Eleven Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Absolutely he would. If we ate 50% of his salary he would be a brilliant throw-in piece for a trade for a better player. The example I used before (and don't go nuts over how unrealistic it is, it's just an example) was in a Myers for Bobby Ryan deal, Anaheim might be a lot more likely to do that if they're getting a potential 25 goal scorer to replace Ryan for just $2mil in addition to Myers. I just thought it was interesting because I had heard nothing of the Sabres retaining salary in the Pominville trade. It was necessary to get the deal done but now this article mentions the idea of retaining salary in Vanek, Miller trades too.... but then we're talking about 3-5 million in retained, dead salary on the roster. Probably not ideal. I would not blame the team for holding on to Vanek and Miller if retained salary becomes the issue. With Stafford, the Sabres just have to use the compliance buyout. No one is picking him up at $4M.
Doohicksie Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Blah..... I clicked the blog link in your sig file. The 20 greatest post-lockout moments... the 3-on-1 save by Ryan Miller????????? HOLY CHIT.
Taro T Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 I would not blame the team for holding on to Vanek and Miller if retained salary becomes the issue. With Stafford, the Sabres just have to use the compliance buyout. No one is picking him up at $4M. But by holding say $2MM of his salary next year (in a year the Sabres probably won't be tight on the cap, so the only thing the Sabres lose by holding his money is money (it's good to have Daddy Warbucks as an owner ;) )) can Stafford become something useful to the Sabres? There is probably somebody out there that would give something up for a $2MM Stafford; if so, shop him all summer. Even if there isn't a GM with more patience than Job running the team next year, I'd hope they don't compliance buyout him too soon. And yes, I still desperately want him off the roster.
LastPommerFan Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Drew has exactly one season where he wasn't "worth" $4M. This season. David Jones, Jiri Hudler, PM Bouchard are comparables. I want him gone, but I don't think eating half the salary would be required.
dudacek Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 This could have been why it took so long for the Pominville trade to be approved. Could Darcy have been the first one to take advantage of a new wrinkle in the CBA? (Didn't someone post earlier that the salary offload portion of the CBA didn't kick in until the summer?)
TrueBlueGED Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Drew has exactly one season where he wasn't "worth" $4M. This season. David Jones, Jiri Hudler, PM Bouchard are comparables. I want him gone, but I don't think eating half the salary would be required. I agree with this.
tom webster Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 This could have been why it took so long for the Pominville trade to be approved. Could Darcy have been the first one to take advantage of a new wrinkle in the CBA? (Didn't someone post earlier that the salary offload portion of the CBA didn't kick in until the summer?) There have been two or three deals where part of salary is being covered by trading team. I know Carolina did it with Jokinen and I'm pretty sure someoine else did it as well.
nfreeman Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Drew has exactly one season where he wasn't "worth" $4M. This season. David Jones, Jiri Hudler, PM Bouchard are comparables. I want him gone, but I don't think eating half the salary would be required. I say this with full respect and sensitivity for your recent emotional trauma: NFW. There will always be comparables out there that can justify overpaying someone. DR is far from the only GM who has erred. But that doesn't mean giving him $4MM was the right decision. Giving Stafford $4MM was of a piece with many DR decisions involving the overpayment of decent-but-not-great forwards. He endowed an upper middle class -- Stafford, Hecht, Pommer, Connolly, Max, Roy, Leino, etc -- but that left no room to bring in elite players (or to keep guys like Briere and Soupy for that matter). Not a single GD one of those forwards was a difference-maker, and not a single one of them who remained when the Sabres returned to the playoffs in 2010 and 2011 did a GD thing when it mattered. There has been a fair amount of commentary to the effect that under the new CBA, where front-loading of contracts is more or less gone, this type of upper middle class contract will be pretty scarce. It makes sense to me -- I'd rather have 3-4 elite players and a bunch of guys making $2.5MM or less than what we've seen from the Sabres since 2007. Here's a question: would you rather have 2 Staffords, or 1 Crosby? The question answers itself.
