I was just playing around with armchair GM. If the sabres sign stamkos, they need to trade ennis.

Stamkos 11 million for 7 years
Foligno 2.1 for 2 years (I believe this is the min raise)
Girgensons 3.25 for 2 years
Deslauriers .702 tender
Larsson .88 tender
Ristolainen 5.5 for 6 years (gets him until UFA)
McCabe 1.5 for 2 years
McCormick to LTIR
Moulson sent to the AHL
Call up Ullmark (this is the cheap route, rather than signing a UFA)

This only leaves us 436k in cap space, and we would still need a 4th liner, along with room for forward depth (call ups/signings) and a 7th defenseman.

I think ennis being hurt will damage our chances of stamkos, solely due to the fact we won't be able to trade ennis. Some would argue others such as Deslauriers/Larsson/Foligno won't be here, but their caps are modest and we would still need to sign someone to fill their spots. So not much of savings can be argued.

Ennis and Moulson have me thinking it won't be possible to bring in Stamkos.
- Mentalorgasm5

I get the sense that Franson and at least 1 or 2 forwards (might be ennis as you said) will be gone by July 1. That should free up some space. Don't be surprised if Risto gets a bridge deal or if it's long term a cap hit closer to what Maata, Klingberg got.

Are there perhaps "better" options in FA? CJ has looked good but you have to factor in the difficulty of the schedule. He looked alright first half but seemed to let in quite a few head scratchers. Id like him back but if they've got a shot at someone better...
- Sabresfan-365

yeah, there are some options...might not be as good, but then again, perhaps the team will be better on defense and said ufa could put up similar numbers--see al montoya

Just lowering expectations. It's the same song and dance we see all the time. when it doesn't happen you hear the same three answers:

a) we didn't want him anyways, overrated
b) Our mgmt/ownership let us down
c)"buffaluck"
- Sabresfan-365

I've worked my whole career in sales and business development management so I like having high expectations and living in the glass half full mode. We'll see I guess but I like to think we stand a good chance at getting him.

I get the sense that Franson and at least 1 or 2 forwards (might be ennis as you said) will be gone by July 1. That should free up some space. Don't be surprised if Risto gets a bridge deal or if it's long term a cap hit closer to what Maata, Klingberg got.
- Sabresfan-365

Who would take ennis though? Out this long for a concussion, he is pretty much blackballed. Even if he comes back this season, he won't get enough games in for teams to be comfortable acquiring him imo.

Franson could be moved, but I think we would spend around another 3 million on a replacement. Kind of a lateral move.

Ristolainen is in a weird spot, his bridge contract would be a long term deal (6 years). 6 years allows him to become an UFA at the end of the contract. Imo Ristolainen has a better pedigree than both Klingberg and maata before they signed their deals. I know a lot like those two as comparisons, but I think Risto has a little more money coming to him than those two.

It has been reported that Stamkos only wants to play center.
- macman9

Is there a source for this? Or is it the usual hockeybuzz "game of telephone" if you repeat it enough times, it becomes true?
All i have ever heard is that he offhandedly said in a post game interview to a reporter that he prefers center, but is willing to play where ever the coach puts him.
Not criticizing you directly, macman. Just asking if anyone knows weather he is really demanding to only play center or of its getting blown out of proportion.

Who would take ennis though? Out this long for a concussion, he is pretty much blackballed. Even if he comes back this season, he won't get enough games in for teams to be comfortable acquiring him imo.

Franson could be moved, but I think we would spend around another 3 million on a replacement. Kind of a lateral move.

Ristolainen is in a weird spot, his bridge contract would be a long term deal (6 years). 6 years allows him to become an UFA at the end of the contract. Imo Ristolainen has a better pedigree than both Klingberg and maata before they signed their deals. I know a lot like those two as comparisons, but I think Risto has a little more money coming to him than those two.
- Mentalorgasm5

He's accomplished enough in the league that I think a few teams would want him, perhaps not at full value but still good enough to be a piece in a larger deal.

We already have guys here that can take Franson's spot for a fraction of the cost:

Trade-Risto

McCabe-Bogo

Gorges-Pysyk/Nelson

I don't think you can really count Risto's first two years (tank years). This coming contract will be based on this year and maybe the tail end of last year. Not all that different than Klingberg and the Stars.

Is there a source for this? Or is it the usual hockeybuzz "game of telephone" if you repeat it enough times, it becomes true?
All i have ever heard is that he offhandedly said in a post game interview to a reporter that he prefers center, but is willing to play where ever the coach puts him.
Not criticizing you directly, macman. Just asking if anyone knows weather he is really demanding to only play center or of its getting blown out of proportion.
- seedy

http://www.sportsnet.ca/h...ll-stamkos-possibilities/

It’s difficult to tell where things stand right now because none of the principals are talking, including Yzerman, agent Don Meehan or Stamkos himself. But according to a couple of sources, there are other things at play. The first is role.

