Dan Paille????

[korab rules]

I really wonder how much of that was due to the fact that they were consistently picking somewhere in the middle of the pack year after year, other than that Rasmussen pick. That game breaker talent is tough to find at that point. I have a hard time believing that they were going after guys that wouldn't potentially cash in big time further in their careers, since that is pretty tough to predict. With their forwards, they were definitely drafting towards that hardest working team in the league idea that was big back then though.

 

This is the one thing I do like about how we've had mostly the same front office in place for so long now. You can really look at the continuity of the drafts and what type of players they're looking for at certain times.

 

 

Exactly - Vanek was a big departure from the players they were picking with previous first round picks, because of their draft position. He was entirely in keeping with other top five picks who proved to be difference makers, like Turgeon, Perreault, Martin, Schoenfeld, Housley, Barrasso. The only top five miss was Shawn Anderson in 1986.

 

Seems amazing that the Sabres have only had a top five pick 8 times in 40 years, and only twice in the last 23 years. Great that they hit big with seven of those 8.

[Taro T]

I really wonder how much of that was due to the fact that they were consistently picking somewhere in the middle of the pack year after year, other than that Rasmussen pick. That game breaker talent is tough to find at that point. I have a hard time believing that they were going after guys that wouldn't potentially cash in big time further in their careers, since that is pretty tough to predict. With their forwards, they were definitely drafting towards that hardest working team in the league idea that was big back then though.

 

This is the one thing I do like about how we've had mostly the same front office in place for so long now. You can really look at the continuity of the drafts and what type of players they're looking for at certain times.

 

 

 

Exactly. Dan Paille and Thomas Vanek are not 1st round picks anymore. Miller isn't a 5th rounder. Rivet isn't a big trade acquisition. They're all NHL players who fit a certain role on their team.

True, having a top pick alters the perception of whether the pick should pan out and whether panning out means being a contributor or being a stud.

 

That said, in years past I would absolutely have expected the Sabres to go for Phaneuf, Coburn, Suter, or even Michalek. Any of those D would also would have been expected to be studly but the Sabres had NO established scoring (Satan led the team w/ 26 goals) and really NEEDED a true sniper. Which is why I'm convinced they'd have gone for Michalek if the criminals were still in charge. You can never have enough solid 2-way wingers. :doh:

[Taro T]

Exactly - Vanek was a big departure from the players they were picking with previous first round picks, because of their draft position. He was entirely in keeping with other top five picks who proved to be difference makers, like Turgeon, Perreault, Martin, Schoenfeld, Housley, Barrasso. The only top five miss was Shawn Anderson in 1986.

 

Seems amazing that the Sabres have only had a top five pick 8 times in 40 years, and only twice in the last 23 years. Great that they hit big with seven of those 8.

The year before Vanek was drafted, offensive players that would be expected to score were still available after the Sabres reached for Ballard: Semin, Higgins, and (the future bust) Klepis were all available. Had they wanted to go for a scorer, they were available and Ballard would most likely still have been available when they chose Paille.

 

The year before that, Perezhogin and Steckel were available when Novotny was selected.

 

The year before that, when Kriukov was chosen, Marcel Hossa, Mikhonov, and Frolov were available.

 

Barrett Heisten was probably actually a reasonable selection when looking for offense back in 2000, but we all know how well that one worked out.

 

The year they took Kalinin, Gagne, Kraft, and Gomez were all on the board when Buffalo selected.

 

We can go back through the rest of the criminals' tenure, but I think my point has been made. The Sabres didn't stay away from offensive players because there were none available. There were skilled offensive players available. Might the business model have had anything to do w/ staying away from the offensive skilled players? I would say yes.

[korab rules]

The year before Vanek was drafted, offensive players that would be expected to score were still available after the Sabres reached for Ballard: Semin, Higgins, and (the future bust) Klepis were all available. Had they wanted to go for a scorer, they were available and Ballard would most likely still have been available when they chose Paille.

 

The year before that, Perezhogin and Steckel were available when Novotny was selected.

 

The year before that, when Kriukov was chosen, Marcel Hossa, Mikhonov, and Frolov were available.

