JohnRobertEichel Posted July 2, 2010 Report Posted July 2, 2010 16 players signed = 1 goalie, 6 defensemen, 9 forwards The backup goalie will probably be Lalime. The 7th D-man will probably be Weber. Kennedy and Kaleta will be re-signed. Ennis should make the team as a top 6 forward. I'm guessing Gerbe and Mancari will be the other two forward spare parts? That's 23. The 7 aforementioned players will not add up to anything close to $12 million. There are still some huge deficiencies on this roster...the power play, not enough scoring from the top lines, not enough quality centers, maybe adequately replacing Lydman and Tallinder, more toughness and grit needed... Does Darcy honestly believe the young guys are going to fill these voids? Or is a major trade or two in the works? Doesn't seem to be much of anything left on the free agent market that can fix any of the biggest problems with this team.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 2, 2010 Report Posted July 2, 2010 16 players signed = 1 goalie, 6 defensemen, 9 forwards The backup goalie will probably be Lalime. The 7th D-man will probably be Weber. Kennedy and Kaleta will be re-signed. Ennis should make the team as a top 6 forward. I'm guessing Gerbe and Mancari will be the other two forward spare parts? That's 23. The 7 aforementioned players will not add up to anything close to $12 million. There are still some huge deficiencies on this roster...the power play, not enough scoring from the top lines, not enough quality centers, maybe adequately replacing Lydman and Tallinder, more toughness and grit needed... Does Darcy honestly believe the young guys are going to fill these voids? Or is a major trade or two in the works? Doesn't seem to be much of anything left on the free agent market that can fix any of the biggest problems with this team. That leaves him with $7-8 million. The season is pretty much sold out again. Even if they make the playoffs they will probably get bounced in 1 round again, netting 2-3 million for home games. Why spend the money? Take a $5 million gamble on a Kaberle type, only to get your money back if they go deep into the 2nd round?
bob_sauve28 Posted July 2, 2010 Report Posted July 2, 2010 16 players signed = 1 goalie, 6 defensemen, 9 forwards The backup goalie will probably be Lalime. The 7th D-man will probably be Weber. Kennedy and Kaleta will be re-signed. Ennis should make the team as a top 6 forward. I'm guessing Gerbe and Mancari will be the other two forward spare parts? That's 23. The 7 aforementioned players will not add up to anything close to $12 million. There are still some huge deficiencies on this roster...the power play, not enough scoring from the top lines, not enough quality centers, maybe adequately replacing Lydman and Tallinder, more toughness and grit needed... Does Darcy honestly believe the young guys are going to fill these voids? Or is a major trade or two in the works? Doesn't seem to be much of anything left on the free agent market that can fix any of the biggest problems with this team. We will know a lot more about Myers, Butler and Sekera this year. They will all play a lot. Is Stafford still in the team's plans? I am still not done with the idea that Roy and Vanek can and will get better Vanek. I think they will.
nfreeman Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 16 players signed = 1 goalie, 6 defensemen, 9 forwards The backup goalie will probably be Lalime. The 7th D-man will probably be Weber. Kennedy and Kaleta will be re-signed. Ennis should make the team as a top 6 forward. I'm guessing Gerbe and Mancari will be the other two forward spare parts? That's 23. The 7 aforementioned players will not add up to anything close to $12 million. There are still some huge deficiencies on this roster...the power play, not enough scoring from the top lines, not enough quality centers, maybe adequately replacing Lydman and Tallinder, more toughness and grit needed... Does Darcy honestly believe the young guys are going to fill these voids? Or is a major trade or two in the works? Doesn't seem to be much of anything left on the free agent market that can fix any of the biggest problems with this team. Interesting analysis. It does indicate that DR would be open to taking a well-paid player in trade, possibly from a team that needs to move out a big salary for cap reasons. I will note that I think the Sabres will not spend to the cap -- maybe $3MM or so under.
deluca67 Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Interesting analysis. It does indicate that DR would be open to taking a well-paid player in trade, possibly from a team that needs to move out a big salary for cap reasons. I will note that I think the Sabres will not spend to the cap -- maybe $3MM or so under. Maybe he has smartened up and has taken my earlier advice? Bank money this off-season, add the $10 mil savings from letting Connolly, Rivet and Montador go and hitting next years free agent class hard. It looks to be a far more talented class than this year.
