Kristian Posted July 7, 2012 Report Posted July 7, 2012 Boyes had a great bounce-back season, too. Look, I know the team needs role-players like Boyes (or Hecht), but FFS, the price they pay for them! But that's as much part of the big picture, A guy like Matt Barnaby was a great pest and agitator, and in his prime he filled that role perfectly. Throw in an extra million a year on his salary (whatever it was), and he's "just" another guy taking up space. I know I'm exaggarating, but essentially that's how the numbers add up.
deluca67 Posted July 7, 2012 Report Posted July 7, 2012 But that's as much part of the big picture, A guy like Matt Barnaby was a great pest and agitator, and in his prime he filled that role perfectly. Throw in an extra million a year on his salary (whatever it was), and he's "just" another guy taking up space. I know I'm exaggarating, but essentially that's how the numbers add up. It's the basic concept of value. I think Bobby Ryan would be a great pick up. Bobby Ryan making $7 mil a year? It's a different story. Miller is a great example. If Miller was closer to the $4 mil range I would never consider trading him. At his current price, I hope they do move him.
K-9 Posted July 7, 2012 Report Posted July 7, 2012 It's the basic concept of value. I think Bobby Ryan would be a great pick up. Bobby Ryan making $7 mil a year? It's a different story. Miller is a great example. If Miller was closer to the $4 mil range I would never consider trading him. At his current price, I hope they do move him. Do you really not see the irony in that statement? GO SABRES!!!
Robviously Posted July 7, 2012 Report Posted July 7, 2012 It's the basic concept of value. I think Bobby Ryan would be a great pick up. Bobby Ryan making $7 mil a year? It's a different story. Miller is a great example. If Miller was closer to the $4 mil range I would never consider trading him. At his current price, I hope they do move him. So you want to move him because he costs $2M more in cap space than you want even though we're currently ~$10M under the cap? That makes a lot of sense. If he DID make $4M/season, and we WERE currently ~$12M under the cap, how would anything be different with regard to the roster or this offseason?
deluca67 Posted July 7, 2012 Report Posted July 7, 2012 So you want to move him because he costs $2M more in cap space than you want even though we're currently ~$10M under the cap? That makes a lot of sense. If he DID make $4M/season, and we WERE currently ~$12M under the cap, how would anything be different with regard to the roster or this offseason? If gives the Sabres more money to play with in free-agency. Two million a year can be the difference in getting a quality player signed.
Robviously Posted July 7, 2012 Report Posted July 7, 2012 If gives the Sabres more money to play with in free-agency. Two million a year can be the difference in getting a quality player signed. We already have more than enough money to spend on free agents and there's really no one left for us to chase anyway unless Doan becomes available and decides Buffalo is an acceptable destination. And in that case, we still have more than enough space to sign him. If Miller made $2M less per year, literally nothing about this offseason is different.
deluca67 Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 We already have more than enough money to spend on free agents and there's really no one left for us to chase anyway unless Doan becomes available and decides Buffalo is an acceptable destination. And in that case, we still have more than enough space to sign him. If Miller made $2M less per year, literally nothing about this offseason is different. You don;t think the Sabres would get more trade offers? When it comes to a player contract $2 mil is a big difference. Wouldn't Vanek be less of a disappointment if he made $2mil less? Who on this board wants to trade Stafford if he makes only $2 mil a season? As TW smartly pointed out, once the Sabres paid Leino's bonus he actually becomes tradeable.