 

Barrett Heisten was probably actually a reasonable selection when looking for offense back in 2000, but we all know how well that one worked out.

 

The year they took Kalinin, Gagne, Kraft, and Gomez were all on the board when Buffalo selected.

 

We can go back through the rest of the criminals' tenure, but I think my point has been made. The Sabres didn't stay away from offensive players because there were none available. There were skilled offensive players available. Might the business model have had anything to do w/ staying away from the offensive skilled players? I would say yes.

 

It's easy to look back on a draft 10 years later and make any argument you want. I don't buy your argument that the Sabres intentionally chose players who wouldn't be any good so they wouldn't have to pay them when they reached free agency, which was at least 10 years away in those days. I hated the criminal ownership group, too, but not so much that I would claim they intentionally botched drafts to keep payroll down.

 

Another view is that tough two way players fit the model of the game they wanted to play at that point. Kind of like what they drafted this year. Is Golisano intentionally botching drafts to keep payroll down, too?

 

Maybe they just misjudged what all those players would look like in five years, and chose the players they thought would turn out to be better NHL players at some point down the road. That is just as likely, if not more likely, than a conspiracy theory based on nothing more than second guessing drafts from 10 years ago and justified hatred of the Rigas clan.

[shrader]

True, having a top pick alters the perception of whether the pick should pan out and whether panning out means being a contributor or being a stud.

 

That said, in years past I would absolutely have expected the Sabres to go for Phaneuf, Coburn, Suter, or even Michalek. Any of those D would also would have been expected to be studly but the Sabres had NO established scoring (Satan led the team w/ 26 goals) and really NEEDED a true sniper. Which is why I'm convinced they'd have gone for Michalek if the criminals were still in charge. You can never have enough solid 2-way wingers. :doh:

 

I really think the built in marketing they had with Vanek thanks to his explosion in the Frozen Four that year had a bit of a role in it too. I don't think the criminals would've passed on that.

[Eleven]

The year before Vanek was drafted, offensive players that would be expected to score were still available after the Sabres reached for Ballard: Semin, Higgins, and (the future bust) Klepis were all available. Had they wanted to go for a scorer, they were available and Ballard would most likely still have been available when they chose Paille.

 

The year before that, Perezhogin and Steckel were available when Novotny was selected.

 

The year before that, when Kriukov was chosen, Marcel Hossa, Mikhonov, and Frolov were available.

 

Barrett Heisten was probably actually a reasonable selection when looking for offense back in 2000, but we all know how well that one worked out.

 

The year they took Kalinin, Gagne, Kraft, and Gomez were all on the board when Buffalo selected.

 

We can go back through the rest of the criminals' tenure, but I think my point has been made. The Sabres didn't stay away from offensive players because there were none available. There were skilled offensive players available. Might the business model have had anything to do w/ staying away from the offensive skilled players? I would say yes.

 

The year Ballard was drafted, Pierre-March Bouchard, Petr Taticek, and Eric Nystrom all were selected in the top 10, before the Sabres took Ballard with the 11th pick.

 

The year Novotny was chosen, Svitov, Chistov, M. Koivu, Knyazev, Karlsson, and Blackburn all were taken before Novotny, and therefore before the other players mentioned above.

 

The year before that (2000--Kruikov), Klesla, Jonsson, Torres (the only arguably decent pick), Yakubov, and Krahn all were chosen before Kruikov, and before the players mentioned above.

 

Did all of these teams draft based upon their business models?

 

More likely that the NHL draft is more of a crapshoot than drafts in some other sports, especially after the top few picks.

[Taro T]

It's easy to look back on a draft 10 years later and make any argument you want. I don't buy your argument that the Sabres intentionally chose players who wouldn't be any good so they wouldn't have to pay them when they reached free agency, which was at least 10 years away in those days. I hated the criminal ownership group, too, but not so much that I would claim they intentionally botched drafts to keep payroll down.

 

Another view is that tough two way players fit the model of the game they wanted to play at that point. Kind of like what they drafted this year. Is Golisano intentionally botching drafts to keep payroll down, too?

