Jump to content


Is Thursday going to be a free-for-all?


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    Even John Scott outscored me.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,079 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2013 - 12:58 PM

Cut down is tomorrow, is it not?  What do you expect for waiver activity?  Can teams make trades today?

PTR

#2 Spndnchz

Spndnchz

    Ass. Player Agent

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,656 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fracking Shanahan's house

Posted 16 January 2013 - 01:05 PM

Whole bunch of guys getting waived today. Teams must put whatever players on waivers by noon on Thursday.  24 hour waivers will go until Friday at noon and final rosters must be set by 3 PM on Friday.

#3 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 16 January 2013 - 09:25 PM

View PostSpndnchz, on 16 January 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Whole bunch of guys getting waived today. Teams must put whatever players on waivers by noon on Thursday.  24 hour waivers will go until Friday at noon and final rosters must be set by 3 PM on Friday.
Is there a list anywhere we can see who has been placed on waivers so far?  The only things I saw didn't look very comprehensive.

If Wade Redden were a RH shot I'd give him a call, our defense situation notwithstanding.

#4 Spndnchz

Spndnchz

    Ass. Player Agent

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,656 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fracking Shanahan's house

Posted 17 January 2013 - 09:52 AM

tick tock tick tock....

#5 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:27 AM

What's the deal Chz?  The suspense is killing me!!!!

#6 Spndnchz

Spndnchz

    Ass. Player Agent

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,656 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fracking Shanahan's house

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:47 AM

As Vogl pointed out in his article, the Sabres have 26 guys at camp.  They need to get down to 23 by 3pm Friday.  If you put Gerbe and Cody on IR you're down to 24.

My question is do they really need to waive someone right away?  Technically Grigorenko's contract doesn't kick in until the 6th game, so is it really counted?  If it doesn't, they don't need to waive anyone until Gerbe or McCormick come back or before Griggy's 6th game.

#7 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,752 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:49 AM

View PostSpndnchz, on 17 January 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

As Vogl pointed out in his article, the Sabres have 26 guys at camp.  They need to get down to 23 by 3pm Friday.  If you put Gerbe and Cody on IR you're down to 24.

My question is do they really need to waive someone right away?  Technically Grigorenko's contract doesn't kick in until the 6th game, so is it really counted?  If it doesn't, they don't need to waive anyone until Gerbe or McCormick come back or before Griggy's 6th game.
Under the old CBA, kids up on a junior tryout did count against the 23.

#8 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:04 AM

View PostSpndnchz, on 17 January 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

As Vogl pointed out in his article, the Sabres have 26 guys at camp.  They need to get down to 23 by 3pm Friday.  If you put Gerbe and Cody on IR you're down to 24.

My question is do they really need to waive someone right away?  Technically Grigorenko's contract doesn't kick in until the 6th game, so is it really counted?  If it doesn't, they don't need to waive anyone until Gerbe or McCormick come back or before Griggy's 6th game.
Here's the other question I don't know the answer to.  Who is on the roster that they could send down without clearing?  Foligno? anyone else?  They clearly don't want to keep 9 defensemen and they couldn't run short on forwards for long they way the schedule is but it could get them through the weekend until this calms down.

#9 Spndnchz

Spndnchz

    Ass. Player Agent

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,656 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fracking Shanahan's house

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:14 AM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

Here's the other question I don't know the answer to.  Who is on the roster that they could send down without clearing?  Foligno? anyone else?  They clearly don't want to keep 9 defensemen and they couldn't run short on forwards for long they way the schedule is but it could get them through the weekend until this calms down.

Just Foligno and Hodgson on the roster.  Neither is going anywhere.

#10 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:14 AM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:


Here's the other question I don't know the answer to.  Who is on the roster that they could send down without clearing?  Foligno? anyone else?  They clearly don't want to keep 9 defensemen and they couldn't run short on forwards for long they way the schedule is but it could get them through the weekend until this calms down.
Hodgson and Foligno I believe and obviously neither is going anywhere

Chz beat me to it

Edited by inkman, 17 January 2013 - 11:14 AM.


