stenbaro Posted May 16, 2008 Author Report Posted May 16, 2008 That's besides the point. The point was that they put together a team that nobody else could have because of a grand-fathered contract, spent more money than anyone else (ignoring LTIR cushions, which the Flyers have a bunch of) and still didn't win the cup. In other words, you can't buy a cup. Spending more may increase your chances to a point, but you can't guarantee it by spending more than everyone else. It might be beside the point but wouldnt it be nice to be on the other side of the coin.. As far as buying a cup Anaheim went out and added Pronger to an already good defense they found a way, Detroit somehow does it every few years, they bring in a Rafalski to add to a Lidstrom..Before that it was Primeau and Shanahan I believe..They Brought in HAsek..There are many examples of teams that have won a cup that "bought one" I guess it;s the example you use... There are no guarantees in sports..Even well putogether teams that were put together through smart trades and their own farm system arent guaranteed to win the cup (2006 Buffalo Sabres)
Bmwolf21 Posted May 16, 2008 Report Posted May 16, 2008 It might be beside the point but wouldnt it be nice to be on the other side of the coin..As far as buying a cup Anaheim went out and added Pronger to an already good defense they found a way, Detroit somehow does it every few years, they bring in a Rafalski to add to a Lidstrom..Before that it was Primeau and Shanahan I believe..They Brought in HAsek..There are many examples of teams that have won a cup that "bought one" I guess it;s the example you use... There are no guarantees in sports..Even well putogether teams that were put together through smart trades and their own farm system arent guaranteed to win the cup (2006 Buffalo Sabres) There's a difference between bringing in one guy to push you over the top and reshaping the entire roster by outspending everyone else in free agency. The Rangers are generally the latter and not the former; the Red Wings and Avs have all traded for guys who have helped put them over the top in a given year and therefore are not considered "buying" a championship. Plus trading for a guy completely negates the idea of "buying" a Cup, since you are giving up players and/or picks and prospects to get a guy and not just throwing the most money at him.
spndnchz Posted May 16, 2008 Report Posted May 16, 2008 It might be beside the point but wouldnt it be nice to be on the other side of the coin..As far as buying a cup Anaheim went out and added Pronger to an already good defense they found a way, Detroit somehow does it every few years, they bring in a Rafalski to add to a Lidstrom..Before that it was Primeau and Shanahan I believe..They Brought in HAsek..There are many examples of teams that have won a cup that "bought one" I guess it;s the example you use... There are no guarantees in sports..Even well putogether teams that were put together through smart trades and their own farm system arent guaranteed to win the cup (2006 Buffalo Sabres) I don't blame a team for fully utilizing the rules. Like doing your taxes, you find every loophole out there if its to your advantage. and I have to say, the Pens bringing in Hossa was marvelous, simply marvelous.
wonderbread Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 I don't blame a team for fully utilizing the rules. Like doing your taxes, you find every loophole out there if its to your advantage. and I have to say, the Pens bringing in Hossa was marvelous, simply marvelous. Darcy would never.
awill29 Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 I don't blame a team for fully utilizing the rules. Like doing your taxes, you find every loophole out there if its to your advantage. and I have to say, the Pens bringing in Hossa was marvelous, simply marvelous. Absolutely not. They gave up alot to get him. A great 2 way forward in Armstrong, a good face-off man in Christensen, their top prospect and a 1st rounder is entirely too much for a rental who's going to be on the down-side of his career in 2 years. Not like it'll matter, anyway, Hossa's gonna demand 7M+ for north of 5 years come July 1, and there's no way the Pens give him around a 2M$ raise. Not with M.A. Fleury due to make about 5M as an RFA, and Malkin next year looking at 8 or above. Although I do have the Pens winning the cup, you just don't trade a way your future to better your odds for 1 year.