 

Maybe they just misjudged what all those players would look like in five years, and chose the players they thought would turn out to be better NHL players at some point down the road. That is just as likely, if not more likely, than a conspiracy theory based on nothing more than second guessing drafts from 10 years ago and justified hatred of the Rigas clan.

You mean something to the effect of

The criminals' game plan was build a team that could support a world class goalie but w/out having to pay too much out to anyone BUT the world class goalie.

I never stated the Sabres went out of their way drafting bad players. I said they went out of their way not drafting guys that would be considered serious offensive forwards (guys that could be reasonably expected to put up 30-40 goals and 80-90 points and w/ a bit of luck maybe even see 40-50 goals and 90-100 points). The business plan and the on-ice plan were centered around having killer goaltending and not giving up the huge scoring chances and then scoring 2-3 goals and winning the game. The team was drafting a whole lot of the same type of player during the criminals' tenure.

 

It ultimately turned out to be a flawed plan, as when the Sabres nickel and dimed Peca and he simply would not come back, they alienated the goalie that everything was built around. Things went down very quickly after that.

 

My listing of players that were still available after the Sabres made their 1st pick was merely meant as a counter to your supposition that there weren't offensive forwards still available when the Sabres were picking.

 

The Sabres run in '07 showed that you can't have a team made up entirely of the exact same players (for different reasons than the late '90's early '00's team showed).

I really think the built in marketing they had with Vanek thanks to his explosion in the Frozen Four that year had a bit of a role in it too. I don't think the criminals would've passed on that.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I'd have been surprised if the old regime would have gone for Tom. Although I do hope that my claim that they'd've taken Michalik over one of the D was over-the-top.

 

The year Ballard was drafted, Pierre-March Bouchard, Petr Taticek, and Eric Nystrom all were selected in the top 10, before the Sabres took Ballard with the 11th pick.

 

The year Novotny was chosen, Svitov, Chistov, M. Koivu, Knyazev, Karlsson, and Blackburn all were taken before Novotny, and therefore before the other players mentioned above.

 

The year before that (2000--Kruikov), Klesla, Jonsson, Torres (the only arguably decent pick), Yakubov, and Krahn all were chosen before Kruikov, and before the players mentioned above.

 

Did all of these teams draft based upon their business models?

 

More likely that the NHL draft is more of a crapshoot than drafts in some other sports, especially after the top few picks.

As we've already agreed, the draft is essentially a crapshoot. Some of these players that you mentioned were expected to be offensive players (I doubt Blackburn was, but hey he was drafted by the Strangers.), they simply didn't pan out. I intentionally included some offensive guys that didn't pan out after the Sabres selected to show that it still would have been a crapshoot if the Sabres did go in that direction. Considering the Sabres NEVER went after the big scorer in the criminals' era, I'd expect to assume there was a reason for it. And most likely it was for some reason other than Plante and Satan were leading the team with 53 and 46 points respectively and the team felt they had enough snipers in house.

[Eleven]

 

 

 

As we've already agreed, the draft is essentially a crapshoot. Some of these players that you mentioned were expected to be offensive players (I doubt Blackburn was, but hey he was drafted by the Strangers.), they simply didn't pan out. I intentionally included some offensive guys that didn't pan out after the Sabres selected to show that it still would have been a crapshoot if the Sabres did go in that direction. Considering the Sabres NEVER went after the big scorer in the criminals' era, I'd expect to assume there was a reason for it. And most likely it was for some reason other than Plante and Satan were leading the team with 53 and 46 points respectively and the team felt they had enough snipers in house.

 

Ok. What was the business model, that was built upon deliberately drafting players who were not big scorers? I'm no fan of the Rigases myself, but I need something more to think that this was deliberate.

[mikegrier]

haaaa, and paille gets the game winning assisttonight for the bruins

[Taro T]

Ok. What was the business model, that was built upon deliberately drafting players who were not big scorers? I'm no fan of the Rigases myself, but I need something more to think that this was deliberate.

Let me flip that one over on you. What big scorers did they EVER draft in that era?

 

The team had none (one?) up on the big club. When there are at least 80 players in the league w/ more points than your leading scorer in consecutive years, I would suggest you could use a scorer.

