IKnowPhysics

Side story, that many know, but not everyone knows... The Buffalo Sabres logo is one of the most elegantly direct logos in professional sports. It's not a single cryptic letter (like a B or a C or a C-with-flames or a P-with-whatever-the-*****-feathers?). It's not an image of a mascot (like a cat or a bear or a Roman guy or a penguin). It's the full name of the city and team, albeit with a hint of dyslexia/Canadianese: Buffalo. Sabres. The logo is the name. The name is spelled out as the logo. No other team has that. (Tangent: we're also lucky enough to have a chant that rhymes, which is also exquisite and very rare. Chants that don't rhyme suck balls. Let's Go Buffalo. Pure bliss compared to other hackneyed *****. Go Leafs Go? Let's go Rangers? Barf.) So when 2000 came around and the CCM designers drank too much maple syrup, I can paraphrase the conversation: "Alright, people like this unofficial jersey that Starter made. W gotta do something like it, but better. We made the swords bigger and put a dotpuck behind them to make it a crest. How are people gonna know what city this is if we don't make the Buffalo heads on the shoulders bigger? It won't fit above or on the crest." They only had one viable answer: put the city name below the crest. Neatly, no other team had done that. And it was enabled by relatively new jersey manufacturing technology of the time: jersey sublimation. They didn't have to tack/twill each letter in place, which would have added weight, complexity, materials, and cost. And it could be done in any font, including to match the three-color nameplate font. So instead of a logo that reads "Buffalo Sabres," we got a third jersey that reads "Sabres (of) Buffalo." And...some folks didn't like that Buffalo across the bottom then either. But it was different and new.

Absolutely. They could have had this: But instead got this: Which looks like a bootleg version of this:

And after taking a second look, the team that really lost this game? Nevermind who ended up with the fugliest new jerseys. It's the New York Islanders. They could have swung for the fences and instead, their fans effectively got nothing.

Understandable. Org's trying to rebrand with royal and gold and doesn't want to mix. Especially when they haven't gotten the new branding on the ice, let alone in front of live fans to reinforce it. It's not time yet. I agree with this explanation. But it doesn't make the end product any better. Nobody waxes nostaligic about the gray stripe as a design feature, so why keep it? Other jerseys got to drop their mistakes (for example, dropping the red sleeves on CGY). All 31 jerseys in one spot here: https://news.sportslogos.net/2020/11/16/nhl-adidas-unveil-reverse-retro-jerseys-for-all-31-teams/hockey-2/ After seeing them all, Sabres ended up middle-of-the-road, which makes me feel better. Some of those jerseys are fire and truly neat, and some -several in fact- are horrificly awful. Some are hot trash all around for simple reasons (Columbus) and some are just good ideas gone way bad (making the Brass Bonanza GRAY because that's the only shared color the Hurricanes could leverage for that cultural appropriation? Bad bad bad.)

I see what they tried to do league-wide and how that guided the design choices for the Sabres version. As for our particular jersey: Eh. In a Reverse Retro campaign that went for some of the zaniest designs (ANA, ARI, CAR, to name a few), they singled out Buffalo's most bland logo. Go goathead here. Bring back the Buffalo head-shaped torso and sleeve striping. Hell, even do it in blue and gold if you want. It's also curious why they didn't go full black/red. Did the organization not want that or are they reserving that palette for a true retro third jersey in a couple of years? If it's the former, I could see the org not wanting that because a) they've been hammered about blue and gold for more than 17 years and b) wanting to keep distance from the Adelphia branding. But all of that is conceptual. Execution-wise, most of this jersey doesn't look that bad, except for one detail that absolutely ruins it for me: the gray bottom stripe. That's a part of the palette that plagued the navy/gold jerseys (overused on the stripes). On this jersey, it looks plain dingy, like it got dipped in bathwater. Keeping that white would have completed a pretty good look, albeit one that wasn't the craziest or or most boldly retro. Going gray on the bottom was unecessary and bad.

Teams are starting to post teasers, and you can tell which jersey is which one from the Adidas teaser from the number inside the collar. Note that VGK ended up being 95, not OTT. Also note that several jerseys have yokes, which are not pictured in the Adidas teaser. That means ours could look significantly different from the teaser.

Source?

They're trying. Which good, because if they weren't trying, they'd be fools. The future is enormous amounts of real-time biometric, kinematic, and positional data generated by wireless on-player hardware automatically processed and boiled down (by software written by sports scientists) into factors the coaches may use to help make decisions in game situations, fitness/training/conditioning, recovery, tactics/strategy, etc.

@tom webster has their ***** together. Participating in revenue sharing and meeting league-mandated revenue sharing requirements is not equivalent to losing money or operating at a loss or being on the verge of bankruptcy. And even teams that claim to operate at a loss in HRR are increasing in value. Decreased gameday revenue will impact all owners, but it is not the only revenue stream, and the talk of the team firing workers to maintain solvency is irresponsible and unfounded speculation. It falls in the same category as the debunked myth of an internal salary cap.

