Bullwinkle III Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 Still woulda bought out Stafford first IMO. No. Stafford still has some trade value and evidently some teams (Edm) have interest in him.
... Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 You guys trying to make sense of using a CBO for Gerbe need to just stop it. The explanation will more than likely be disappointing no matter what it is.
JJFIVEOH Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 No. Stafford still has some trade value and evidently some teams (Edm) have interest in him. You're right. As much as we all hate to admit it, Stafford has some value. He had a terrible year last year, but so did 95% of the team. Fact is, he is still a 20 goal scorer. There are usually about 100 twenty goal scorers in the NHL every year and Stafford averages 22 in an 82 game season which puts him around the top 80. You could probably take half the teams in the league and those would be top line numbers. Barring several big moves by Darcy in the next few days, 20 goals will be important for this team next year.
papazoid Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 gerbe sucks... gerbe's agent Jordan Neumann says he was informed by email of the Sabres' plans on Wednesday, and added the team told Gerbe by phone. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2013/07/03/agent-sabres-inform-f-nathan-gerbe-intend-to-buy-out-final-year-contract/#ixzz2Y4YUv0PK
billsrcursed Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 How do you like it, how do you like it more more more! How do you like it, how do you like it soup du jour! How do you like it how do you like it more more more! Sorry ;) I probably should have edited my post to read, "4 pages of Gerbe before we even know for sure what took place..." Either way, don't apologize. It's never wasted on me!
Marvelo Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 If Gerbe was transplanted on a team with heart, they'd get him and he'd get them and I think he would do fine. But there are too many big guys on the Sabres like Stafford and Tyler Myers who are not serious about the game of hockey and don't have the eye of the tiger. I think that a few of them last year saw the lockout and did not prepare for NHL hockey all year. Guys like Myers probably thought they'd play in Europe and wouldn't have to play NHL last year. I know it's speculation but I think that's the reason he was out of shape coming into the season. As for Stafford, he disappears for large stretches as we all know. I think he's got something terribly wrong going on inside his head and his heart. He's not there to please us fans and much of the team I think couldn't care less whether they were in Buffalo, Columbus, Phoenix or Edmonton. It's just a job to them. To Gerbe it's different. He didn't have production last year and he seemed to be getting pinched into the corners. The Ottawa pbp man purposely nick-named him Gerber. Rolston didn't like him, he gave him 10 minutes a game, maybe less. But every time he was on the ice, you could see his arms and legs furiously pumping, giving it all he had, getting in the faces of guys that were bigger and stronger than himself and even roughing them up a bit. Yes I wish Gerbe was taller but he has the heart of a lion and I hope he lands on a team of big, ferocious guys where he can fill a niche, just like Paille did on Boston. I wish him well...I'm also 5'5 and play rec hockey and the effort he put forth made me proud.
Dave Dryden Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 You guys trying to make sense of using a CBO for Gerbe need to just stop it. The explanation will more than likely be disappointing no matter what it is. You only get 2 buyouts to use by July 1 of next year-- you don't get them forever. Unless they see lots more contracts they want to buy out in the next year, they could be left in the position of having unused buyouts. This seems likely given the current roster, especially with Vanek and Miller likely to come off the books. It seems like a use or lose it decision. You may disagree, but that's the only logical explanation I see.
nucci Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 Why are people so outraged? This is just a business decision on a fringe player on a non-playoff team. Don't get your panties in a twist over such a minor move. Gerbe wasn't good enough and he doesn't fit the mold of a bigger and tougher team to play against. Maybe the days of acquiring tiny forwards is over for the Sabres. I hope so. :thumbsup:
Weave Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 Maybe the trade and buyout option is far-fetched, but why eliminate the option for absolutely zero benefit? Using a compliance on Gerbe saves almost nothing against the cap, and we're not anywhere near the cap ceiling anyway. It just doesn't make any sense at all. Darcy has plenty of faults but strategery (thanks George!) never seemed to be lacking with him. He is a good tactician. I suspect this decision is well thought through. It seems obvious to me that the team has no plans whatsoever to use a 2nd CBO on a current rostered Sabres even next season. And I have to assume that the team explored the trade-and-buy-out-route and found the market really wasn't there for them to use. And next year the market for those trades is even smaller because the obvious buy out candidates are getting bought out this season. Maybe, just maybe, there really weren't the opportunties to "do a team a favor" that we all postulated there might be. Might as well use one now. Dudachek made a point worth discussing. Darcy may be alot of things, but I can't recall him being a liar in the past. And he did say previously that they weren't buying anyone out. Something must have changed. Paul Hamilton discussed it a bit on WGR yesterday evening. I wonder what changed.