 

In order for me to believe drafting 2 way players over scorers wasn't deliberate I would have to see them actually draft someone that was projected to be a scorer. Almost all the forwards they drafted early in those years carried the "two way player, not a lot of scoring potential" label. Maybe Heisten was considered more of an offensive player (I doubt it, but couldn't find the writeup on him, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt) but that would be one in ~7 years. AND they couldn't get him signed (if he even had been considered as having offensive potential at the time he was drafted) and when he did play for the Strangers he never scored a point there.

[Eleven]

Let me flip that one over on you. What big scorers did they EVER draft in that era?

 

The team had none (one?) up on the big club. When there are at least 80 players in the league w/ more points than your leading scorer in consecutive years, I would suggest you could use a scorer.

 

In order for me to believe drafting 2 way players over scorers wasn't deliberate I would have to see them actually draft someone that was projected to be a scorer. Almost all the forwards they drafted early in those years carried the "two way player, not a lot of scoring potential" label. Maybe Heisten was considered more of an offensive player (I doubt it, but couldn't find the writeup on him, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt) but that would be one in ~7 years. AND they couldn't get him signed (if he even had been considered as having offensive potential at the time he was drafted) and when he did play for the Strangers he never scored a point there.

 

Nope; just gimme the evidence. I'm not the one who stated the original point.

 

EDIT: Not being a prick here on purpose, but as I stated above, I need something more to think that this was deliberate.

[Taro T]

Nope; just gimme the evidence. I'm not the one who stated the original point.

 

EDIT: Not being a prick here on purpose, but as I stated above, I need something more to think that this was deliberate.

Sorry counselor, I've already given you evidence. I've also already stated what the plan was. (And the plan almost worked on 2 separate occassions. Unfortunately when it didn't work the 2nd time, the plan blew up.)

[Eleven]

Sorry counselor, I've already given you evidence. I've also already stated what the plan was. (And the plan almost worked on 2 separate occassions. Unfortunately when it didn't work the 2nd time, the plan blew up.)

 

The plan almost worked...but it was foiled by those meddling kids.

 

Seriously, I just don't see enough to think that the failure to draft scorers was part of a business plan. I also have read enough of your posts over the last four years that I don't take your opinions lightly. I just don't see the support for this one.

[nfreeman]

Sorry counselor, I've already given you evidence. I've also already stated what the plan was. (And the plan almost worked on 2 separate occassions. Unfortunately when it didn't work the 2nd time, the plan blew up.)

You pose a very interesting and plausible theory, but I must respectfully point out that this is not evidence. It's a series of facts that comports with a hypothesis, but it's not evidence. Evidence would be something like Rigas' cellmate testifying that Rigas confessed to him that he had put Paille, Heisten, Novotny etc. on Adelphia's payroll for helping to build the Rigas' golf course on land paid for by Adelphia, and Rigas thought he could get away with it because since they were good 2-way players, they wouldn't be too flashy and expensive, unlike all of those high-priced scorers that Rigas intentionally passed on.

[SwampD]

You pose a very interesting and plausible theory, but I must respectfully point out that this is not evidence. It's a series of facts that comports with a hypothesis, but it's not evidence. Evidence would be something like Rigas' cellmate testifying that Rigas confessed to him that he had put Paille, Heisten, Novotny etc. on Adelphia's payroll for helping to build the Rigas' golf course on land paid for by Adelphia, and Rigas thought he could get away with it because since they were good 2-way players, they wouldn't be too flashy and expensive, unlike all of those high-priced scorers that Rigas intentionally passed on.

That's still hearsay.

[Taro T]

The plan almost worked...but it was foiled by those meddling kids.

If you're referring to Michael and Dominic, yes it was. I suppose you could add Gary in on the 1st time the plan was foiled. ;)

Seriously, I just don't see enough to think that the failure to draft scorers was part of a business plan. I also have read enough of your posts over the last four years that I don't take your opinions lightly. I just don't see the support for this one.

1st off let me state that I do believe the criminals did want to put a winning team on the ice, and obviously they came very close to getting there. They were w/in 60:01 of having a champion. But I also believe they didn't have the cash flow (especially w/ loan payments to make) to risk going w/ high priced players. Even when they brought one 1 (Gilmour) they had somebody else (Chicago) helping to pay the salary.