Bmwolf21 Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 Absolutely not. They gave up alot to get him. A great 2 way forward in Armstrong, a good face-off man in Christensen, their top prospect and a 1st rounder is entirely too much for a rental who's going to be on the down-side of his career in 2 years. Not like it'll matter, anyway, Hossa's gonna demand 7M+ for north of 5 years come July 1, and there's no way the Pens give him around a 2M$ raise. Not with M.A. Fleury due to make about 5M as an RFA, and Malkin next year looking at 8 or above. Although I do have the Pens winning the cup, you just don't trade a way your future to better your odds for 1 year. Pretty damn good deal on Atlanta's end, though, especially since they were going to lose Hossa with no compensation...
tom webster Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 Absolutely not. They gave up alot to get him. A great 2 way forward in Armstrong, a good face-off man in Christensen, their top prospect and a 1st rounder is entirely too much for a rental who's going to be on the down-side of his career in 2 years. Not like it'll matter, anyway, Hossa's gonna demand 7M+ for north of 5 years come July 1, and there's no way the Pens give him around a 2M$ raise. Not with M.A. Fleury due to make about 5M as an RFA, and Malkin next year looking at 8 or above. Although I do have the Pens winning the cup, you just don't trade a way your future to better your odds for 1 year. Some teams want mediocirty, some teams go for the Cup. 1) Armstrong is a good two way forward, not great. A marginal second line forward, more then likely a third liner. 2) Christensen, like you said, is a great face off man. With Crosby, Malkin and Staal, he is a forth liner at best. 3) Esposito's stock plummeted for a reason. The quintesential floater with the drive of Alexander Daigle. 4) The 29th or 30 th pick. In other words, Pittsburgh gave up Paille, Gaustad, MacArthur and a very high pick for a chance to win the Cup. Sign me up!
BetweenThePipes00 Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 Absolutely not. They gave up alot to get him. A great 2 way forward in Armstrong, a good face-off man in Christensen, their top prospect and a 1st rounder is entirely too much for a rental who's going to be on the down-side of his career in 2 years. Not like it'll matter, anyway, Hossa's gonna demand 7M+ for north of 5 years come July 1, and there's no way the Pens give him around a 2M$ raise. Not with M.A. Fleury due to make about 5M as an RFA, and Malkin next year looking at 8 or above. Although I do have the Pens winning the cup, you just don't trade a way your future to better your odds for 1 year. You're right ... but last I checked Crosby (20 yrs old), Malkin (21), Staal (19), Fleury (23), Whitney (25) or even Letang (21) were not in that deal. That's their future. How many first-round picks pan out? 50%? So Esposito or that 1st rounder will be a bust (maybe both), not to mention it's almost a second rounder now. And even if they can't keep that whole core group together because of the cap, all the more reason to go for it while you have all that talent, take your shot.
awill29 Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 Some teams want mediocirty, some teams go for the Cup.1) Armstrong is a good two way forward, not great. A marginal second line forward, more then likely a third liner. 2) Christensen, like you said, is a great face off man. With Crosby, Malkin and Staal, he is a forth liner at best. 3) Esposito's stock plummeted for a reason. The quintesential floater with the drive of Alexander Daigle. 4) The 29th or 30 th pick. In other words, Pittsburgh gave up Paille, Gaustad, MacArthur and a very high pick for a chance to win the Cup. Sign me up! You're right ... but last I checked Crosby (20 yrs old), Malkin (21), Staal (19), Fleury (23), Whitney (25) or even Letang (21) were not in that deal. That's their future. How many first-round picks pan out? 50%? So Esposito or that 1st rounder will be a bust (maybe both), not to mention it's almost a second rounder now.And even if they can't keep that whole core group together because of the cap, all the more reason to go for it while you have all that talent, take your shot. If the deal works out and Pittsburgh wins the cup, then great, it panned out for them. But Christensen has good potential, and Armstrong was developing nicely. And sure, it might be the last pick in the draft, but this draft is supposed to be very deep anyway. And yes, they do still have a great nucleus of young players. Hell, I even think that for this season, the Pens came out on top. But what I don't like is the fact that they traded away more good players that they could've locked up long term for cheap. And all they got out of it was a rental who will probably be on the team for 3 months. Granted, he's very good, but come July 1, his bags are packed. No thanks.
SabresFan526 Posted May 17, 2008 Report Posted May 17, 2008 If the deal works out and Pittsburgh wins the cup, then great, it panned out for them. But Christensen has good potential, and Armstrong was developing nicely. And sure, it might be the last pick in the draft, but this draft is supposed to be very deep anyway. And yes, they do still have a great nucleus of young players. Hell, I even think that for this season, the Pens came out on top. But what I don't like is the fact that they traded away more good players that they could've locked up long term for cheap. And all they got out of it was a rental who will probably be on the team for 3 months. Granted, he's very good, but come July 1, his bags are packed. No thanks. I think everyone is forgetting that Pascal Dupuis came in that deal to Pittsburgh as well. Granted, he's a UFA, but he's cheap enough and an excellent defensive forward that I think he's better than Armstrong and is cheap enough that they could probably keep him. 2 NHL players for potential that can put you over the top in the Cup Finals and beyond. I'll take it, myself, even if it's just two rentals, but I think Dupuis probably stays and that's fine.