Stamkos prefers to play centre, which creates a top-six logjam with Valtteri Filppula and triplet Tyler Johnson. It sounds like the Lightning would prefer Stamkos to play on the wing to ease that issue. From what I’ve been told, the discussions were professional, but both organization and player remain searching for common ground.

He's accomplished enough in the league that I think a few teams would want him, perhaps not at full value but still good enough to be a piece in a larger deal.

We already have guys here that can take Franson's spot for a fraction of the cost:

Trade-Risto

McCabe-Bogo

Gorges-Pysyk/Nelson

I don't think you can really count Risto's first two years (tank years). This coming contract will be based on this year and maybe the tail end of last year. Not all that different than Klingberg and the Stars.
- Sabresfan-365

If the sabres know they are getting stamkos, I would absolutely fine giving ennis away for a 6th.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but economically it makes more sense to buyout moulson at the end of next season, compared to this season? It's why I sent him down to the AHL for the 950k, rather than buying him out.

I was just playing around with armchair GM. If the sabres sign stamkos, they need to trade ennis.

Stamkos 11 million for 7 years
Foligno 2.1 for 2 years (I believe this is the min raise)
Girgensons 3.25 for 2 years
Deslauriers .702 tender
Larsson .88 tender
Ristolainen 5.5 for 6 years (gets him until UFA)
McCabe 1.5 for 2 years
McCormick to LTIR
Moulson sent to the AHL
Call up Ullmark (this is the cheap route, rather than signing a UFA)

This only leaves us 436k in cap space, and we would still need a 4th liner, along with room for forward depth (call ups/signings) and a 7th defenseman.

I think ennis being hurt will damage our chances of stamkos, solely due to the fact we won't be able to trade ennis. Some would argue others such as Deslauriers/Larsson/Foligno won't be here, but their caps are modest and we would still need to sign someone to fill their spots. So not much of savings can be argued.

Ennis and Moulson have me thinking it won't be possible to bring in Stamkos.
- Mentalorgasm5

There's lots of things we could do
Moulson is the toughest to move, but if u include a draft pick it might be possible
Pronger recently got moved

But if not...
I'm sure that Gionta &/or Gorges can be moved, probably Franson too
And each of their salaries pretty much equal Ennis

If the sabres know they are getting stamkos, I would absolutely fine giving ennis away for a 6th.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but economically it makes more sense to buyout moulson at the end of next season, compared to this season? It's why I sent him down to the AHL for the 950k, rather than buying him out.
- Mentalorgasm5

Economically it makes more sense to retain 50% and trade, buying him out doesn't help at all. The year where we need the cap space the most, his buyout hit is 3.88 mil on the cap

There's lots of things we could do
Moulson is the toughest to move, but if u include a draft pick it might be possible
Pronger recently got moved

But if not...
I'm sure that Gionta &/or Gorges can be moved
And each of their salaries pretty much equal Ennis
- jdfitz77

Moulson, Gionta, and Gorges all have limited to no trade clauses, they'll be here next season. The only team I could see entertaining the idea of moulson is Arizona, and Moulson would just put a block to that.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/h...ll-stamkos-possibilities/
- Sabresfan-365

Interesting. We definitely have plenty of centers already.....

It is the Chicago model, big money for the core, everybody else is interchangeable. Stan Bowman is not afraid to rid himself of anybody, and I see Tim Murray being the same way, Their loyalty is to making the team better not to protecting a players feelings.
My concern with Stamkos is do we have the support system from the wing to have him thrive here at this time?
It has been reported that Stamkos only wants to play center, Then who plays wing? O'Reilly has played wing before, but is that something he is interested in doing again. I know the team needs scoring but isn't that something that will start to come once the Youngin's get a little hair on their chins.
I am of the opinion that if Murray gets Stamkos...great, But if he decides it is too costly I will be OK with moving forward on the path we are on.
I couldn't be more wishy-washy if I tried.
- macman9

This isn't just directed at you...

I'm still waiting for someone to post a link saying that Stamkos ONLY wants to play Center

To my knowledge, he ONCE said he prefers Center, but would do whatever it takes to win

He might very well want to only play center, but I haven't actually seen this anywhere
I think it's just an assumption ppl are making, that isn't necessarily true

It is the Chicago model, big money for the core, everybody else is interchangeable. Stan Bowman is not afraid to rid himself of anybody, and I see Tim Murray being the same way, Their loyalty is to making the team better not to protecting a players feelings.
My concern with Stamkos is do we have the support system from the wing to have him thrive here at this time?
It has been reported that Stamkos only wants to play center, Then who plays wing? O'Reilly has played wing before, but is that something he is interested in doing again. I know the team needs scoring but isn't that something that will start to come once the Youngin's get a little hair on their chins.
I am of the opinion that if Murray gets Stamkos...great, But if he decides it is too costly I will be OK with moving forward on the path we are on.
I couldn't be more wishy-washy if I tried.
- macman9

Thank You Pach, I respect your opinion

Moulson, Gionta, and Gorges all have limited to no trade clauses, they'll be here next season. The only team I could see entertaining the idea of moulson is Arizona, and Moulson would just put a block to that.
- Mentalorgasm5

Since when does a limited NTC mean a guy won't be able to be moved?