 

Readers Digest Version - Business Plan - cash flow is very tight (due to things behind the scenes), so put yourself in a position to win but guard the cashflow very carefully. Remember, the Sabres support Adelphia, not the other way 'round. How that translates on ice - Put your money in your goalie and then put serviceable 3rd liners around him (slight exaggeration, but not much of one). I'm not claiming this is a conspiracy of some nature to dupe the fans into believing the team was better than it was. This was a team that came extremely close to winning on more than 1 occassion. If not for some bad calls in '98 the team would have been the sacrificial lambs on the Red Wings romp but they would have done better than Wilson's team did. In '99, it was there for them. In '00, they had to fight too hard to make up for the hangover. But in '01, they were Mike Peca away from another serious run. There is no reason to think Hasek ends up running away after '01 if Peca is happy and in the fold; so they could have made another run that year as well. The plan WAS successful for a time. (Much as the Adelphia business plan was successful for a time. And had the tech bubble not burst, the Adelphia plan (illegal as it was) might actually have continued working long enough for the principals to pay back their illegal loans to themselves which had been used to buy their own stock.)

 

Some Background - (RDV again)

John never wanted to own a hockey team (not initially at least). He became a minority partner in the Sabres to give them enough of a cash infusion to maintain the value of his true interest (Adelphia, and its crown jewel - Empire). Had Rigas not bought into ownership there was a very legitimate possibility that the Knoxes would not have been able to continue. As time went on, Rigas continued to gain a larger share until he outright owned the team. Again, the reason for owning the Sabres was to maintain the value of Adelphia.

 

In the early '90's the Sabres did try to buy a championship. They had the 3rd highest payroll in the league IIRC at the very beginning of the Muckler era. The criminals were involved by then and had seen that path hadn't worked. (Whether that factored into their thinking or not, you'd have to ask them. I'd expect it did as spending more money than was coming in had put the Sabres in the position to need Rigas' money in the 1st place.)

 

When the Sabres stepped back and started to reload, they did it on Hasek's shoulders and the work ethic instilled by Nolan. They had a team w/out much scoring, but they didn't need to score much. They also had only 1 high priced player (Hasek) and a couple of moderately high priced players (Miro and Zhitnik). The team was winning with the formula of riding a high priced goalie and surrounding him with a lot of 3rd liners.

 

We'd already had a strike and a lockout by this time and salaries were escalating tremendously with the largest gains going to big goal scorers and goalies. If you can win without the big salaries (other than 1 obvious exception) why would you want to add them? Remember, this team was 1 crossbar away from having been 60 minutes from Lord Stanley's Chalice. I also honestly believe the team would have been at least in the Finals in '01 (and quite likely could have won it) had they gotten Peca back during the season that year.

 

Contract negotiations during the criminals' years (unless your name was Dom) were arduous at best. Again - protect cash flow at all cost. Unfortunately, this was the undoing of the plan, as they significantly low balled Peca at the beginning and Peca just flat out refused to play their games. When Hasek saw the Sabres weren't going to improve the team in '01 by signing or trading Peca for legitimate assets, he wanted out. And without a world class goalie, the servicebable 3rd liners weren't so serviceable.

 

With the success they had had on the ice w/out drafting offense, and with offense costing the serious money, and with cash flow as tight as it was, I don't see much incentive to go drafting players that would end up costing significant money. I also don't see any draft choices during that period that would be considered serious offensive players.

 

Feel free to disagree with this (rambling) assessment. We can agree to disagree. I'd be interested in hearing the "evidence" to refute it.

You pose a very interesting and plausible theory, but I must respectfully point out that this is not evidence. It's a series of facts that comports with a hypothesis, but it's not evidence. Evidence would be something like Rigas' cellmate testifying that Rigas confessed to him that he had put Paille, Heisten, Novotny etc. on Adelphia's payroll for helping to build the Rigas' golf course on land paid for by Adelphia, and Rigas thought he could get away with it because since they were good 2-way players, they wouldn't be too flashy and expensive, unlike all of those high-priced scorers that Rigas intentionally passed on.

