Tyrannustyrannus Posted July 4, 2009 Report Posted July 4, 2009 somebody will always overpay. Regier has overpaid for players we already have (Connolly and Vanek come to mind) but I think it was to save face with the fan base. At least we're not as bad as the NY Rangers. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedi.../content.1.html
SteamRoller72 Posted July 4, 2009 Report Posted July 4, 2009 somebody will always overpay. Regier has overpaid for players we already have (Connolly and Vanek come to mind) but I think it was to save face with the fan base. At least we're not as bad as the NY Rangers. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedi.../content.1.html Vanek is not overpaid....did you see Scott Gomez or Marion Gaborik's deals? Also, Regier didn't negotiate the Vanek contract, Edmonton did. There's quite a few GM's with a history of overpaying for marginal talent. Regier is not one of them.
Tyrannustyrannus Posted July 4, 2009 Author Report Posted July 4, 2009 I know it was the right move, but at the time Regier was forced to overpay. Players who play one good NHL season don't deserve a contract like that...
shrader Posted July 4, 2009 Report Posted July 4, 2009 Vanek is not overpaid....did you see Scott Gomez or Marion Gaborik's deals? Also, Regier didn't negotiate the Vanek contract, Edmonton did. There's quite a few GM's with a history of overpaying for marginal talent. Regier is not one of them. And the beautiful thing about that Vanek deal is that it is now down to $6.4 million each of it's remaining years. That's a nice added bonus for the budget.
jawj80 Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 For all of you Lindy bashers, this article shows you how good of a coach he is. He gets guys to play way above their ability. If Gaustad and Mair were on any other team, they would be spending their time in the AHL. Lindy made the guys on that list great and then they left and took a bunch of money and now they aren't worth half of what they make.
SwampD Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 For all of you Lindy bashers, this article shows you how good of a coach he is. He gets guys to play way above their ability. If Gaustad and Mair were on any other team, they would be spending their time in the AHL. Lindy made the guys on that list great and then they left and took a bunch of money and now they aren't worth half of what they make. Ah! The myth of Lindy - That somehow, even though Darcy picks from the same pool of talent as every other GM, he somehow manages to pick only marginal NHL talent and it is only through the Magic of Lindy that they turn into NHLers. This article reminded me just how over-rated these players were, here in this small market and good for them that they believed their own press and got their payday. Oh, welcome to the board.
gregkash Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 Truth be told the only contracts I'd want on the Sabres books of the People that have left would be JP Dumonts... And Mike Grier's (from last year, he hasn't signed yet this year).. Everyone else got very very overpaid on the Open Market..
Tyrannustyrannus Posted July 5, 2009 Author Report Posted July 5, 2009 When I originally read the article I wondered how much coaching figured into the mix. I think it has to do more with how less motivated players are once they get that big contract. I met a former NHLer and future Hall of Famer (I'll leave him nameless) He never won the cup, but only seemed to care that he made a lot of money. But when it comes down to it, I can't justify signing Campbell, Drury, Briere, or McKee for what they got. Its one thing to sign a Free Agent for a large sum of money for a short time, but to get stuck with a $53 million contract for 8 seasons? How long until we have another Lockout because the league reverted back to the late 1990's? How sick will it make Buffalo fans when Philadelphia buys out Briere's contract?
inkman Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 How sick will it make Buffalo fans when Philadelphia buys out Briere's contract? If by sick you mean how hard will I laugh, then yes, I will be quite 'sick'.
silvermike Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 I think the most remarkable thing on that list is that Uwe Krupp, in 1998 at age 33, signed a deal that eleven years later would have made him the highest paid defenseman on the Sabres.
deluca67 Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 Vanek is not overpaid....did you see Scott Gomez or Marion Gaborik's deals? Also, Regier didn't negotiate the Vanek contract, Edmonton did. There's quite a few GM's with a history of overpaying for marginal talent. Regier is not one of them. Have you seen the current roster?
