Kennedy Placed on Waivers (old Arbitration thread)

[spndnchz]

Mirtle from the Globe and Mail is saying that 4 teams are interested in Kennedy.

 

"I do not, at this point, know the teams involved. Kennedy's camp wouldn't comment other than to say something is coming soon."

[static70]

If the forwards were set after Neidermeyer was signed, why is Kennedy no longer a Sabre? ;)

Good point, but its Regier were speaking on here, I can see it going something like this,

 

Regier offers Kennedy Qualifying offer with 2 way option

Kennedy says no thanks to 2 way option as well as the money and goes to arbitration

Regier signs Niedermayer

Kennedy is awarded 1 million in arbitration

Regier tells Kennedy to sign here, then, tells him he is on waivers and will be bought out if no one picks him up

Kennedy waits to be picked up on waivers while sitting in shock

Regier waits the 24 hours then buys out Kennedy

Kennedy is speechless

Regier thinks, meh, we picked up Niedermayer for just such a contingency

 

Moral of the story,

 

Don't take Regier to arbitration or you end up walking away bow-legged.

[thesportsbuff]

Good point, but its Regier were speaking on here, I can see it going something like this,

 

Regier offers Kennedy Qualifying offer with 2 way option

Kennedy says no thanks to 2 way option as well as the money and goes to arbitration

Regier signs Niedermayer

Kennedy is awarded 1 million in arbitration

Regier tells Kennedy to sign here, then, tells him he is on waivers and will be bought out if no one picks him up

Kennedy waits to be picked up on waivers while sitting in shock

Regier waits the 24 hours then buys out Kennedy

Kennedy is speechless

Regier thinks, meh, we picked up Niedermayer for just such a contingency

 

Moral of the story,

 

Don't take Regier to arbitration or you end up walking away bow-legged.

 

No, it's more like:

 

Regier offers Kennedy a qualifying offer just above the league minimum.

Kennedy says no thanks and takes the team to arbitration.

Regier watches as Lydman and Tallinder sign elsewhere, leaving a hole in our defense.

Regier signs Niedermayer.

Kennedy is awarded 1 million in arbitration.

Regier is awarded the option of the buyout due to the arbitration ruling.

Regier decides to use Kennedy's roster spot and salary elsewhere, but is unable to get rid of Kennedy via trade or waivers.

Regier buys out Kennedy.

 

Moral of the story,

Regier did what what was right for this team. I feel much better about plugging a hole on defense and not having to start the year with Sekera, Butler and Weber as half of the defense core. Kennedy was the odd man out. I would have been angry if they'd retained Kennedy and then, once the season starts, they couldn't bring up Ennis because they have too many forwards.

 

It's an "unusual" move. That doesn't make it bad.

[spndnchz]

Good point, but its Regier were speaking on here, I can see it going something like this,

 

Regier offers Kennedy Qualifying offer with 2 way option

Kennedy says no thanks to 2 way option as well as the money and goes to arbitration

Regier signs Niedermayer

Kennedy is awarded 1 million in arbitration

Regier tells Kennedy to sign here, then, tells him he is on waivers and will be bought out if no one picks him up

Kennedy waits to be picked up on waivers while sitting in shock

Regier waits the 24 hours then buys out Kennedy

Kennedy is speechless

Regier thinks, meh, we picked up Niedermayer for just such a contingency

 

Moral of the story,

 

Don't take Regier to arbitration or you end up walking away bow-legged.

And a complimentary can of "Tucks medicated pads".

[static70]

And a complimentary can of "Tucks medicated pads".

:w00t:

[static70]

No, it's more like:

 

Regier offers Kennedy a qualifying offer just above the league minimum.

Kennedy says no thanks and takes the team to arbitration.

Regier watches as Lydman and Tallinder sign elsewhere, leaving a hole in our defense.

Regier signs Niedermayer.

Kennedy is awarded 1 million in arbitration.

Regier is awarded the option of the buyout due to the arbitration ruling.

Regier decides to use Kennedy's roster spot and salary elsewhere, but is unable to get rid of Kennedy via trade or waivers.

Regier buys out Kennedy.

 

Moral of the story,

Regier did what what was right for this team. I feel much better about plugging a hole on defense and not having to start the year with Sekera, Butler and Weber as half of the defense core. Kennedy was the odd man out. I would have been angry if they'd retained Kennedy and then, once the season starts, they couldn't bring up Ennis because they have too many forwards.