Had I produced conclusive evidence - no. But I had in fact presented circumstantial evidence - yes.

 

The drafting is the only evidence I had presented to this point. The cash flow issues were real (and what untimately landed them in jail) and contract negotiations also support the theory circumstantially.

 

This isn't Perry Mason. I doubt we're going to have John blurting anything out from his jailcell.

[Eleven]

 

 

Feel free to disagree with this (rambling) assessment. We can agree to disagree. I'd be interested in hearing the "evidence" to refute it.

 

 

I'm not saying you're wrong; I'm saying that I'm unconvinced that you're right. They did not bring in many high-priced players, to be sure, but newly-drafted players aren't costly. (They may have been more costly under the old CBA, but still, they weren't that costly at entry level.) Yes, the failure to draft high-scoring talent is consistent with a theory that the Rigases didn't care about the team other than its use in propping up Adelphia, and drafted accordingly. It's also consistent with a theory that the Sabres simply didn't draft very well in the first round for a few years.

 

But at least I understand a little more about what your theory is, now. It's interesting, but I guess to me, the simpler conclusion (based on the same facts) is the easier one to reach.

[wjag]

haaaa, and paille gets the game winning assisttonight for the bruins

My script had him getting the GWG... Oh well, close enough... Be interested to see how he reacts when Kaleta takes a run at him.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Taro ... here is my problem with your theory ....

 

This isn't the NFL ... there were no $10 million signing bonuses for the top first-round picks. And when Rigas and Co. were running the Sabres, guys could not become unrestricted until they were 31 years old. Even if a first-round pick had came out of the gate scoring 40 goals a season his first four years, he had zero leverage at the age of 22 ... he was going to get a good deal at that point, but he was not going to get paid like the top veterans in the league. Why would they be worried about a kid's SECOND contract IF BY CHANCE he pans out and produces big out of the gate? If cash flow is the issue, why all of a sudden start thinking long-term and worry about 4 or 5 years down the road?

 

In fact, even if a big-time scorer was going to get a huge deal you couldn't afford at age 22, wouldn't you be better off drafting the stud, getting the cheap production for 3 years, and then trading him for more high picks to get more cheap production?

[nfreeman]

Taro ... here is my problem with your theory ....

 

This isn't the NFL ... there were no $10 million signing bonuses for the top first-round picks. And when Rigas and Co. were running the Sabres, guys could not become unrestricted until they were 31 years old. Even if a first-round pick had came out of the gate scoring 40 goals a season his first four years, he had zero leverage at the age of 22 ... he was going to get a good deal at that point, but he was not going to get paid like the top veterans in the league. Why would they be worried about a kid's SECOND contract IF BY CHANCE he pans out and produces big out of the gate? If cash flow is the issue, why all of a sudden start thinking long-term and worry about 4 or 5 years down the road?

 

In fact, even if a big-time scorer was going to get a huge deal you couldn't afford at age 22, wouldn't you be better off drafting the stud, getting the cheap production for 3 years, and then trading him for more high picks to get more cheap production?

good post.

[shrader]

I'm not completely clear on the exact timeline, but I can't shake the feeling that we're talking about the "hardest working team in hockey" era here. Most of the picks we're talking about fit that mold. I really have to wonder how a guy like Tim Connolly fits into this conversation. Yes, they didn't draft him, but they may as well have at the age they brought him in at. He was pure offensive potential and a high profile move thanks to the Peca deal. Doesn't he fit that mold of potential future high priced player that you're talking about Taro?

[Taro T]

Taro ... here is my problem with your theory ....

 

This isn't the NFL ... there were no $10 million signing bonuses for the top first-round picks. And when Rigas and Co. were running the Sabres, guys could not become unrestricted until they were 31 years old. Even if a first-round pick had came out of the gate scoring 40 goals a season his first four years, he had zero leverage at the age of 22 ... he was going to get a good deal at that point, but he was not going to get paid like the top veterans in the league. Why would they be worried about a kid's SECOND contract IF BY CHANCE he pans out and produces big out of the gate? If cash flow is the issue, why all of a sudden start thinking long-term and worry about 4 or 5 years down the road?