Guest Sloth Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Interesting analysis. It does indicate that DR would be open to taking a well-paid player in trade, possibly from a team that needs to move out a big salary for cap reasons. I will note that I think the Sabres will not spend to the cap -- maybe $3MM or so under. Bobby Ryan turned down a 5 for 5 deal from Anaheim. As reported by the Orange County Register, "If the two sides are unable to agree on a contract, do not be surprised if Ryan, who had 35 goals and 64 points last season, is dealt." I'm sure Anaheim and Ryan will reach an agreement, but what if they do not? I'd trade Pomminstein, Stafford, and a 2nd round pick for the guy. A Vanek, Roy, Ryan line would be scary good. Darcy would never do it though, and I'm not sure if Anaheim would feel it is an equal trade. Any thoughts?
Bullwinkle Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Bobby Ryan turned down a 5 for 5 deal from Anaheim. As reported by the Orange County Register, "If the two sides are unable to agree on a contract, do not be surprised if Ryan, who had 35 goals and 64 points last season, is dealt." I'm sure Anaheim and Ryan will reach an agreement, but what if they do not? I'd trade Pomminstein, Stafford, and a 2nd round pick for the guy. A Vanek, Roy, Ryan line would be scary good. Darcy would never do it though, and I'm not sure if Anaheim would feel it is an equal trade. Any thoughts? Rather than a 2nd round pick, I'd throw in Connolly and ask for their 2nd round pick. That would be a great deal IMO.
nfreeman Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Bobby Ryan turned down a 5 for 5 deal from Anaheim. As reported by the Orange County Register, "If the two sides are unable to agree on a contract, do not be surprised if Ryan, who had 35 goals and 64 points last season, is dealt." I'm sure Anaheim and Ryan will reach an agreement, but what if they do not? I'd trade Pomminstein, Stafford, and a 2nd round pick for the guy. A Vanek, Roy, Ryan line would be scary good. Darcy would never do it though, and I'm not sure if Anaheim would feel it is an equal trade. Any thoughts? I'd be very happy if the Sabres made that trade. I think Anaheim would probably insist on Roy instead of Pommer, but I'd make that trade too. The hitch is that if Ryan doesn't want $5MM x 5 years, it will probably take $6MM x 6 years to get him signed. So you really have to be sure you like him that much before making the trade. Rather than a 2nd round pick, I'd throw in Connolly and ask for their 2nd round pick. That would be a great deal IMO. This deal is getting better all the time!
SabresFanInRochester Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Bobby Ryan turned down a 5 for 5 deal from Anaheim. As reported by the Orange County Register, "If the two sides are unable to agree on a contract, do not be surprised if Ryan, who had 35 goals and 64 points last season, is dealt." I'm sure Anaheim and Ryan will reach an agreement, but what if they do not? I'd trade Pomminstein, Stafford, and a 2nd round pick for the guy. A Vanek, Roy, Ryan line would be scary good. Darcy would never do it though, and I'm not sure if Anaheim would feel it is an equal trade. Any thoughts? Maybe I am mistaken by what a RFA actually means. I thought an RFA was a free agent, but the team that he most recently played for had the right to match any contract offer. That's what happened with Vanek a couple years ago. So why are we proposing a trade? I know Anaheim's GM said he would match any offer, but I think Buffalo still needs to throw a significant contract at Ryan - 5 years, $6.5 million. I think Ryan is exactly the type of player that Buffalo needs.