 

It's an "unusual" move. That doesn't make it bad.

I don't buy for one second that releasing Kennedy had anything to do with signing Morrisonn. It makes absolutely zero sense.

[thesportsbuff]

I don't buy for one second that releasing Kennedy had anything to do with signing Morrisonn. It makes absolutely zero sense.

 

Internal budget, wanting a 23-man or less roster -- whatever the case it makes plenty of sense. Why is giving up a small third line forward (on a team full of small forwards) who hasn't accomplished or proven anything such a hard concept to fathom? Regier wanted to use the roster spot elsewhere. Kennedy was a victim of an over-abundance of small low-impact forwards -- he just happened to be the cheapest buyout. Seriously, would you rather have kept Kennedy (on his one-way deal) and then come October, there's no room for Ennis on the roster because of Kennedy?

 

Sure, I'd rather see other players gone before Kennedy, but if nobody took on Kennedy for $1 mil what makes you think somebody would take Stafford? I think I agree with Darcy that things are tight in the NHL. Just because it sounds good in theory "oh we can trade Stafford and Connolly" doesn't mean it was a legitimate possibility.

[wonderbread]

I don't buy for one second that releasing Kennedy had anything to do with signing Morrisonn. It makes absolutely zero sense.

 

 

Just cause it doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean it doesn't to the braintrusts at OSP!

[ntjacks79]

I think you're all still missing the reasoning behind the move. It has nothing to do with saying "we're not overpaying" or being angry over Kennedy's arbitration decision. My post earlier in the thread sums it up but I doubt that anybody read it given the amount of "omg darcy sucks how could he think Kennedy isn't worth $1million" posts still going on. I'll give it another go.

I read your post. I'm still not seeing how it answers the inconsistency in the Sabres approach to management that I am bringing up over and over and over. Everything you wrote makes a lot of sense, don't get me wrong, but I just can't understand how a team management can be so stupid as to box themselves into such a mess such that they faced the situation you described. If they had not signed Connolly and Stafford and Gaustad to such stupid deals they would not have faced the situation they did with Kennedy. That's the whole point - I've said it so many different ways. They did the same thing in 2007 - no contract offer to Briere, screw up signing Drury because of how they handled Briere, overpay Vanek... oh, sorry, we don't have any money now for Dumont. It's the over and over and over stupidity that I'm trying to point out, not the situation they faced with Kennedy and why they decided to do what they did. If you look at the Kennedy situation in a vacuum, of course everything you describe makes a ton of sense.

[spndnchz]

Add Darren Helm, Detroit, just re-upped after his rookie contract, similar stats to TK, two year deal, 825k and 1 million.

[Calvin]

BTW Brendan Witt is bought out so he will be cheap. I like him for cheaper than Regier in Calgary. Sign for league min. Do it.

whatever for??

[SabresneedaCup]

dig through the ditches and burn through the witches and slam in the back of my DRAGULA!

[biodork]

dig through the ditches and burn through the witches and slam in the back of my DRAGULA!

 

lol random, but nice. :thumbsup:

[ECHL]

whatever for??

7th man. Webber or Witt. I'll take Witt. Shot blockers and tough SOB.

[SwampD]

dig through the ditches and burn through the witches and slam in the back of my DRAGULA!

I was thinking -

 

Bust the busters, screw the feeders, make the healers, feel the way i feel.

[Calvin]

7th man. Webber or Witt. I'll take Witt. Shot blockers and tough SOB.

So you'd rather we use some slow-as-molasses veteran as the 7th d-man instead of a kid who could use the experience of being up here with the big team, even if only at practices?

[ntjacks79]

I was thinking -

 

Bust the busters, screw the feeders, make the healers, feel the way i feel.

Wow, it's never been more obvious that you're from my part of North Tonawanda... :rolleyes:

[SwampD]

Wow, it's never been more obvious that you're from my part of North Tonawanda... :rolleyes:

Now I have to go to the other thread.