 

In fact, even if a big-time scorer was going to get a huge deal you couldn't afford at age 22, wouldn't you be better off drafting the stud, getting the cheap production for 3 years, and then trading him for more high picks to get more cheap production?

Sorry BtP, I normally agree w/ what you have to say, but your recollection of the landscape under the previous CBA isn't terribly accurate.

 

You stated there was no way a big time scorer would make serious bucks when he was young. For the grinders, that was true. But it wasn't true for guys that could score. Although the rookie salaries were capped at $925k, Ilya Kovalchuk (and other young guns) received very easily met performance bonus clauses in their deals. Kovalchuk made over $14MM in his 1st 3 seasons. It kind of looks to me like that top pick got $10MM in bonuses over those 3 years. Obviously, Kovalchuk was a rare breed, but lots of rookies made more than $1MM after receiving performance bonuses. Guys could get huge deals prior to being 22.

 

Do you think the Sabres wanted to sign a guy that might score 30 in his 2nd year and earn $3MM or would they prefer to sign somebody that they KNEW would start out costing less than $1MM? Remember, the Sabres were successfully following the playbook of having teams that could sneak into the playoffs but which were custom made to win a low scoring tightened checking game without having any big time scorers and the owners had huge potential cash flow issues (they had to keep meeting their loan payments or the whole house of cards blew up). Finding out that they'd have to pay out a few $MM unexpectedly could seriously jeopordize a loan repayment schedule. I don't know if John realized the extent of the cash flow issues, but Timmy certainly did.

 

Anybody remember Joe Sakic's, Chris Gratton's, or Federov's offer sheets? These guys all got monster offer sheets while RFA's. They weren't 31. And Sakic's deal paid him $17 MM in his 1st year. Guys essentially could end up w/ huge signing bonuses.

 

Also arbitration and the automatic 10% raise were 2 other huge salary escalators. And arbitration primarily rewarded guys putting up points. Some guys in their mid-20's were getting nearly 100% salary bumps from arbitrators. And contracts like Kariya's ($10MM to a 24 year old) only further drove up the arbitration awards. Remember, Peca didn't want to go to arbitration because he wasn't a goal scorer. Most of his value was in the leadership untangibles which arbitrators couldn't set a firm price on.

 

Salaries were escalatitng like crazy during the past CBA. There were several years where the average player salary went up by over 20%. Primarily it was the big scorers that were getting those huge bumps. If your model has you paying a goalie a lot of money and then he is surrounded by grinders, your salary structure won't get as out of whack as your competitors.

 

As to your question about whether the team would be better off getting a big time scorer and then trading him vs having a grinder, my answer is that to the Sabres it didn't appear better at that time. The basis of that answer is that they DIDN'T go after big time scorers when they were available. They preferred to go after players that were round pegs that would fit in the round holes. Whether I believe they'd've been better off is immaterial.

I'm not completely clear on the exact timeline, but I can't shake the feeling that we're talking about the "hardest working team in hockey" era here. Most of the picks we're talking about fit that mold. I really have to wonder how a guy like Tim Connolly fits into this conversation. Yes, they didn't draft him, but they may as well have at the age they brought him in at. He was pure offensive potential and a high profile move thanks to the Peca deal. Doesn't he fit that mold of potential future high priced player that you're talking about Taro?

Actually, picking up Connolley and Pyatt (~$2MM in salary/year) for a guy that should have been worth ~$3MM (and I believe actually got ~$4MM from the Isles) fits in exactly w/ the cash flow point. By making that trade, they saved themselves at least $1MM in 2002, which is just about when cash flow really came to a head. (And as an aside: anybody that saw Timmy play prior to the lockout knew the guy had tremendous tools, but didn't seem to know how or when to use them in an obstruction-laden NHL. I really think the Sabres were far more interested in Pyatt at the time than Timmy.)

[Stoner]

I think Lindy and Darcy need to be brought into this discussion. Exactly how was this scheme translated into picks? Did the Rigases flat out instruct Darcy how to draft? And why wouldn't Darcy have quit at that very moment? Why would Lindy want to be part of such a sick, dysfunctional organ-EYE-zation?