Bullwinkle Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Maybe I am mistaken by what a RFA actually means. I thought an RFA was a free agent, but the team that he most recently played for had the right to match any contract offer. That's what happened with Vanek a couple years ago. So why are we proposing a trade? I know Anaheim's GM said he would match any offer, but I think Buffalo still needs to throw a significant contract at Ryan - 5 years, $6.5 million. I think Ryan is exactly the type of player that Buffalo needs. I think what we're suggesting is that if Anaheim is having difficulty in talks with Ryan, they would consider trading him instead.
nucci Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 I think what we're suggesting is that if Anaheim is having difficulty in talks with Ryan, they would consider trading him instead. But he is not under contract as a RFA. How can he be traded?
thesportsbuff Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 But he is not under contract as a RFA. How can he be traded? I also don't understand all this trade talk. The only conclusion I can come to is they mean trading his rights, which is essentially a trade because of this "unwritten law" that RFA's are off-limits (except when it's Buffalo's RFA).
shrader Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 But he is not under contract as a RFA. How can he be traded? I answered it in the other thread, but I'll say it here too. RFAs can be traded. It's no different than trading a draft pick or a drafted prospect. A team owns the rights to negotiate with that player (or in this case, the right to match any offer that may be made) and that right is what can be traded. Pyatt and Bernier were RFAs when we traded them.
thesportsbuff Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 I answered it in the other thread, but I'll say it here too. RFAs can be traded. It's no different than trading a draft pick or a drafted prospect. A team owns the rights to negotiate with that player (or in this case, the right to match any offer that may be made) and that right is what can be traded. Pyatt and Bernier were RFAs when we traded them. We traded Pyatt and Bernier? Or did we just not offer them contracts and allowed them to become UFAs?
sabresnutinphoenix Posted July 3, 2010 Report Posted July 3, 2010 Living here in Phoenix, the Sabres parallel a lot with the AZ Diamondbacks...They have 1 or 2 star players and a lot of young players...They were good for a season and a half and then phsst...I am hoping the Sabres fill the rest of their roster with John Madden type players (players who have won a cup and can offer leadership more than a Rivet can)...Youth is nice but leadership has to be sprinkled in there or else when te play turns sour so does the playoff hopes...
shrader Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 We traded Pyatt and Bernier? Or did we just not offer them contracts and allowed them to become UFAs? The Sabres made qualifying offers to both players. Later in those respective offseasons, they traded them to Vancouver for draft picks.
JohnRobertEichel Posted July 4, 2010 Author Report Posted July 4, 2010 Interesting analysis. It does indicate that DR would be open to taking a well-paid player in trade, possibly from a team that needs to move out a big salary for cap reasons. I will note that I think the Sabres will not spend to the cap -- maybe $3MM or so under. And I have no problem with leaving that much cap space. It's a suitable number to account for Portland injury call-ups and trading deadline moves. My problem is with the ~$7 million range the team is headed for at the moment. Connolly ($4.5 mill) and Stafford ($2.3 mill) need to be upgraded. I can live with the rest of the roster as is, but this team badly needs a new 1st line RW and 2nd line C who won't disappear in the playoffs. The cap space is certainly there to make such changes; I only wonder if Darcy has the stomach and the brains anymore to make it happen?
Guest Sloth Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 And I have no problem with leaving that much cap space. It's a suitable number to account for Portland injury call-ups and trading deadline moves. My problem is with the ~$7 million range the team is headed for at the moment. Connolly ($4.5 mill) and Stafford ($2.3 mill) need to be upgraded. I can live with the rest of the roster as is, but this team badly needs a new 1st line RW and 2nd line C who won't disappear in the playoffs. The cap space is certainly there to make such changes; I only wonder if Darcy has the stomach and the brains anymore to make it happen? You and I seem to have the same opinion on this particular topic. My only disagreement is that they Sabres already have a 2nd line center, and his name is Derek Roy. The Sabres need to sign a true 1st line center. And Yes, the Sabres definitely need to grab a new 1st line RW. I like Bobby Ryan a lot. He can be described as a power forward, and that is something the Sabres need desperately. Buffalo has too many finesse style players. As for a possible trade scenario, Anaheim most likely would not take Pomminstein and Connolly. That is a lot of money wrapped up in two players. I think a realistic trade would be Pomminstein, Stafford, guy has "potential", and a 2nd round pick. Damn, for Bobby Ryan I would throw out the 2nd round pick and add a 1st round pick. Bobby Ryan is very young, and the Sabres would get immediate results. One more thing, I believe one of the reasons Bobby Ryan turned down the 5 for 5 deal was because of the contract length. He apparently wants to be a UFA in 3 or 4 years. Pretty smart move on his part, in my opinion.