X. Benedict Posted May 18, 2008 Report Posted May 18, 2008 Some teams want mediocirty, some teams go for the Cup.1) Armstrong is a good two way forward, not great. A marginal second line forward, more then likely a third liner. 2) Christensen, like you said, is a great face off man. With Crosby, Malkin and Staal, he is a forth liner at best. 3) Esposito's stock plummeted for a reason. The quintesential floater with the drive of Alexander Daigle. 4) The 29th or 30 th pick. In other words, Pittsburgh gave up Paille, Gaustad, MacArthur and a very high pick for a chance to win the Cup. Sign me up! Pittsburgh had a crowded store shelf. Christensen is a nice pick up for Atlanta for just his hands alone. I don't think anybody really lost in this trade.
deluca67 Posted May 18, 2008 Report Posted May 18, 2008 Pittsburgh had a crowded store shelf. Christensen is a nice pick up for Atlanta for just his hands alone. I don't think anybody really lost in this trade. It depends on if the Pens win the Cup. Hossa wasn't brought in to get the Pens to the Cup. He was brought in to get them to the Cup and win. The Thrashers got a great return for Hossa. The Thrashers have a lot talent and if they could just get their front office in order they could be one of the better teams in the East.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted May 18, 2008 Report Posted May 18, 2008 I don't know ... I think too often we think things are only good moves if the team WINS the Cup ... if they lose a Game 7 triple OT at Detroit is it all of a sudden a bad trade? You take your best shot, on the ice and off. Yeah they gave up some POTENTIALLY good players but they did not mortgage their future to win JUST this season. I think it would have been much worse to sit still and think, "Yeah maybe we are one player away, but we'll win one eventually with all this talent anyway so ... let's just go with what we have." Ask the 74-75 Sabres how the "They're so young and talented, their time will come" thing worked out.
That Aud Smell Posted June 20, 2008 Report Posted June 20, 2008 bump. figured i'd put this back up in view of the jeff carter signing. i'd said we could get pommer for 6/33.75. it's starting to look more like it'd take toward 6 per year to get him tied up, unless you give him more years. now, carter only signed for 3 years. that's consistent with the kind of deal where both sides get some protection from a long-term deal, the phlyers don't risk over-paying for a long period of time, and carter doesn't sell himself short through the prime of his career. pominville's worth is more established: we need to have that guy locked up long-term. i'd be in favor a 7-year deal. that way, your annual hit could be lower. so i will revise my take and say perhaps we could get him signed for 7/$40.75. i like that ".75" stuff ... it makes me feel smart.
inkman Posted June 20, 2008 Report Posted June 20, 2008 You could buy me diamonds You could buy me pearls Take me on a cruise around the world Baby, you know I'm worth it Dinner light by candles Run my bubble bath Make love tenderly to last, and last Baby, you know I'm worth it (Bridge) Wanna' please; wanna' keep; wanna' treat your inkman right? Not just told, but to show, that he knows he's worth your time You will loose, if you choose, to refuse to put him first He will and he can find a man who knows his worth! Mmmmmmmmm (Chorus) 'Cause a real man knows a real man when he sees him (when he sees him) And a real man knows a real man Ain't 'fraid to please him (please him) And a real man knows a real man always comes first (first) And a real man just can't deny Pominville's worth Mmmmmm hmmmmm (x1), Mmmmmm hmmmmm (x1), Mmmmmm hmmmmm (x1), Mmm (Hold up) (Verse 2) If you treat me fairly I'll give you all my goods... Treat you like a real man should Baby, I know you're worth it If you never play me Promise not to bluff I'll hold you down when it gets rough 'Cause baby, I know you're worth it (Bridge 2) He rolls the mile; makes you smile, all the while being true Don't take for granted the passions that he has for you You will lose, if you choose, to refuse to put him first He will and she can find a man who knows His worth! ...OH! (Chorus) 'Cause a real man knows a real man when he sees him (when he sees him) And a real man knows a real man Ain't 'fraid to please him (please me) And a real man knows a real man always comes first (first, baby) And a real man just can't deny Pominville's worth [breakdown] No need to read in between the lines Spell it out for you (spell it out for you) Just hear this song 'Cause you can't go wrong when you value(Better value...) Pominville's Pominville's Pominville's Worth! (yeah) [Chorus (x2)] 'Cause a real man knows a real man when he sees him (when he sees him[1st time]) (nothin' like Pominville's worth [2nd time]) And a real man knows a real man Ain't 'fraid to please him (please me [1st time]) (ohhh, ooh [2nd time]) And a real man knows a real man always comes first (first, baby [1st time]) (comes first [2nd time]) And a real man just can't deny Pominville's worth (repeat)
WayneGibbous Posted June 20, 2008 Report Posted June 20, 2008 $7 mil? OMG. Nooooooooooooo way. He is not worth that and the Sabres will never pay him that. Love the guy but no way. He deserves the same cash as Roy.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted June 20, 2008 Report Posted June 20, 2008 The market has changed since the Roy deal ... do you really think he will take Roy money when jeff Carter got more for doing less? $7 mill might be high buy Roy money is low.
