korab rules Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 But this does show the change in the hockey operations. The Sabres now can do moves that the 'big clubs' have been doing. Send players to the minors if needed to take them out of the NHL cap to free up money to bring new blood in. Thank you Terry Pegula! +1 - this is a move TG would never have made - paying a guy 3.5 million to play in the minors. Now lets just hope that they have a need for that cap space they just cleared! Regardless, should they call old rivet up on the rotary phone and someone else claims him on re-entry waivers, we would only be footing half the bill for him, which is likely the only way we could get some other team to take him.
shrader Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 +1 - this is a move TG would never have made - paying a guy 3.5 million to play in the minors. To be fair, most of that $3.5 million has already been spent on Rivet sitting up in the pressbox.
X. Benedict Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 And once again, I wasn't advocating those specific players to Buffalo, only the qualities in leadership from outside of the organization. :doh: ;) fair enough.
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 This move makes no sense to me. At best some team makes a claim, and his cap hit is gone, at worst, he goes to portland and we're paying him for minors. He could not report to portland, at which point his salary would come off, but since we're 2/3 through the season, i think that would only save 1.2 mil or so, and it's not like we're hurting for cap space. the D depth might be more important.
shrader Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 This move makes no sense to me. At best some team makes a claim, and his cap hit is gone, at worst, he goes to portland and we're paying him for minors. He could not report to portland, at which point his salary would come off, but since we're 2/3 through the season, i think that would only save 1.2 mil or so, and it's not like we're hurting for cap space. the D depth might be more important. One quick point to add to that. If he's sent to the minors, he still comes off the cap.
Weave Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 I wonder if they were training him to be a coach? It is not like Dineen isn't going to be considered for a vacancy next year and the Sabres will need someone with D perspective in Portland if he goes. Rivet in his prime was great and has a nasty streak that all these players need to incorporate into their game. Has been a good mentor and the Sabres would be smart to keep him around if he is willing to hang up the skates. I was thinking something along this line as well. Maybe TG wouldn't stomach sending Rivet down to Portland at that salary to be a player-coach but TP will? I wouldn't mind seeing Rivet rewarded for how he handled things by being given the opportunity to get a leg up on a coaching career in Portland.
korab rules Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 To be fair, most of that $3.5 million has already been spent on Rivet sitting up in the pressbox. Let me correct my previous post: +1 - this is a move TG would never have made - paying a guy 3.5 million $42,682.93 per game to play in the minors.
X. Benedict Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 This move makes no sense to me. At best some team makes a claim, and his cap hit is gone, at worst, he goes to portland and we're paying him for minors. He could not report to portland, at which point his salary would come off, but since we're 2/3 through the season, i think that would only save 1.2 mil or so, and it's not like we're hurting for cap space. the D depth might be more important. If there is a trade in the works, it might make a ton of sense.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 This move makes no sense to me. At best some team makes a claim, and his cap hit is gone, at worst, he goes to portland and we're paying him for minors. He could not report to portland, at which point his salary would come off, but since we're 2/3 through the season, i think that would only save 1.2 mil or so, and it's not like we're hurting for cap space. the D depth might be more important. This reminds me of something from the PC yesterday. At one point Pegula was asking about games and I believe I heard Darcy chime in with 55 games played. In actuality it is 58. I am not positive it was Regier who answered, and I can't find the exact point, but if anyone can confirm he said it...please do so. If our GM is on trade deadline eve and thinks we have 12% more games to play than we really do....that's a little scary in my opinion. the 2/3 is really 70.7% games played.....not a big deal, just the psychology of numbers. 29% of the season remains with the Sabres 3 games out of the last playoff spot.
nfreeman Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 My 2 cents: 1. I agree that there is NFW this would've happened under TG. 2. This probably makes it less likely that they trade Monty at the deadline, unless it's coupled with a separate trade for a defenseman (which would, based on TP's comments yesterday, need to be someone under contract for next year). 3. Since the Sabres now officially don't care about paying someone an NHL salary to play in the minors, this is a no-lose proposition for them. Either he is claimed, so his cost and cap hit are gone, or he clears waivers and plays in Portland, which should (hopefully) sharpen his game up in case the Sabres need him. 4. This does seem to increase the likelihood that they will bring in someone via trade, since they will have additional cap space. 5. If Rivet is claimed, I think they will name a new captain. If he's not claimed, then probably not.
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 If there is a trade in the works, it might make a ton of sense. the trade would have to be for someone who's cap hit is 12 mil a season to get us close to the cap without it. Cap space isn't really an issue for the Sabres right now. I guess it's nice to have the space, as a luxury but I'd be lying if my first thought wasn't "They're clearing space for someone to come in" and then, "God I hope it's Brad Richards". So here's hoping man. Although, isn't richards injured, does anyone know? edit 2: Richards is day to day with concussion like symptoms.