tom webster Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 You and I seem to have the same opinion on this particular topic. My only disagreement is that they Sabres already have a 2nd line center, and his name is Derek Roy. The Sabres need to sign a true 1st line center. And Yes, the Sabres definitely need to grab a new 1st line RW. I like Bobby Ryan a lot. He can be described as a power forward, and that is something the Sabres need desperately. Buffalo has too many finesse style players. As for a possible trade scenario, Anaheim most likely would not take Pomminstein and Connolly. That is a lot of money wrapped up in two players. I think a realistic trade would be Pomminstein, Stafford, guy has "potential", and a 2nd round pick. Damn, for Bobby Ryan I would throw out the 2nd round pick and add a 1st round pick. Bobby Ryan is very young, and the Sabres would get immediate results. One more thing, I believe one of the reasons Bobby Ryan turned down the 5 for 5 deal was because of the contract length. He apparently wants to be a UFA in 3 or 4 years. Pretty smart move on his part, in my opinion. Good catch on the term part of the contract. It does seem like everyone else is overlooking that part. It would be interesting to see if Anaheim would match a 3 year, $19 million deal that I think would ony net them a 1st, 2nd and a 3rd.
SabresFanInRochester Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 Good catch on the term part of the contract. It does seem like everyone else is overlooking that part. It would be interesting to see if Anaheim would match a 3 year, $19 million deal that I think would ony net them a 1st, 2nd and a 3rd. Anaheim's first offer to Ryan was a 4-year deal and it was turned down.
apuszczalowski Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 Interesting analysis. It does indicate that DR would be open to taking a well-paid player in trade, possibly from a team that needs to move out a big salary for cap reasons. I will note that I think the Sabres will not spend to the cap -- maybe $3MM or so under. By the time Darcy gets around to pulling the trigger on a deal, all the teams will be back under the cap To answer the initial question, no, no he is not "up to something". He made his FA "splash" and will sit around until the "Bargain Bins" open up.
FolignosJock Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 we have just enough cap space left to resign our free agents and fill portlands roster the remainng 7 million will wait until the trade deadline where hopefully we will be major sellers shipping out timmy, pommers, and stafford for peanuts and maybe even picking up an expensive free agent to be that wont resign with us and will contribute nearly nothing to our eventual 9th spot in the eastern conference honestly darcy has to see how much better the flyers, bruins and leafs are right. I'm praying he gets something done.
shrader Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 we have just enough cap space left to resign our free agents and fill portlands roster the remainng 7 million will wait until the trade deadline where hopefully we will be major sellers shipping out timmy, pommers, and stafford for peanuts and maybe even picking up an expensive free agent to be that wont resign with us and will contribute nearly nothing to our eventual 9th spot in the eastern conference honestly darcy has to see how much better the flyers, bruins and leafs are right. I'm praying he gets something done. The money spent on Portland players does not count towards the cap.
FolignosJock Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 The money spent on Portland players does not count towards the cap. but in the case of sekera, weber, mancari and possibly some others that will have two way contracts some of that counts right?
shrader Posted July 4, 2010 Report Posted July 4, 2010 but in the case of sekera, weber, mancari and possibly some others that will have two way contracts some of that counts right? Only when they're actually on the NHL roster.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.