LabattBlue Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 It doesn't look like the Sabres will be up against the cap this year, and cosidering the salary buried in the last couple of years(Kotalik, Pardy, Morissonn, etc...), why not send him to Rochester to provide some much needed offense to that team? I don't get it. Instead fill Rochester with offensively challenged "AHL veterans" like McCormick & Ellis.
Weave Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 It doesn't look like the Sabres will be up against the cap this year, and cosidering the salary buried in the last couple of years(Kotalik, Pardy, Morissonn, etc...), why not send him to Rochester to provide some much needed offense to that team? I don't get it. Instead fill Rochester with offensively challenged "AHL veterans" like McCormick & Ellis. That has already been touched on here. The team is projecting to be close to the 50 contract limit.
LabattBlue Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 That has already been touched on here. The team is projecting to be close to the 50 contract limit. When they hit 50(if they hit 50) they can waive Gerbe(or any other player) at that time. Until then, it is a moot point. PS I am still waiting to see the list of current players under contract who count against the 50 player limit.
spndnchz Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 I like it until I realized we lost one of our centers.
etiennep99 Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 When they hit 50(if they hit 50) they can waive Gerbe(or any other player) at that time. Until then, it is a moot point. PS I am still waiting to see the list of current players under contract who count against the 50 player limit. According to capgeek, they have 36 players signed at the moment. The following players have been offered contracts: Hodgson, Flynn, Hackett, Adam, Tropp, & Crawford. That takes us to 42. Add in a possible free agent like Briere: 43 Ristolainen (NHL/AHL) or Zadarov(NHL): 44 Austin, Nelson, & Locke are AHL eligible: 45 to 47 The Sabres would like Pardy back on a 2-way contract to mentor kids in Rochester: 48 Even more depth is needed in Rochester....that takes us to 50 contracts, which is 2 too many because you need to remain flexible in trades. Maybe some of the Rochester guys can be AHL only contracts, such as Austin, or even Lepkowski since he was passed over in the draft the 2nd time around. It's too bad that they can't just write-off fringe AHL'ers like Boychuck & Szydlowski, and even one of Knapp or Lieuwen.
Weave Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 When they hit 50(if they hit 50) they can waive Gerbe(or any other player) at that time. Until then, it is a moot point. PS I am still waiting to see the list of current players under contract who count against the 50 player limit. I suspect it probably wasn't done for this reason but waiving him now is almost a favor to him. He's free to look for a team during the regular FA signing period. It would be much harder fro him to find a team after teams have their rosters more set. and it seems that the Sabres are moving away from small forwards organizationally. They want a different kind of team. I'm sure they want that "different kind of team" to start coming together in Rochester. I like it until I realized we lost one of our centers. The joke that never dies.
etiennep99 Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 If it was a favor, did the CBO option give Gerbe more money than a RBO would have? Or were the Sabres penny-pinching here too?
LabattBlue Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 According to capgeek, they have 36 players signed at the moment. The following players have been offered contracts: Hodgson, Flynn, Hackett, Adam, Tropp, & Crawford. That takes us to 42. Add in a possible free agent like Briere: 43 Ristolainen (NHL/AHL) or Zadarov(NHL): 44 Austin, Nelson, & Locke are AHL eligible: 45 to 47 The Sabres would like Pardy back on a 2-way contract to mentor kids in Rochester: 48 Even more depth is needed in Rochester....that takes us to 50 contracts, which is 2 too many because you need to remain flexible in trades. Maybe some of the Rochester guys can be AHL only contracts, such as Austin, or even Lepkowski since he was passed over in the draft the 2nd time around. It's too bad that they can't just write-off fringe AHL'ers like Boychuck & Szydlowski, and even one of Knapp or Lieuwen. Thx for the info. There are a lot of "ifs" in your scenario. I don't think Gerbe was going to be in the Sabres long term plans even before this week, so I guess his departure other than burning a CBO, is no big deal.
spndnchz Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 If it was a favor, did the CBO option give Gerbe more money than a RBO would have? Or were the Sabres penny-pinching here too? Same money either way.
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 I just don't get this move, we're pressed for centers enough as it is already on the current roster...