That Aud Smell Posted June 20, 2008 Report Posted June 20, 2008 $7 mil? OMG. Nooooooooooooo way. who said anything about $7MM? i said something about 7 years, but not 7MM. thanks for the song, ink.
stenbaro Posted June 20, 2008 Author Report Posted June 20, 2008 who said anything about $7MM? i said something about 7 years, but not 7MM. thanks for the song, ink. I started the thread off thinking he would hit between 5-6 mill..He might go beyond that..My hope is a 10 yr 50 million dollar contract..However that will never happen..LOL
stenbaro Posted July 14, 2008 Author Report Posted July 14, 2008 I started the thread off thinking he would hit between 5-6 mill..He might go beyond that..My hope is a 10 yr 50 million dollar contract..However that will never happen..LOL Any word on how the negotiating is going???? I figured by now we shoulda heard something
wjag Posted July 14, 2008 Report Posted July 14, 2008 I'm no Nostradameus, but that doesn't stop me from throwing my predictions around. I think, market value-wise, Pomminstein can command between six and seven million. I forsee a 7-year, 42 million contract. Bank it and book it. The guy has 40-goal potential..
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 14, 2008 Report Posted July 14, 2008 I'm no Nostradameus, but that doesn't stop me from throwing my predictions around. I think, market value-wise, Pomminstein can command between six and seven million. I forsee a 7-year, 42 million contract. Bank it and book it. The guy has 40-goal potential.. If he was a UFA, he might be able to get that if he replicated last season ... but even if the Sabres don't lock him up, he'd be an RFA ... As good as he was last season, would a team risk 3 first-round picks and give him all that money? Maybe ... but NOW, this offseason, a full year before that, I don't think he has quite that much leverage. It also depends if and what Miller signs for ... they have to get him done first, he would be unrestricted and really, Vanek's deal notwithstanding, Miller is the face of the franchise and his deal will set the bar.
wjag Posted July 14, 2008 Report Posted July 14, 2008 If he was a UFA, he might be able to get that if he replicated last season ... but even if the Sabres don't lock him up, he'd be an RFA ... As good as he was last season, would a team risk 3 first-round picks and give him all that money? Maybe ... but NOW, this offseason, a full year before that, I don't think he has quite that much leverage. It also depends if and what Miller signs for ... they have to get him done first, he would be unrestricted and really, Vanek's deal notwithstanding, Miller is the face of the franchise and his deal will set the bar. Oh I agree... I've got him signing a lifetime contract for oh let's say 100M. I am very free with other people's money...
LabattBlue Posted July 14, 2008 Report Posted July 14, 2008 There is no way Pominville is signing for "Roy money". My guess would be that he ends up somewhere between 4.5-6 mil per year. The longer the term, the higher the avg per year goes up.
Chief Enabler Posted July 14, 2008 Report Posted July 14, 2008 I really dont like the direction this thread is going :cry: . We are talking about a playoff bubble team shelling out franchise contracts to Vanek, Roy, Miller & Pominville; with Pominville being the highest!?! nuts I tell ya. In the big picture, does or can everyone stay? IMO, if my hand was forced I trade Miller. sorry.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.