[nfreeman]

name='ntjacks79' timestamp='1280949100' post='221142']

I read your post. I'm still not seeing how it answers the inconsistency in the Sabres approach to management that I am bringing up over and over and over. Everything you wrote makes a lot of sense, don't get me wrong, but I just can't understand how a team management can be so stupid as to box themselves into such a mess such that they faced the situation you described. If they had not signed Connolly and Stafford and Gaustad to such stupid deals they would not have faced the situation they did with Kennedy. That's the whole point - I've said it so many different ways. They did the same thing in 2007 - no contract offer to Briere, screw up signing Drury because of how they handled Briere, overpay Vanek... oh, sorry, we don't have any money now for Dumont. It's the over and over and over stupidity that I'm trying to point out, not the situation they faced with Kennedy and why they decided to do what they did. If you look at the Kennedy situation in a vacuum, of course everything you describe makes a ton of sense.

Well, the Drury/Briere debacle was a different kettle of fish. That, along with Soupy, was perhaps the biggest burst of NHL team management incompetence since the lockout. I agree that Pommer and Hecht are way overpaid, and wouldn't argue much about including Stafford, TC and Gaustad in that description, but the aggregate overpayment for the latter group isn't much money. More importantly, every team in the NHL has made mistakes on players and given out bad contracts. In fact, I'd guess that the total cash wasted by the Sabres on bad contracts is below the NHL average. So I disagree with the assertion that the Sabres have been inconsistent, and that this proves they don't know what they're doing. They've been pretty consistent about paying their young players the lowest amount they can get away with under the CBA. The mistakes that they've made on overplaying players are the same mistakes that every team has made.

 

I do believe though that this is another move that makes players around the NHL think of the Sabres as an undesirable franchise. It also seems like it was clumsily done, although given the sequence of events I'm not sure exactly what the Sabres should have done differently if they couldn't live with Kennedy having a 1-way contract.

[ntjacks79]

The mistakes that they've made on overplaying players are the same mistakes that every team has made.

 

I do believe though that this is another move that makes players around the NHL think of the Sabres as an undesirable franchise. It also seems like it was clumsily done, although given the sequence of events I'm not sure exactly what the Sabres should have done differently if they couldn't live with Kennedy having a 1-way contract.

I agree that most/many teams have made similar mistakes in overpaying players. The big difference is that with Buffalo they "recover" from those mistakes by getting rid of "young and promising talent" (I really do think the Dumont situation is similar to Kennedy, even though he was older)... the kind of talent that a team that refuses to sign big $ free agents absolutely has to have to remain competitive.

But I very much agree that this is yet another move that would give a player the impression that Buffalo is a very undesirable place to play.

[VansTheMans]

I think Bucky's crybaby article overstates the emotional angle on this move. I also think he's trying to bolster some sort of anti-management agenda by praying on what he thinks are Buffalo fans' unending love for hometowners and their historic getting-screwed/underdog complex. Cheap. He also focuses on the financial issue, which I don't think was the most important issue.

 

For months (years now?) most knowledgable fans have been criticizing the young, soft, undersized forwards on the team and moreso, Regier's lack of effort to do anything about it (especially with the situation of too many up-and-coming young players). Then, when he brings in a little veteran chutzpah and leadership in Robby, taking up a roster spot, we complain when he pulls the trigger on a young guy's player-arbitrated one-way contract? That seems fickle, and fickle's not my style.

 

Yeah, I play a little violin for a Buffalo boy's career sidetracked out of town, but his hockey career's not over. He showed enough promise to be valuable to an NHL team, but not in ways that made him quite as valuable to our NHL team. That's a hard life lesson and I sincerely wish Kennedy well. (side speculation: I like the idea of Stan Bowman bringing him to Chicago to play with Kane.)

 

I think Regier's action was in the interest of bettering the team: don't overpay for players, don't keep players that don't fit what the team needs, free up a roster spots for players that fit what the team needs. That last aspect is the crucial one. We've given ourselves a little more forward roster room to make moves.

 

The question we should be asking is not why is Tim Kennedy gone- it's who is Regier going to replace him with to make the team better?

 

The question is who can we replace Regier with that will put together a championship caliber team?

[static70]

Internal budget, wanting a 23-man or less roster -- whatever the case it makes plenty of sense. Why is giving up a small third line forward (on a team full of small forwards) who hasn't accomplished or proven anything such a hard concept to fathom? Regier wanted to use the roster spot elsewhere. Kennedy was a victim of an over-abundance of small low-impact forwards -- he just happened to be the cheapest buyout. Seriously, would you rather have kept Kennedy (on his one-way deal) and then come October, there's no room for Ennis on the roster because of Kennedy?