What I'm reading (here, here) says an expansion fee is not considered Hockey Related Revenue under the CBA, and therefore does not contribute to the players' escrow. NHLPA didn't bargain this into the CBA last go-around and missed an opportunity; the owners will make out. Between Vegas and Seattle, the expansion fee was $1.15B, which will be split among 30 teams (Vegas is excluded from the Seattle expansion fee). Compare that to the total league revenue last year of $5.09B. If both of the entire expansion amount is given to the owners (I'm sure it's not) and splt evenly, that's $38.3M each. The TV contracts are currently $600M (Canada) and $200M (US), which totals as $800M, split 50/50 with the players as HRR, giving the owners each $12.9M last year. This pales in comparison to NHL ticket and gameday merchandise/concession income, no matter how it's calculated: It's not clear which teams would want to shut down without gate sales: high-spending teams (TOR, NYR, etc) with high overhead, high salaries, and disproportionately small share of TV money (but large merchandise and other revenue) or small-spending teams with small coffers, low merchandise revenue, and disproportionately high salaries (but higher relative TV money/revenue sharing). If I had to guess, it's the latter.

I don't think I did much Botterill defending, but Davidsson did have a good leap of development the year after the draft, but he didn't sustain that trajectory.

Stats: https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/240720/marcus-davidsson 2016-17 Age 17/18 Djurgarden 45GP / 9P (0.200P/GP - NHLe 9.5P) (drafted by Buffalo 37th overall) 2017-18 Age 18/19 Djurgarden 39GP / 21P (0.538P/GP - NHLe 25.6P) 2018-19 Age 19/20 Djurgarden 52GP / 27P (0.519P/GP - NHLe 24.7P) 2019-20 Age 20/21 Vaxjo 31GP / 13P (0.419P/GP - NHLe 19.9P) 2020-21 Age 21/22 Vaxjo 12GP / 1P (0.083P/GP - NHLe 3.9P) Thoughts: If he doesn't show immediate improvement at the SHL level, his development arch is showing flame out. A 2nd round pick F on has an 18% chance to play more than 200 NHL games. At age 18, he looked very good, but he's not trending in the right direction at age 22.

I'll further pontificate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_James From the NHL's article: Taro is right. Calling him a "player" is a stretch. He's a ***** hero.

https://www.eliteprospects.com/team/6796/mannheimer-erc-u16/2010-2011?tab=stats

Finished 28th among all time Sabres with 0.33G/GP, between Sabre greats John Tucker and Travis Turnbull, but not nearly as productive as Steve Heinze (5G in 14GP) or Jim Jackson (2G in 5GP). But an encouraging note: three Sabres that are more productive than Kahun are still active and under contract: Eichel (0.39G/GP), Skinner (0.38G/GP), and Oloffson (0.37G/GP).

Eh. Agreed. I don't look back on the old days with rose-colored glasses; I don't slight a player's existence because of the state of the game in those days. If an individual played, they played. If they suited up with a Sabres jersey on, they're a Sabre. Nothing borderline about having to dish out and take physical beatings on the ice. Same thing for Rayzor, Boulton, Peters, Scott, et al. If they went to war for us, they're a soldier. And a games played argument doesn't work for me either. They're not famous former Sabres, but Paul Byron, Jarolsav Kristek, Wayne Simmonds, Domink Kahun, Mike Hurlbut, and Scott Nichol are all former Sabres.

I'm sorry this happened to you. It wasn't ok then and it isn't ok now. The best we can do going forward is teach, mentor, and set the example.

They did. https://www.nhl.com/coyotes/news/coyotes-renounce-rights-to-mitchell-miller/c-319543540

Analysis: The current cap space ($3.496M) is suspiciously close to the performance bonuses owed ($3.488M) for the full roster (12F, 7D, 2G). If Kevyn Adams believes the performance bonuses will be triggered and he wants to sign large number of significant contracts next year (Hall, Reinhart, Staal, Dahlin, McCabe, Montour, Jokiharju, et al), I could see him chosing to not spend any more cap for most of this year (perhaps until the deadline for a playoff run). That doesn't mean we couldn't trade, but the Adams might try to keep any trades salary-neutral.