Robviously Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 You don;t think the Sabres would get more trade offers? When it comes to a player contract $2 mil is a big difference. Wouldn't Vanek be less of a disappointment if he made $2mil less? Who on this board wants to trade Stafford if he makes only $2 mil a season? As TW smartly pointed out, once the Sabres paid Leino's bonus he actually becomes tradeable. Yes, they would get more trade offers (as they would for any player making less money and with a smaller cap hit) but that's not the issue. You said you'd be "happier to have him" at $4M, not that you'd be more eager to trade him at $4M. You said it was so that they would have "more money to play with in free-agency." And, yes, everyone on the team would be way more valuable (and seem way more awesome) if they were signed to a less expensive contract. Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with reality. The NHL is set up so that if you want to re-sign a player approaching free agency or sign a UFA, you're going to have to overpay to get that guy. You're complaining because we don't have guys signed to imaginary contracts they would never agree to.
deluca67 Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Yes, they would get more trade offers (as they would for any player making less money and with a smaller cap hit) but that's not the issue. You said you'd be "happier to have him" at $4M, not that you'd be more eager to trade him at $4M. You said it was so that they would have "more money to play with in free-agency." And, yes, everyone on the team would be way more valuable (and seem way more awesome) if they were signed to a less expensive contract. Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with reality. The NHL is set up so that if you want to re-sign a player approaching free agency or sign a UFA, you're going to have to overpay to get that guy. You're complaining because we don't have guys signed to imaginary contracts they would never agree to. I'm complaining because we have a goalie that has not lived up to his contract. He's not elite and he is not a value with his current contact. Miller at $4 mil a year is more in line with his status as an NHL goalie. He's good, just not top echelon. I would rather move him and save the money.
TrueBlueGED Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 I'm complaining because we have a goalie that has not lived up to his contract. He's not elite and he is not a value with his current contact. Miller at $4 mil a year is more in line with his status as an NHL goalie. He's good, just not top echelon. I would rather move him and save the money. False. Pavelec just inked a $4 million deal, and Miller is better than him. Fleury makes $5 million, and Miller is better than him. Bryzgalov makes $5.6, and Miller is better than him. Lundqist makes $6.9, and he's better than Miller. Quick just inked for $5.8, and he's better than Miller...but we all know Quick's cap hit is reduced by the 10 year deal with bogus years at the end. Price just signed for $6.5, and he is pretty comparable to Miller. Maybe Miller was overpaid at the signing of his contract, but with contract inflation he's actually pretty close to where he belongs. And I agree with pretty much everything Robviously has said on this topic.
deluca67 Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 False. Pavelec just inked a $4 million deal, and Miller is better than him. Fleury makes $5 million, and Miller is better than him. Bryzgalov makes $5.6, and Miller is better than him. Lundqist makes $6.9, and he's better than Miller. Quick just inked for $5.8, and he's better than Miller...but we all know Quick's cap hit is reduced by the 10 year deal with bogus years at the end. Price just signed for $6.5, and he is pretty comparable to Miller. Maybe Miller was overpaid at the signing of his contract, but with contract inflation he's actually pretty close to where he belongs. And I agree with pretty much everything Robviously has said on this topic. IMO, Miller is not better than Pavelec, Fleury or Bryzgalov. Just like it's your opinion that he is. IMO, Miller doesn't give his team anymore chance of winning than the goalies you mentioned do their own teams. Not to mention those three goalies actually made the playoffs last season. Let's look at one undeniable fact. When the Sabres beat Washington on March 27th they held their playoff destiny in their own hands. It was crunch time and Miller responded with 13 goals allowed on 87 shots over the next three games. That's not elite.
darksabre Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 IMO, Miller is not better than Pavelec, Fleury or Bryzgalov. Just like it's your opinion that he is. IMO, Miller doesn't give his team anymore chance of winning than the goalies you mentioned do their own teams. Not to mention those three goalies actually made the playoffs last season. Let's look at one undeniable fact. When the Sabres beat Washington on March 27th they held their playoff destiny in their own hands. It was crunch time and Miller responded with 13 goals allowed on 87 shots over the next three games. That's not elite. Dude, Bryz is a sieve. Come on.