jawj80 Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 Ah! The myth of Lindy - That somehow, even though Darcy picks from the same pool of talent as every other GM, he somehow manages to pick only marginal NHL talent and it is only through the Magic of Lindy that they turn into NHLers. This article reminded me just how over-rated these players were, here in this small market and good for them that they believed their own press and got their payday. Oh, welcome to the board. First off, I've been reading this board for a while I just don't post. Second, just because I haven't posted hundreds of times doesn't mean I don't know what I am talking about. I agree with you when you say we shouldn't have paid them what they got. They are worth less than what they are being paid. But I still will argue about the influence of Lindy. I've been playing and watching hockey for a long time and I know, that's the deal with those players. The reason Lindy doesn't have that influence now with Roy and Pominville and Vanek, is because they are young and have gotten by on individual talent for a long time and in the NHL that doesn't work. Briere and Drury and Mckee all knew how important it was to buy into the system and they got all of the younger guys to buy in as well.
SwampD Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 First off, I've been reading this board for a while I just don't post. Second, just because I haven't posted hundreds of times doesn't mean I don't know what I am talking about. I agree with you when you say we shouldn't have paid them what they got. They are worth less than what they are being paid. But I still will argue about the influence of Lindy. I've been playing and watching hockey for a long time and I know, that's the deal with those players. The reason Lindy doesn't have that influence now with Roy and Pominville and Vanek, is because they are young and have gotten by on individual talent for a long time and in the NHL that doesn't work. Briere and Drury and Mckee all knew how important it was to buy into the system and they got all of the younger guys to buy in as well. When I look at Lindy, I see a coach that, without Hasek, has not made the playoffs 5 out of 7 seasons. And if the reason they did make it those two years, as you say, isn't a result of his coaching, but rather the influence of players like Drury, Briere, and Mckee, then how good of a coach is he actually. Don't get me wrong, I like Lindy. And most on this board are in agreement with you. I just think he falls into the same category as those players that left, over-rated by the small market fans that fall in love with their stars.
X. Benedict Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 When I look at Lindy, I see a coach that, without Hasek, has not made the playoffs 5 out of 7 seasons. And if the reason they did make it those two years, as you say, isn't a result of his coaching, but rather the influence of players like Drury, Briere, and Mckee, then how good of a coach is he actually. Don't get me wrong, I like Lindy. And most on this board are in agreement with you. I just think he falls into the same category as those players that left, over-rated by the small market fans that fall in love with their stars. The other line of thinking might be to consider how well have Drury, Briere, and McKee, Campbell, Dumont, Grier have done without Lindy.
wjag Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 The other line of thinking might be to consider how well have Drury, Briere, and McKee, Campbell, Dumont, Grier have done without Lindy. I think this point gets glossed over too much. Most players excel in a system with the players around them. Notice I said most, not all. Some are truly special and make others better. But most are products of the system, the team and the organization they play in. Change the system, the team or the organization and performance is rarely duplicated. But fans, GMs and owners all hope against hope that their system, team or organization will be a better fit than the one the player just came from. Because teams cherry pick players having a good year, it seems more often than not that previous results aren't repeated.
nfreeman Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 First off, I've been reading this board for a while I just don't post. Second, just because I haven't posted hundreds of times doesn't mean I don't know what I am talking about. I agree with you when you say we shouldn't have paid them what they got. They are worth less than what they are being paid. But I still will argue about the influence of Lindy. I've been playing and watching hockey for a long time and I know, that's the deal with those players. The reason Lindy doesn't have that influence now with Roy and Pominville and Vanek, is because they are young and have gotten by on individual talent for a long time and in the NHL that doesn't work. Briere and Drury and Mckee all knew how important it was to buy into the system and they got all of the younger guys to buy in as well. Welcome and good post.
SwampD Posted July 5, 2009 Report Posted July 5, 2009 The other line of thinking might be to consider how well have Drury, Briere, and McKee, Campbell, Dumont, Grier have done without Lindy. I would say they've all done about the same. It just doesn't seem that way for Drury, Briere, Cambell and McKee because they never could have lived up to the expectations attached to those contracts.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.