As of 10:40am EST today, 10/29/20, the Sabres numbers are as follows: The salary cap for 2020-21 is $81.5M. The current Sabres cap space, not counting minimum qualifying offers ($6.608M), is $3.496M. The total NHL roster is currently: 12F, 9D, 2G. Cap committed to NHL players under contract (12F, 7D, 2G), totaling $75.725M of salary (new contracts in bold): Eichel, $10M Skinner, $9M Hall, $8M Okposo, $6M Reinhart, $5.2M Staal, $3.25M Olofsson, $3.05M Eakin, $2.25M Girgensens, $2.2M Thompson, $1.4M Lazar, $0.8M Rieder, $0.7M ($51.85M for 12F) Ristolainen (RD), $5.4M Miller (RD), $3.875M Montour (RD), $3.85M McCabe (LD), $2.85M Dahlin (LD), $0.925M Jokiharju (RD), $0.925M Irwin (yo mama), $0.7M ($18.525M for 7D) Hutton, $2.75M Ullmark, $2.6M ($5.35M for Gs) Buyout: Hodgson, $0.792M Carryover Bonus Overages: $1.4875M For RFAs and UFAs and non-rostered players, this leaves $81.5M - $75.725M - $0.792M - $1.4875= $3.496M RFAs that have been qualified and not yet signed (1D) and previous salary, totaling $0.925M, and minimum qualifying offers, totaling $0.8325M: Pilut, $0.925M - min $0.8325M Non-rostered players and NHL cap hit if rostered (11F, 7D, 2G; doesn't include UFAs): Biro, $0.925M Ruotsalainen, $0.925M Cozens, $0.894M Asplund, $0.845M Murray, $0.775M Pekar, $0.764M Oglevie, $0.750M DiPietro $0.75M Fogarty, $0.7M Dea, $0.7M CJ Smith, $0.7M Mittelstadt, QO - $0.8325 Samuelsson, $0.925M Bryson, $0.889M Borgen, $0.864M Fitzgerald, $0.858M Laaksonen, $0.853M Nelson, $0.7M Davidson, $0.7M K6, $0.778 Jonas Johansson, $0.7M Most info sourced from CapFriendly. Potential performance bonuses for 2020-21 are $3.488M (if triggered, performance bonuses extending beyond this year's cap space are applied as a cap hit in 2021-22).

This is the reason. CF tends to be a little more specific and a little more up to date on player positions than other outlets, which usually only list "D" and are often behind the times (listing Reinhart as a C, for example). No site is perfect on this, partly because many players have their usage changed frequently. It's good that Irwin's a left-shot D that could theoretically play both sides; it's increased player versatility. But if we're looking for an improved defense corp, we should be finding good players that are specialized and making the roster versatile.

Sabres have $6.546M with which to sign RFA Olofsson and make other moves. They carry about $3.488M in potential performance bonuses, but this doesn't have to impact this year unless Kevyn Adams decides to be conservative. On performance bonuses:

As of 8:00am EST today, 10/26/20, the Sabres numbers are as follows: The salary cap for 2020-21 is $81.5M. The current Sabres cap space, not counting minimum qualifying offers ($6.608M), is $6.546M. The total NHL roster is currently: 12F, 9D, 2G. Cap committed to NHL players under contract (11F, 7D, 2G), totaling $72.675M of salary (new contracts in bold): Eichel, $10M Skinner, $9M Hall, $8M Okposo, $6M Reinhart, $5.2M Staal, $3.25M Eakin, $2.25M Girgensens, $2.2M Thompson, $1.4M Lazar, $0.8M Rieder, $0.7M ($48.8M for Fs) Ristolainen (RD), $5.4M Miller (RD), $3.875M Montour (RD), $3.85M McCabe (LD), $2.85M Dahlin (LD), $0.925M Jokiharju (RD), $0.925M Irwin (RD), $0.7M ($18.525M for 2LDs and 5RDs) Hutton, $2.75M Ullmark, $2.6M ($5.35M for Gs) Buyout: Hodgson, $0.792M Carryover Bonus Overages: $1.4875M For RFAs and UFAs and non-rostered players, this leaves $81.5M - $72.675M - $0.792M - $1.4875= $6.546M RFAs that have been qualified and not yet signed (1F, 1D) and previous salary, totaling $1.533M, and minimum qualifying offers, totaling $6.608M: Olofsson, $0.7675 - min $0.7M Pilut, $0.925M - min $0.8325M Non-rostered players and NHL cap hit if rostered (11F, 7D, 2G; doesn't include UFAs): Biro, $0.925M Ruotsalainen, $0.925M Cozens, $0.894M Asplund, $0.845M Murray, $0.775M Pekar, $0.764M Oglevie, $0.750M DiPietro $0.75M Fogarty, $0.7M Dea, $0.7M CJ Smith, $0.7M Mittelstadt, QO - $0.8325 Samuelsson, $0.925M Bryson, $0.889M Borgen, $0.864M Fitzgerald, $0.858M Laaksonen, $0.853M Nelson, $0.7M Davidson, $0.7M UPL, $0.778 Jonas Johansson, $0.7M Most info sourced from CapFriendly.

In case no one else noted: Ullmark's contract, unlike Reinhart's, takes him to UFA upon expiry.

It's risky asset management. But this is definitely management saying 'put up or shut up.' We're going to see what works and who wants to be here and the rest are getting moved.