Robviously Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 I'm complaining because we have a goalie that has not lived up to his contract. He's not elite and he is not a value with his current contact. Miller at $4 mil a year is more in line with his status as an NHL goalie. He's good, just not top echelon. I would rather move him and save the money. His status as an NHL goalie is determined by what someone would pay him. You need to accept the reality that if you want to re-sign a player approaching UFA or sign a UFA, you're going to have to overpay to get it done. Miller would not have agreed to a $4M/season contract. You're also talking in circles. You want to trade Miller because he makes too much money ($6M/season) but if he made $4M/season (which is exactly what you think he's worth), you still want to trade him because then he'd be worth more to other teams at that price. Why not just say you want to trade Miller and don't really care why? And the fact remains that Miller making $4M instead of $6M would not have changed anything about our offseason this year, or last year for that matter.
deluca67 Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Dude, Bryz is a sieve. Come on. With the playoffs on the line Miller became a sieve. That's just fact. His status as an NHL goalie is determined by what someone would pay him. You need to accept the reality that if you want to re-sign a player approaching UFA or sign a UFA, you're going to have to overpay to get it done. Miller would not have agreed to a $4M/season contract. You're also talking in circles. You want to trade Miller because he makes too much money ($6M/season) but if he made $4M/season (which is exactly what you think he's worth), you still want to trade him because then he'd be worth more to other teams at that price. Why not just say you want to trade Miller and don't really care why? And the fact remains that Miller making $4M instead of $6M would not have changed anything about our offseason this year, or last year for that matter. Under this premise Leino is a top winger?
TrueBlueGED Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 IMO, Miller is not better than Pavelec, Fleury or Bryzgalov. Just like it's your opinion that he is. IMO, Miller doesn't give his team anymore chance of winning than the goalies you mentioned do their own teams. Not to mention those three goalies actually made the playoffs last season. Let's look at one undeniable fact. When the Sabres beat Washington on March 27th they held their playoff destiny in their own hands. It was crunch time and Miller responded with 13 goals allowed on 87 shots over the next three games. That's not elite. Compare their stats year-by-year. Oh, and Miller's stats in the playoffs are better than his regular season numbers, whereas those other guys go down in the postseason. And I don't think Bryzgalov's turd last year was an outlier (he should be better next year, but he'll never match the numbers he had in Phoenix)...look at what Mike Smith did going from Tampa to Phoenix.
darksabre Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 With the playoffs on the line Miller became a sieve. That's just fact. It's not, but okay.
Robviously Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Under this premise Leino is a top winger? No, under this premise Leino was going to get a big contract because he was coming off a career year with Philly and had 26 points in 30 playoff games with them. That, and the fact the he was the no.2 free agent forward available that summer after Richards, meant it was going to take a lot of money to sign him. That doesn't mean signing him was smart; it explains why the price was the price. Your arguments against Miller completely change from post to post and you even managed to contradict yourself while going after him. Let us know if you ever land on a consistent, coherent argument against him.
Two or less Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Steve Ott says on twitter he will wear #9 in Buffalo.
K-9 Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Steve Ott says on twitter he will wear #9 in Buffalo. No, no. It's too soon. Too soon, I tell you! GO SABRES!!!
darksabre Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Steve Ott says on twitter he will wear #9 in Buffalo. Awesome. I wonder how many fans are going to take their jerseys to the Sabres store to swap three letters?
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Awesome. I wonder how many fans are going to take their jerseys to the Sabres store to swap three letters? I'm sure it will be offered for free either for the $10 scrimmage or the day of a preseason game
Kristian Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 Steve Ott says on twitter he will wear #9 in Buffalo. If I didn't know any better, I'd say this was Ruff's farewell swipe at Derek Roy.
spndnchz Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 I'd change my jersey but it would look odd with OTT and Roy's signature on the number..
nobody Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 I'd change my jersey but it would look odd with OTT and Roy's signature on the number.. Go for a jersey no-no. You have plenty of space to move Roy over and put "Ott/" in front. Then you can get him to sign it also. :blink:
ROC Sabres Posted July 8, 2012 Report Posted July 8, 2012 I like the actual comment he made. Getting asked alot. I'm excited to wear no. "9" my minor hockey number and I thought it would be easy for Blo fans to replace the name bar
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.