#11 shrader

shrader

    National Oranization of Men Against Amazonian Masterhood

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:15 AM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

Here's the other question I don't know the answer to.  Who is on the roster that they could send down without clearing?  Foligno? anyone else?  They clearly don't want to keep 9 defensemen and they couldn't run short on forwards for long they way the schedule is but it could get them through the weekend until this calms down.

Foligno, Hodgson, and Grigorenko are the only guys who can be removed from the roster without the risk of losing them.

#12 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:27 AM

So then it's one of the defensemen or Ellis.  Ellis is 100% replaceable if claimed so I'd have to go with him.

Who has too many forwards?

#13 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,752 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:32 AM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

So then it's one of the defensemen or Ellis Pardy.  Ellis is 100% replaceable if claimed so I'd have to go with him.

Who has too many forwards?
Barring a trade, that is by far the most logical choice, especially with LR stating that they will not carry 9 D.

#14 Derrico

Derrico

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,958 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Toronto Area

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:40 AM

View PostTaro T, on 17 January 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

Barring a trade, that is by far the most logical choice, especially with LR stating that they will not carry 9 D.

Ya I think this is right.  I've never seen him play so I can't judge too harshly but Pardy has never played more than 60 NHL games in a season and his stats sure don't blow you away.  $2 mil sounds a little high for a depth type of defenseman, espically with all that we already have in the system.  I'd prefer a trade, but this move would not shock me at all.

#15 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:45 AM

I'm interested to see who else gets waived around the league today. We could always stand to upgrade our depth.

#16 shrader

shrader

    National Oranization of Men Against Amazonian Masterhood

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:47 AM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

I'm interested to see who else gets waived around the league today. We could always stand to upgrade our depth.

But keep in mind that you then have to move someone else off of the roster to make room for any claim.

#17 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:55 AM

I wonder if they would waive Ellis and Pardy both to give themselves an extra roster spot which they could fill if someone interesting came up or just use on McCormick or gerbe rather than IRing them and kicking the can down the road.

#18 BfloSabresFan

BfloSabresFan

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:58 AM

FYI...Tim Connolly put on waivers

#19 wjag

wjag

    Buffalo Sports -- Dysfunction Junction

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,170 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just below the Mason-Dixon Line

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:59 AM

View PostMotownBillsFan, on 17 January 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

FYI...Tim Connolly put on waivers

Scoop him up!

#20 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:00 PM

View PostMotownBillsFan, on 17 January 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

FYI...Tim Connolly put on waivers
Garth Snow needs a new pair of shorts.

#21 apuszczalowski

apuszczalowski

    Commander of the Armies of the North

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,758 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:07 PM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

I wonder if they would waive Ellis and Pardy both to give themselves an extra roster spot which they could fill if someone interesting came up or just use on McCormick or gerbe rather than IRing them and kicking the can down the road.
Don't know if you can waive someone who is currently injured though. Also, theres no point if you can IR them. Its not going to cost them cap space or a roster spot to IR them and make the decision later after having more time to evaluate some other players and possibly work out other moves/trades.

#22 Spndnchz

Spndnchz

    Ass. Player Agent

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,656 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fracking Shanahan's house

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:07 PM

Pardy on waivers

#23 sabres4life19

sabres4life19

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 358 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Williamsville, NY

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:07 PM

pardy on waivers

#24 sabres4life19

sabres4life19

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 358 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Williamsville, NY

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:23 PM

does this mean gerbe and cody on IR? make D decisions later?

#25 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:26 PM

The Flames waived 2 goalies...shame we couldn't steer one to Rochester.

View Postsabres4life19, on 17 January 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

does this mean gerbe and cody on IR? make D decisions later?
That's the way I see it.  They really do need to make some sort of trade shortly.  I think Ellis is next, Hecht took his roster spot.  Then it gets more difficult.  I'd still like to see them move Leopold.

#26 sabres4life19

sabres4life19

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 358 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Williamsville, NY

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:28 PM

id like to see ellis to rochester, they need to vet presence and some added experience

#27 Falstaff

Falstaff

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 264 posts
  • Location:Philly

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:50 PM

Nick Palmieri (MIN) as per McKenzie.  Get him.  right now.  Instantly.