DumbPuck Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 If Gerbe was transplanted on a team with heart, they'd get him and he'd get them and I think he would do fine. But there are too many big guys on the Sabres like Stafford and Tyler Myers who are not serious about the game of hockey and don't have the eye of the tiger. I think that a few of them last year saw the lockout and did not prepare for NHL hockey all year. Guys like Myers probably thought they'd play in Europe and wouldn't have to play NHL last year. I know it's speculation but I think that's the reason he was out of shape coming into the season. As for Stafford, he disappears for large stretches as we all know. I think he's got something terribly wrong going on inside his head and his heart. He's not there to please us fans and much of the team I think couldn't care less whether they were in Buffalo, Columbus, Phoenix or Edmonton. It's just a job to them. To Gerbe it's different. He didn't have production last year and he seemed to be getting pinched into the corners. The Ottawa pbp man purposely nick-named him Gerber. Rolston didn't like him, he gave him 10 minutes a game, maybe less. But every time he was on the ice, you could see his arms and legs furiously pumping, giving it all he had, getting in the faces of guys that were bigger and stronger than himself and even roughing them up a bit. Yes I wish Gerbe was taller but he has the heart of a lion and I hope he lands on a team of big, ferocious guys where he can fill a niche, just like Paille did on Boston. I wish him well...I'm also 5'5 and play rec hockey and the effort he put forth made me proud. Good post. Exactly what I think about the whole thing.
TrueBlueGED Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 Darcy has plenty of faults but strategery (thanks George!) never seemed to be lacking with him. He is a good tactician. I suspect this decision is well thought through. It seems obvious to me that the team has no plans whatsoever to use a 2nd CBO on a current rostered Sabres even next season. And I have to assume that the team explored the trade-and-buy-out-route and found the market really wasn't there for them to use. And next year the market for those trades is even smaller because the obvious buy out candidates are getting bought out this season. Maybe, just maybe, there really weren't the opportunties to "do a team a favor" that we all postulated there might be. Might as well use one now. Dudachek made a point worth discussing. Darcy may be alot of things, but I can't recall him being a liar in the past. And he did say previously that they weren't buying anyone out. Something must have changed. Paul Hamilton discussed it a bit on WGR yesterday evening. I wonder what changed. I get what you're saying, but it still doesn't make sense to me to eliminate the possibility. I mean, sometimes unplanned things happen. Even if the chances of using the second buyout are 1% or less, wouldn't it be better to have that option? It just seems totally pointless to use one on a contract that saves next to no money when you're nowhere near the cap. As to your second point, Ales Kotalik is an NHL player who will have every opportunity to make the team....minus, you know, the opportunity to show anything during a preseason game :P
Jsixspd Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 I just don't get this move, we're pressed for centers enough as it is already on the current roster... Unless the plan is to replace him with Briere? Honestly, I think that's a retrograde move for the Sabres. Based on this year's stats, I think Briere's best days are behind him. He'll be 36 when the season starts. Here's his stat page http://espn.go.com/nhl/player/_/id/102/danny-briere He had Stafford-like stats this year ; -13 in the plus/minus, and only 16 points. However, I could see Pegula/Regier bringing him back because it would be a popular move with the fans. Well guess what? "Popular" and two-bits will get you a cup of coffee. Doing the "popular" thing won't necessarily put the Stanley Cup in the locker room I would equate re-hiring Briere to the Bills hiring Doug Flutie as QB.... it wasn't a long term move - Flutie was old when he joined the Bills.... it was done strictly to make the Canadian fans happy.
Weave Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 I get what you're saying, but it still doesn't make sense to me to eliminate the possibility. I mean, sometimes unplanned things happen. Even if the chances of using the second buyout are 1% or less, wouldn't it be better to have that option? It just seems totally pointless to use one on a contract that saves next to no money when you're nowhere near the cap. As to your second point, Ales Kotalik is an NHL player who will have every opportunity to make the team....minus, you know, the opportunity to show anything during a preseason game :P They still have one more to use. Darcy is meticulous and diligent if nothing else. I have no faith in him building a cup contender, but when it comes to navigating a chess board I'm betting he's tough to beat. I doubt the CBO is "wasted" on Gerbe. I don't see a ton of value in using a CBO here but I am willing to trust that there is or Darcy wouldn't use it.
LGR4GM Posted July 4, 2013 Report Posted July 4, 2013 I guess Leino is better. On lw we have Vanek, ott, foligno, leino, plus Rochester guys.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.