Two or less Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 I agree with this. Last season, Stafford had a stretch where he went with 54 games with just 6 goals. Sure, he did get on a streak very early in the season, and ended the season on fire with Foligno and Ennis, but 6 goals in a 54 game stretch is not being worth $4 million. Sometimes, the stats are not everything and his 20 goal season was flawed. It's a good accomplishment for the player, but not the team, and doesn't help the team have success. For me, someone worth $4 million per needs more consistency then that.
dudacek Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 His track record means Stafford should slot in between $3 and $4 million as a 20 goal second liner, Darcy signed him at $4 million for four years betting Stafford was going to be the 30-goal man he was in his "breakout" year. At that rate, he would have been a bargain. If he slumped back to his established numbers, he was still a serviceable, if somewhat overpaid top six forward who left you wanting more - not a great decision, but not a back breaker either. Instead, we have a guy who is providing little that any more committed, moderately skilled minor league callup (like Brian Flynn). I think there is still value there given his past where he can be the sweetener in a bigger deal But if he starts next season like this, he will become yet another player Darcy kept too long after his expiry date.
LastPommerFan Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I say this with full respect and sensitivity for your recent emotional trauma: NFW. There will always be comparables out there that can justify overpaying someone. DR is far from the only GM who has erred. But that doesn't mean giving him $4MM was the right decision. Giving Stafford $4MM was of a piece with many DR decisions involving the overpayment of decent-but-not-great forwards. He endowed an upper middle class -- Stafford, Hecht, Pommer, Connolly, Max, Roy, Leino, etc -- but that left no room to bring in elite players (or to keep guys like Briere and Soupy for that matter). Not a single GD one of those forwards was a difference-maker, and not a single one of them who remained when the Sabres returned to the playoffs in 2010 and 2011 did a GD thing when it mattered. There has been a fair amount of commentary to the effect that under the new CBA, where front-loading of contracts is more or less gone, this type of upper middle class contract will be pretty scarce. It makes sense to me -- I'd rather have 3-4 elite players and a bunch of guys making $2.5MM or less than what we've seen from the Sabres since 2007. Here's a question: would you rather have 2 Staffords, or 1 Crosby? The question answers itself. 1st- You leave Pommer off the bolded list. He may not be top end star power difference maker, but he certainly does not fit on that list. He was 2nd- $4M doesn't get you the forward you think it does. The contract is tradeable this offseason. Last season, Stafford had a stretch where he went with 54 games with just 6 goals. Sure, he did get on a streak very early in the season, and ended the season on fire with Foligno and Ennis, but 6 goals in a 54 game stretch is not being worth $4 million. Sometimes, the stats are not everything and his 20 goal season was flawed. It's a good accomplishment for the player, but not the team, and doesn't help the team have success. For me, someone worth $4 million per needs more consistency then that. $4M is the going price for a 15 goal scorer. which is fewer than 10 goals in a 54 game stretch who then scores 5 goals in the remaining 28 games, not 14 like staff did. I hate this guy, please stop making me feel like I'm defending him.
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 1st- You leave Pommer off the bolded list. He may not be top end star power difference maker, but he certainly does not fit on that list. He was 2nd- $4M doesn't get you the forward you think it does. The contract is tradeable this offseason. $4M is the going price for a 15 goal scorer. which is fewer than 10 goals in a 54 game stretch who then scores 5 goals in the remaining 28 games, not 14 like staff did. I hate this guy, please stop making me feel like I'm defending him. Well, don't worry, then. $4M is NOT the going rate for a guy with Staff's numbers, certainly won't be with the new cap, and the league looks at more than numbers. The whole league knows he doesn't try, and , for example, I doubt that Parise would gush over Staff the way he did over Pommer.
LastPommerFan Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 Well, don't worry, then. $4M is NOT the going rate for a guy with Staff's numbers, certainly won't be with the new cap, and the league looks at more than numbers. The whole league knows he doesn't try, and , for example, I doubt that Parise would gush over Staff the way he did over Pommer. You are right about stafford being a ###### bag, but it only takes one feaster to make me right. It takes 29 competent GMs to make you right. Vegas puts the odds in my favor.
IKnowPhysics Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 1st- You leave Pommer off the bolded list. I'm laughing at this whole exchange by the way. Keep going, please. I doubt that Parise would gush over Staff the way he did over Pommer. I bet he would. They were linemates at UND.
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 You are right about stafford being a ###### bag, but it only takes one feaster to make me right. It takes 29 competent GMs to make you right. Vegas puts the odds in my favor. I hope Feaster and/or Vegas makes you right. I would love nothing more than for some team to trade for Stafford. I bet he would. They were linemates at UND. I had a best friend in college, too. Would I want him as my business partner?