[BetweenThePipes00]

Sorry BtP, I normally agree w/ what you have to say, but your recollection of the landscape under the previous CBA isn't terribly accurate.

 

You stated there was no way a big time scorer would make serious bucks when he was young. For the grinders, that was true. But it wasn't true for guys that could score. Although the rookie salaries were capped at $925k, Ilya Kovalchuk (and other young guns) received very easily met performance bonus clauses in their deals. Kovalchuk made over $14MM in his 1st 3 seasons. It kind of looks to me like that top pick got $10MM in bonuses over those 3 years. Obviously, Kovalchuk was a rare breed, but lots of rookies made more than $1MM after receiving performance bonuses. Guys could get huge deals prior to being 22.

 

Do you think the Sabres wanted to sign a guy that might score 30 in his 2nd year and earn $3MM or would they prefer to sign somebody that they KNEW would start out costing less than $1MM? Remember, the Sabres were successfully following the playbook of having teams that could sneak into the playoffs but which were custom made to win a low scoring tightened checking game without having any big time scorers and the owners had huge potential cash flow issues (they had to keep meeting their loan payments or the whole house of cards blew up). Finding out that they'd have to pay out a few $MM unexpectedly could seriously jeopordize a loan repayment schedule. I don't know if John realized the extent of the cash flow issues, but Timmy certainly did.

 

Anybody remember Joe Sakic's, Chris Gratton's, or Federov's offer sheets? These guys all got monster offer sheets while RFA's. They weren't 31. And Sakic's deal paid him $17 MM in his 1st year. Guys essentially could end up w/ huge signing bonuses.

 

Also arbitration and the automatic 10% raise were 2 other huge salary escalators. And arbitration primarily rewarded guys putting up points. Some guys in their mid-20's were getting nearly 100% salary bumps from arbitrators. And contracts like Kariya's ($10MM to a 24 year old) only further drove up the arbitration awards. Remember, Peca didn't want to go to arbitration because he wasn't a goal scorer. Most of his value was in the leadership untangibles which arbitrators couldn't set a firm price on.

 

Salaries were escalatitng like crazy during the past CBA. There were several years where the average player salary went up by over 20%. Primarily it was the big scorers that were getting those huge bumps. If your model has you paying a goalie a lot of money and then he is surrounded by grinders, your salary structure won't get as out of whack as your competitors.

OK ... even given all that, I still find it hard to believe they purposely passed on better scorers in an effort to save money. Maybe you are right, but if so they were stupid about it. It still makes much more sense to draft the asset, get what you can out of him (he might help you win with his evil 30 goals!) and then get something for him if he becomes too expensive for you. They never had a top-five pick, no matter who they took in the middle of the round, that guy was not getting a big rookie deal.

 

As to your question about whether the team would be better off getting a big time scorer and then trading him vs having a grinder, my answer is that to the Sabres it didn't appear better at that time. The basis of that answer is that they DIDN'T go after big time scorers when they were available. They preferred to go after players that were round pegs that would fit in the round holes. Whether I believe they'd've been better off is immaterial.

 

Also, if this was their plan, they were not the only ones doing it, because I don't see a bunch of snipers taken soon after any of the Sabres' picks. Who exactly were they taking if your theory was not in play? I'll agree with your point that the Kovalchuks and Kariyas and even Grattons of the world got huge deals .... but they were top 5 picks. I just do not see anyone comparable that the Sabres passed on ... granted, their NHL career may not reflect how they were regarded at draft time, but wouldn't SOMEONE have to have panned out and scored big? The only time they had a top-10 pick they took Rasmussen, who was point-per-game guy with some jam in college ... it wasn't like there were gasps around the league that they passed on Josh Holden (the next forward taken 5 picks later). They didn't go after big-time scorers? Well, I don't see many big-time scorers that they passed on, either.

 

Again, maybe you are right ... I think it was dumb on their part, but it wouldn't be the first time a team did something dumb worrying about money instead of winning.

[Stoner]

Oh Daniel Paille

We wish you well in beantown

But we like our pick

 

 

Haik-who?

 

Paille, paella?

Starchy provincial dishes

Ours didn't stick