#28 qwksndmonster

qwksndmonster

    Livve Neilo

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,323 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Horseheads

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:02 PM

View PostFalstaff, on 17 January 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

Nick Palmieri (MIN) as per McKenzie.  Get him.  right now.  Instantly.
Why? I know nothing about him.  What makes him worth a roster spot?

#29 ThirtyEight

ThirtyEight

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,702 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oxford, UK

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:10 PM

I don't get why Tim was waived? He has one year left, and if he is bought out they have to pay him his full salary and take the cap hit? Do they just really not want him playing for them?

#30 bobis

bobis

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:11 PM

View Postsabres4life19, on 17 January 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

pardy on waivers

along with Tarnasky and Porter from Rochester, hmmm... deal in the works to fill those spots?

#31 nfreeman

nfreeman

    All I want is everything you got.

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,637 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:13 PM

View PostThirtyEight, on 17 January 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

I don't get why Tim was waived? He has one year left, and if he is bought out they have to pay him his full salary and take the cap hit? Do they just really not want him playing for them?

I could be wrong, but I think if someone claims him, he's off their hands with no cap hit.  And if no one claims him, I'd guess Nonis looks at it as an "out with the old, in with the new" kinda move.

I also think TC has been in decline since his last year with the Sabres and just doesn't have much left.

#32 ThirtyEight

ThirtyEight

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,702 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oxford, UK

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:25 PM

So Calgary could lose both their back-up goalies...lol. I would be shocked if Irving isn't picked up, 24 years old and a pretty decent set of stats - Toronto could use him.

Apparently Carlyle really didn't like Connolly, so i guess they are hoping someone takes him off waivers, and if not, they just bury him. No buy out. (makes sense)

#33 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:32 PM

View PostFreakpop, on 17 January 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

along with Tarnasky and Porter from Rochester, hmmm... deal in the works to fill those spots?
They were the Sabres 16th and 17th forwards.  Meaning they still have 3 extra forwards on the roster.

#34 djp14150

djp14150

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 52 posts

Posted 17 January 2013 - 08:42 PM

I would seriously kick the tires on Palmieri.

With the roster likely Gerbe and MCCormick go on IR.  I would send Ellis down for a claim on Palmieri.

The spares on the roster would be 2 Dmen and 1 forward.

I expect in a month a trade f ne of the Dmen...likely Leopold.



With Connolly.....this was more of a traight release.   This is not one of those salary cap mulligans.  They rather see what the youth bring and possibly finish farther down  in the standings in a deep draft.

I also can see them trade a few players or high picks and young players...see phanuff. And Kassel.



#35 bunomatic

bunomatic

    bunomatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,760 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nanaimo,B.C.,Canada

Posted 17 January 2013 - 09:29 PM

In response to the thread title. It would appear not. :(

#36 apuszczalowski

apuszczalowski

    Commander of the Armies of the North

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,758 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:22 AM

View PostThirtyEight, on 17 January 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

I don't get why Tim was waived? He has one year left, and if he is bought out they have to pay him his full salary and take the cap hit? Do they just really not want him playing for them?
From what I understand, they want the roster spot for some of their guys on the Marlies, looking like they are going to just play out the season seeing what they have in some guys like Kadri and try to have space for FA next offseason

View PostThirtyEight, on 17 January 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

So Calgary could lose both their back-up goalies...lol. I would be shocked if Irving isn't picked up, 24 years old and a pretty decent set of stats - Toronto could use him.

Apparently Carlyle really didn't like Connolly, so i guess they are hoping someone takes him off waivers, and if not, they just bury him. No buy out. (makes sense)
Toronto already has 2 "young goalies with" potential in Reimer and Scrivens, if they are going to get a goalie now, its going to be a better veteran who can take over the #1 spot til they feel Reimer/Scrivens is ready to take over fully (I can see one of those 2 being a part of a deal for someone like Luongo if they make a deal)

View PostFreakpop, on 17 January 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

along with Tarnasky and Porter from Rochester, hmmm... deal in the works to fill those spots?
This was a cut down to get back to 23 players, and they had to be waived to go back to Rochester, so theres no spots to fill unless they are released or claimed