IKnowPhysics Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I hope Feaster and/or Vegas makes you right. I would love nothing more than for some team to trade for Stafford. Like a few others here, I think (and admittedly was hopeful) that we were really close to trading him before the deadline. I just think the few buyers that had what we were asking (likely a 1st rounder, maybe more) didn't have or want to spend it at the time. It's not much consolation, but I don't think his stock drops that much between the end of the season and the next deadline. Edit: And ######, from the other thread, Columbus was willing to spend a 1st on Stafford until Gaborik was pryed from NYR. http://kuklaskorner.com/tso/comments/two-sabres-trade-offers-that-were-rejected
Robviously Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I hope Feaster and/or Vegas makes you right. I would love nothing more than for some team to trade for Stafford. If you believe the rumors, plenty of teams were interested on deadline day but the Sabres' asking price was too high. (In other words, it wasn't a trade Darcy could "win" so we're keeping the bum. I'm sure he does wonders for the "doom and gloom" locker room that Leopold described.)
Trettioåtta Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I'm laughing at this whole exchange by the way. Keep going, please. I bet he would. They were linemates at UND. They weren't linemates - Parise said Stafford was never good enough to be on his line (and he didn't say it in a teasing/banterish way)
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 Like a few others here, I think (and admittedly was hopeful) that we were really close to trading him before the deadline. I just think the few buyers that had what we were asking (likely a 1st rounder, maybe more) didn't have or want to spend it at the time. It's not much consolation, but I don't think his stock drops that much between the end of the season and the next deadline. Edit: And ######, from the other thread, Columbus was willing to spend a 1st on Stafford until Gaborik was pryed from NYR. http://kuklaskorner....t-were-rejected If you believe the rumors, plenty of teams were interested on deadline day but the Sabres' asking price was too high. (In other words, it wasn't a trade Darcy could "win" so we're keeping the bum. I'm sure he does wonders for the "doom and gloom" locker room that Leopold described.) I still believe that he was being packaged. I do not believe that any team--C-Bus or otherwise--was trading a first or second for him straight up. Those rumors are exactly as believable as the Miller + Staff for Ovi rumors, to me.
Robviously Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I still believe that he was being packaged. I do not believe that any team--C-Bus or otherwise--was trading a first or second for him straight up. Those rumors are exactly as believable as the Miller + Staff for Ovi rumors, to me. No one was trading a first. I could see a late second round pick, maybe. I would have been happy with a third. Enough with this guy.
Trettioåtta Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I still believe that he was being packaged. I do not believe that any team--C-Bus or otherwise--was trading a first or second for him straight up. Those rumors are exactly as believable as the Miller + Staff for Ovi rumors, to me. A second has a 50/50 chance of ever even playing an NHL game. Stafford is a proven 50 point scorer and his salary really isn't that bad at all - go to any team and see what the salary is of a 25+ year old who scores 50 points. Yeah teams would trade a second for that. They would probably trade a first for it if they could ensure it would be a late one (ie. when the draft order is set)
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 A second has a 50/50 chance of ever even playing an NHL game. Stafford is a proven 50 point scorer and his salary really isn't that bad at all - go to any team and see what the salary is of a 25+ year old who scores 50 points. Yeah teams would trade a second for that. They would probably trade a first for it if they could ensure it would be a late one (ie. when the draft order is set) Stafford is a proven floater and nothing else. And why am I doing this here, when I created a nice, convenient spot for all this stuff? This is probably as annoying as the Ruff posts that crept into every non-GDT. I'll stop here, and leave the discussion where it belongs. (Not your fault, 38!)
26CornerBlitz Posted April 10, 2013 Report Posted April 10, 2013 @mnwild WATCH: Jason Pominville joins #mnwild and gets a surprise in the latest #BecomingWild webisode, presented by Toyota http://ow.ly/jUIJR
LGR4GM Posted April 10, 2013 Report Posted April 10, 2013 @mnwild WATCH: Jason Pominville joins #mnwild and gets a surprise in the latest #BecomingWild webisode, presented by Toyota http://ow.ly/jUIJR I miss Pominville :cry:
Claude_Verret Posted April 10, 2013 Report Posted April 10, 2013 @mnwild WATCH: Jason Pominville joins #mnwild and gets a surprise in the latest #BecomingWild webisode, presented by Toyota http://ow.ly/jUIJR Good stuff. I hope Pommers lights it up with the Wild.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.