fill major needs, that package doesn't fill any of our needs

Zegras, Steel, Lundestrom, BOG are all centre prospects I would take over Middlestat and we don't need goalies

Rakell gets moved for a top end RHD or a top RHD propect + nothing else makes the Ducks who are starved for offense trade their best forward whos still only 26
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb 20 at 9:52
#9
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: Salzy
Never said we dont, But we only move Rakell if we fill major needs, that package doesn't fill any of our needs

Zegras, Steel, Lundestrom, BOG are all centre prospects I would take over Middlestat and we don't need goalies

Rakell gets moved for a top end RHD or a top RHD propect + nothing else makes the Ducks who are starved for offense trade their best forward whos still only 26


Zegras 100%
Steel: 50/50
lunderstrom: no

Not that i want the sabres to trade risto for rakell cause i dont love thta, but is that a option in your eyes
Feb 20 at 9:58
#10
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 974
Quoting: asauer1122
Zegras 100%
Steel: 50/50
lunderstrom: no

Not that i want the sabres to trade risto for rakell cause i dont love thta, but is that a option in your eyes


I can't see the Ducks doing that
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb 20 at 10:03
#11
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: Salzy
I can't see the Ducks doing that


Rakell has only had one year over 51 points. and only 2 years better than 45. Risto put up 40+ points pretty consistently and he is younger. I wouldnt make the move from a sabres standpoint but ANA would be wise to jump on that offer if it occured
Feb 20 at 11:50
#12
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
I agree this is crazy but to say that deal wouldnt get Rakell alone is insane


"Insane"? Rakell would be the fourth-best scoring forward on your team. A bad goalie, a goalie prospect and a center prospect who is developing more slowly than Sam Steel doesn't get near Rakell, and to even suggest otherwise reveals a lack of knowledge about hockey.
Feb 20 at 11:52
#13
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
Like the sabres, you guys have many massive needs and need to hit that rebuild button


So what? What does that have to do with the indisputable fact that Rakell for Hutton, Mittelstadt and Luukonen is the worst Rakell trade that's been suggested here lately?
Feb 20 at 11:58
#14
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
Rakell has only had one year over 51 points. and only 2 years better than 45. Risto put up 40+ points pretty consistently and he is younger. I wouldnt make the move from a sabres standpoint but ANA would be wise to jump on that offer if it occured


That's laughable. The primary job of a defenseman is to defend, and Ristolainen is arguably one of the worst defensive defensemen in the game. You don't have to be a big believer in plus-minus to realize that a career minus 143 (!!) and never a year when he was plus indicate an inability to execute a defenseman's primary job.
Feb 20 at 12:38
#15
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: OldNYIfan
That's laughable. The primary job of a defenseman is to defend, and Ristolainen is arguably one of the worst defensive defensemen in the game. You don't have to be a big believer in plus-minus to realize that a career minus 143 (!!) and never a year when he was plus indicate an inability to execute a defenseman's primary job.


Obviously you havent done your research. Ill help you out a bit. Under the new coach and actually playing in a system, risto has improved immensely at Defending and dzone play. i wouldnt expect you to understand that a player can improve being only in their mid 20s. Believe it or not most dman dont really hit full stride until 24-26. Risto is 25. do research before commenting
Sayburrz liked this.
Feb 20 at 12:40
#16
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: OldNYIfan
"Insane"? Rakell would be the fourth-best scoring forward on your team. A bad goalie, a goalie prospect and a center prospect who is developing more slowly than Sam Steel doesn't get near Rakell, and to even suggest otherwise reveals a lack of knowledge about hockey.


I wont touch on the logic but "more slowly" is horrendous grammar. I see im arguing with a rather unintelligent person so I will take every thing you say with a grain of salt. (You probably dont understand that but its a saying people use, not actual grains of salt:/)
Feb 20 at 12:59
#17
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
Obviously you havent done your research. Ill help you out a bit. Under the new coach and actually playing in a system, risto has improved immensely at Defending and dzone play. i wouldnt expect you to understand that a player can improve being only in their mid 20s. Believe it or not most dman dont really hit full stride until 24-26. Risto is 25. do research before commenting


Thanks for the lecture, newbie. I was following hockey before your father was born. I know how to "do research," you presumptuous know-nothing.
Feb 20 at 12:59
#18
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
I wont touch on the logic but "more slowly" is horrendous grammar. I see im arguing with a rather unintelligent person so I will take every thing you say with a grain of salt. (You probably dont understand that but its a saying people use, not actual grains of salt:/)


"more slowly" is absolutely correct. Learn the language.
Feb 20 at 1:04
#19
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: OldNYIfan
"more slowly" is absolutely correct. Learn the language.


"Slower" was the correct wording for that specific sentence actually. I know, elementary English is hard...
Feb 20 at 1:04
#20
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Thanks for the lecture, newbie. I was following hockey before your father was born. I know how to "do research," you presumptuous know-nothing.


Super weird that you know my age along with my fathers age. Kinda creepy. May want to consider picking up a hobby rather than stalking dudes
Sayburrz liked this.
Feb 20 at 1:14
#21
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
"Slower" was the correct wording for that specific sentence actually. I know, elementary English is hard...


Wrong. Slower is an adjective. Words that modify verbs ("developing") are called "adverbs." Developing more slowly is correct; developing slower is uneducated. Ask a grammarian. You don't know enough.

And you're too immature for insults, too.
Feb 20 at 5:49
#22
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
I wont touch on the logic but "more slowly" is horrendous grammar. I see im arguing with a rather unintelligent person so I will take every thing you say with a grain of salt. (You probably dont understand that but its a saying people use, not actual grains of salt:/)


The hallmark of the true ignoramus is the immediate and reflexive accusation that the other person lacks intelligence. In reality, such statements merely reveal the inescapable limitations of the speaker.
Feb 21 at 12:18
#23
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: OldNYIfan
The hallmark of the true ignoramus is the immediate and reflexive accusation that the other person lacks intelligence. In reality, such statements merely reveal the inescapable limitations of the speaker.


Thats actually what you just did so you kind of just dug yourself in a hole lol. Stop trying to sound like some smart dude cause you got roasted. you care way to much judging by that last response hahahaha
Feb 21 at 1:16
#24
First NY Then LA
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 11,836
Likes: 5,331
Quoting: asauer1122
Thats actually what you just did so you kind of just dug yourself in a hole lol. Stop trying to sound like some smart dude cause you got roasted. you care way to much judging by that last response hahahaha


I got roasted? I care way "to" much? You're hilarious.
Feb 21 at 1:59
#25
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 984
Likes: 313
Quoting: OldNYIfan
I got roasted? I care way "to" much? You're hilarious.


wow you must be old ahahahah enjoy the remainder of your life gramps
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Remove Option
Submit Poll