 

Sure, I'd rather see other players gone before Kennedy, but if nobody took on Kennedy for $1 mil what makes you think somebody would take Stafford? I think I agree with Darcy that things are tight in the NHL. Just because it sounds good in theory "oh we can trade Stafford and Connolly" doesn't mean it was a legitimate possibility.

You don't need a 23 man roster in the off season, there is a set date for that to occur and we aren't there yet. And its been reported that Morrisonn's contract is a 2 way, so why would it matter if Kennedy's was or wasn't. So the roster space routine doesn't hold water.

 

Internal Budget? Let's see, the qualify him at what? roughly 650k? It was reported they offered him somewhere up to 800k? Then he is awarded a million and buy him out then sign a Defenseman at just over 2 mil? The point on this is I would believe it if they hadn't qualified him, but since that happened long before Morrisonn was a shine in Darcy's eye this arguement is totally D Bunked!

Internal Budget my a$$.

 

As for the hard concept to fathom question, It isn't, like I said, I could really care less if Kennedy was on the team or not, no skin off of my teeth.

As for Connolly and Stafford, ya, they could be packaged for a RWer worth a ######. Maybe Clowe, maybe someone else. I guess the real question would be is Darcy willing to part with Connolly and insert Ennis as line 2 center between Hecht and Pomminstein as well as part with Stafford and bring in a RWer that can form chemistry with Roy and Vanek? My guess is no, which means Regier is a complete fool in my opinion. What does all this have to do with whether or not I can fathom if Kennedy's departure? Well, I would have kept Kennedy, at the 1 million to play with Nieds and Grier on line 3, not Gerbe.

 

Its all moot in any event, we'll end up seeing Vanek-Roy-Stafford on line 1 and get the frustration rolling for the first 41 games before Lindy decides he's given Drew his chance.

It'll be most likely Ennis-Connolly-Pomminstein on line 2 which you can kiss the Calder trophy goodbye for Ennis with Pomminsteins miss the net shots and Connolly's dissappearing acts.

Line 3 should be good though, Hecht-Nieds-Grier. Should be a banner season for them.

Line 4 added a guy who atleast stands up to people, McCormick-Gaustad-Kaleta. Not unhappy there either.

 

So for the forwards, lets see, YEP, SAME OLE, SAME OLE, bottom 6 look decent and will probably have to be depended on to step up and contribute more often than not because our top 6, specifically line 1 RW and line 2 Center positions haven't changes. :angry:

[Stoner]

Post-arbitration, the salary is locked in; there was no ability to negotiate. They had two options: accept his award ($1 million, one-way contract) or buyout him out immediately. They exercised the latter option.

They didn't really have any choice, did they? They had to accept the award IIUC.

 

After accepting it, they had the option of doing nothing or waiving him.

 

Here's what I still don't get. Right up to the hearing day, as Darcy tells it, the two sides were negotiating. The Sabres wanted him at, let's say, 800k. They wanted him and had the roster spot for him and he fit into their plans on left wing. The award is 200k higher, and all of a sudden, they have to waive him because of roster and budget considerations? Makes no sense.

 

I have no doubt the internal budget is to tight, and OSP is also so tight, that the 200k actually did make a difference -- then on top of that Regier surely wanted to make a statement about arbitration in the future.

[Eleven]

They didn't really have any choice, did they? They had to accept the award IIUC.

 

After accepting it, they had the option of doing nothing or waiving him.

 

Here's what I still don't get. Right up to the hearing day, as Darcy tells it, the two sides were negotiating. The Sabres wanted him at, let's say, 800k. They wanted him and had the roster spot for him and he fit into their plans on left wing. The award is 200k higher, and all of a sudden, they have to waive him because of roster and budget considerations? Makes no sense.

 

I have no doubt the internal budget is to tight, and OSP is also so tight, that the 200k actually did make a difference -- then on top of that Regier surely wanted to make a statement about arbitration in the future.

 

It may be because the Sabres wanted a two-way deal, and not because of 200K. A number of people have posted that idea.

[Stoner]

It may be because the Sabres wanted a two-way deal, and not because of 200K. A number of people have posted that idea.

 

Darcy never mentioned that in his, uh, Utterances to Mannequins.