Stoner Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 This reminds me of something from the PC yesterday. At one point Pegula was asking about games and I believe I heard Darcy chime in with 55 games played. In actuality it is 58. I am not positive it was Regier who answered, and I can't find the exact point, but if anyone can confirm he said it...please do so. If our GM is on trade deadline eve and thinks we have 12% more games to play than we really do....that's a little scary in my opinion. the 2/3 is really 70.7% games played.....not a big deal, just the psychology of numbers. 29% of the season remains with the Sabres 3 games out of the last playoff spot. That would have been Mike Gilbert at the podium, who also clued Terry into the name of the lacrosse team he just bought and the fact that ticket prices were raised slightly recently.
nobody Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 I don't see the percentage of paid salary at this point mattering too much - anyone brought in also has already been paid the same percentage of their contract for the season. It still opens up the equivalent amount of cap space for a team.
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 My 2 cents: 1. I agree that there is NFW this would've happened under TG. 2. This probably makes it less likely that they trade Monty at the deadline, unless it's coupled with a separate trade for a defenseman (which would, based on TP's comments yesterday, need to be someone under contract for next year). 3. Since the Sabres now officially don't care about paying someone an NHL salary to play in the minors, this is a no-lose proposition for them. Either he is claimed, so his cost and cap hit are gone, or he clears waivers and plays in Portland, which should (hopefully) sharpen his game up in case the Sabres need him. 4. This does seem to increase the likelihood that they will bring in someone via trade, since they will have additional cap space. 5. If Rivet is claimed, I think they will name a new captain. If he's not claimed, then probably not. I have a question. If he does end up going down to portland, he would need to clear waivers again to be called up should we have an injury or something right? If so, say there was an injury to two defenseman and we needed to call him up for a game that day, would he be able to play?
Patty16 Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 Free's up very little cap room. Perhaps just giving Rivet an opportunity to see if he can catch on with another team. If he clears waivers isn't he able to stay with the Sabres? it frees up cap space to add a player making Rivet's salary which is 3.5ish i believe.
dumb_dumb88 Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 the trade would have to be for someone who's cap hit is 12 mil a season to get us close to the cap without it. Cap space isn't really an issue for the Sabres right now. I guess it's nice to have the space, as a luxury but I'd be lying if my first thought wasn't "They're clearing space for someone to come in" and then, "God I hope it's Brad Richards". So here's hoping man. Although, isn't richards injured, does anyone know? edit 2: Richards is day to day with concussion like symptoms. According to Dreger, Richards may be on the block. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/dregerreport/
X. Benedict Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 According to Dreger, Richards may be on the block. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/dregerreport/ High stakes here. Trade for Richards and you are gambling on his concussed melon. Don't trade and miss out. Either way, he won't be skating this week.
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 High stakes here. Trade for Richards and you are gambling on his concussed melon. Don't trade and miss out. Either way, he won't be skating this week. It's his first concussion so it's not like you're trading for an oft injured player. The real risk is that he's a UFA next year.
X. Benedict Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 It's his first concussion so it's not like you're trading for an oft injured player. The real risk is that he's a UFA next year. Well he's a rental at this point. He's only of value if he's able to skate. Do you give up a first, a second?
dumb_dumb88 Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 It's his first concussion so it's not like you're trading for an oft injured player. The real risk is that he's a UFA next year. If your going for the Cup in 3 seasons or less I say he would be a very enticing piece to possibily achieve that goal. Pegula and Black announce Buffalo as the destination for hockey talent, then, to prove they mean business on both that point as well as the Cup they make the move to bring in Richards and sign him to a 3 to 5 year contract. One can dream, can't one :nana:
nobody Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 I have a question. If he does end up going down to portland, he would need to clear waivers again to be called up should we have an injury or something right? If so, say there was an injury to two defenseman and we needed to call him up for a game that day, would he be able to play? I'll let the rule book experts discuss emergency call ups. But for a standard call up he would be put on re-entry waivers and anyone could claim him with the Sabres having to pay 1/2 of the remaining salary.
Eleven Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 Why has everyone been so quick to assume that Dallas is trading Richards? Even when Dallas was doing well, people assumed Richards was available. I don't get it.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 That would have been Mike Gilbert at the podium, who also clued Terry into the name of the lacrosse team he just bought and the fact that ticket prices were raised slightly recently. thanks....I didn't think Darcy was THAT clueless.
Lanny Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 it frees up cap space to add a player making Rivet's salary which is 3.5ish i believe. It only clears what he is due to be paid the remainder of the season, so as someone else said probably around $1.25 million. If he clears it doesn't free up any real money, just cap money. And the Sabres weren't that close to the cap to begin with for them to be looking to free cap space to make a trade. As I said it's more likely a move to give Rivet a place to play, perhaps a contender, rather than sitting in the press box the rest of the season. Meanwhile maybe saving a million or so.
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Posted February 23, 2011 Well he's a rental at this point. He's only of value if he's able to skate. Do you give up a first, a second? From what I've heard this years draft is fairly weak, hence we've been saying a lot of picks moved. I would not be opposed at all to giving away this years first rounder with maybe a conditional pick next year or this year (based on whether or not he resigns with us), We have a lot of assets plus a lot of cheap young players that Dallas might find appealing. A number 1 Center like him is very rare and if he's there for the taking I think we need to step up to the plate. Eleven, it's not really an assumption, Joe N(spelling), the Dallas manager has stated he's open to any and all offers regarding Richards. Dallas has struggled with attendance, they are in ownership turmoil and they've lost 4 in a row to boot. They might need to slash prices.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.