And in Moulson's case...
His options might be, accept a trade (wherever), or go to Rochester
He might need to accept a trade to stay in the NHL

This isn't just directed at you...

I'm still waiting for someone to post a link saying that Stamkos ONLY wants to play Center

To my knowledge, he ONCE said he prefers Center, but would do whatever it takes to win

He might very well want to only play center, but I haven't actually seen this anywhere
I think it's just an assumption ppl are making, that isn't necessarily true
- jdfitz77

That's just a polite way of saying it. If he tests FA he's definitely going to go somewhere that can offer him the opportunity.

Moulson, Gionta, and Gorges all have limited to no trade clauses, they'll be here next season. The only team I could see entertaining the idea of moulson is Arizona, and Moulson would just put a block to that.
- Mentalorgasm5

Agreed. Anyone who talks about trading Moulson or even Ennis just needs to put themselves in any of the 29other GM's shoes and ask themselves "why would i want that guy?"
And i get the "salary dump favor" thing. Theres only so many teams out there that might be willing to do that. And at that point, Moulson at least would veto it.

Is there a source for this? Or is it the usual hockeybuzz "game of telephone" if you repeat it enough times, it becomes true?
All i have ever heard is that he offhandedly said in a post game interview to a reporter that he prefers center, but is willing to play where ever the coach puts him.
Not criticizing you directly, macman. Just asking if anyone knows weather he is really demanding to only play center or of its getting blown out of proportion.
- seedy

I've been saying this all along

I think ppl have gone way too far in spinning one honest answer into a declaration of his demands would be a year & half later

Also...
Playing wing for Jack is a heck of a lot more enticing then having Filppula or Namestnikov as your center
I'd guess Stamkos would like the idea of playing with elite talent on his line again

That's just a polite way of saying it. If he tests FA he's definitely going to go somewhere that can offer him the opportunity.
- Sabresfan-365

Agree it's the polite way of saying it...
But that's by no means a "demand" to play the spot either

Since when does a limited NTC mean a guy won't be able to be moved?

And in Moulson's case...
His options might be, accept a trade (wherever), or go to Rochester
He might need to accept a trade to stay in the NHL
- jdfitz77

Gorges has a full NTC I believe.
Moulson, limited, no team would be looking acquire him, unless if they're helping us, which means we include a pick. (Easy for Moulson to put those types of teams on his list, since they are few)
Gionta is limited, however, no contending team would be looking to acquire him at 4.25. So easy for him to block any trade.

Limited trade clauses don't mean the player can't be trade, however, given the 3 we are discussing, it pretty much means they are untradeable.

In regards to moulson, at his age, and with his family, he gets paid 5 million to play in the NHL or the AHL. If I were him, I just drive to Rochester to play my games, but that's just me.

Gorges has a full NTC I believe.
Moulson, limited, no team would be looking acquire him, unless if they're helping us, which means we include a pick. (Easy for Moulson to put those types of teams on his list, since they are few)
Gionta is limited, however, no contending team would be looking to acquire him at 4.25. So easy for him to block any trade.

Limited trade clauses don't mean the player can't be trade, however, given the 3 we are discussing, it pretty much means they are untradeable.

In regards to moulson, at his age, and with his family, he gets paid 5 million to play in the NHL or the AHL. If I were him, I just drive to Rochester to play my games, but that's just me.
- Mentalorgasm5

Gorges was a limited NTC, which may have been voided post trade.

Gorges was a limited NTC, which may have been voided post trade.
- Sabresfan-365

How does that work? I remember heater had one, was traded, and still had one when San Jose traded him.

Is it an accepted condition when the team acquires a player? Agreeing to honor the NTC buy waiving to come to our team?

How does that work? I remember heater had one, was traded, and still had one when San Jose traded him.

Is it an accepted condition when the team acquires a player? Agreeing to honor the NTC buy waiving to come to our team?
- Mentalorgasm5

Possible, all i know is GeneralFanager lists him as having a limited NTC that might have been voided after the trade.

If RoR will take back a LW position, problem solved! If they guy is future captain material he would realize that having Stamkos is going to help the team more than the difference in his skills applied at C/LW.

If RoR will take back a LW position, problem solved! If they guy is future captain material he would realize that having Stamkos is going to help the team more than the difference in his skills applied at C/LW.
- RhinoFan

As much as I would love to get stamkos, I fear stamkos, eichel, and kane are all too similar to compliment each other well.

I would actually like to try and pry Eberle from the Oilers. He might be the best fit rounding out the top 6 for this team.

Kane O'Reilly Eberle
Foligno Eichel Reinhart

I would actually like to see what Foligno could do with those two for reminder of the season. If it fails throw girgensons back up there, until someone else is ready.