TrueBlueGED Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 He settled on "bridge" deal but I admit he is clearly not a fan. Sorry for the original "terse" response but I am kind if sensitive to mis-quoting or taking out of context. No worries, I was guilty of weaving some of my own interpretation of his work into it :) In any event, I do think the pack mentality at WGR has reached TBN pack mentality status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 vine.co/v/h1PUTDd1MeD There's a link to Cody announcing his new six-year deal. Toss the C on him now. Um, no. I've seen nothing from him to indicate ' captain ' material. At least yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Actually the Roy deal was fine. Let's hope the player turns out better. And, for the record I am happy we've got him for six years. Contract should look cheap at the end of the deal. Smart, motivated player with some skill and high expectations for himself. He's already an OK second liner and the best is yet to come. Well, I think Roy was the classic guy for whom Golisano's preferred 1-day contact term would have made sense. But I agree that Hodgy seems like a much better bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 From WGR550: Hodgson was on the ice for 3.64 Goals Against per 60 minutes, 1.97 with him off Goals Against was 18th worst in the NHL, 13th amongst F's He had a -7.91 Corsi rating per 60 minutes (shots on goal+missed+blocked) The Sabres allowed 31.0 shots against with Hodgson on the ice and 29.2 off Shots against was 29th worst in the NHL He was on the ice for 42.5% of Even Strength (non-SH or EN) goals against I don't care if he can be buried in the AHL, it's crazy to go whole hog on a guy with those numbers and nothing to suggest they will improve significantly. This is like Groundhog Day. The "smart" fans never, ever, EVER seem to learn around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 From WGR550: Hodgson was on the ice for 3.64 Goals Against per 60 minutes, 1.97 with him off Goals Against was 18th worst in the NHL, 13th amongst F's He had a -7.91 Corsi rating per 60 minutes (shots on goal+missed+blocked) The Sabres allowed 31.0 shots against with Hodgson on the ice and 29.2 off Shots against was 29th worst in the NHL He was on the ice for 42.5% of Even Strength (non-SH or EN) goals against I don't care if he can be buried in the AHL, it's crazy to go whole hog on a guy with those numbers and nothing to suggest they will improve significantly. This is like Groundhog Day. The "smart" fans never, ever, EVER seem to learn around here. Yeah but, was his SV% higher than Millers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle III Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 From WGR550: Hodgson was on the ice for 3.64 Goals Against per 60 minutes, 1.97 with him off Goals Against was 18th worst in the NHL, 13th amongst F's He had a -7.91 Corsi rating per 60 minutes (shots on goal+missed+blocked) The Sabres allowed 31.0 shots against with Hodgson on the ice and 29.2 off Shots against was 29th worst in the NHL He was on the ice for 42.5% of Even Strength (non-SH or EN) goals against I don't care if he can be buried in the AHL, it's crazy to go whole hog on a guy with those numbers and nothing to suggest they will improve significantly. This is like Groundhog Day. The "smart" fans never, ever, EVER seem to learn around here. I agree with this. Despite the fact that if the salary cap goes up and we can bury his contract or buy him out if need be, how confident are you that in six years we can say he was a steal at $4.25 per year? He has a lot to prove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 He was 4th in the league in goals scored on Tuesdays, on the road, while getting 1:30 minutes/game power play time, 30% chance of rain while wearing blue underwear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I agree with this. Despite the fact that if the salary cap goes up and we can bury his contract or buy him out if need be, how confident are you that in six years we can say he was a steal at $4.25 per year? He has a lot to prove. I'd argue it's about market value now...the only reason it's slightly over market value is because of his RFA status. This is a league where David Jones makes $4MM per year. Let me say that again: David Jones makes $4MM per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radiomike Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 He was 4th in the league in goals scored on Tuesdays, on the road, while getting 1:30 minutes/game power play time, 30% chance of rain while wearing blue underwear. Now that is a stat. Seriously though, dude's still young and has plenty of room to grow. This is neither the best signing ever nor the worst. Decent chance that the Sabres make out on the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I think we've seen enough to know that at worst he's a decent 2nd line center. $4.25M/yr is in line with 2nd line center money, no? And if he continues to improve that deal will be a relative bargain for a 1st line center. I'm good with the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle III Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I'd argue it's about market value now...the only reason it's slightly over market value is because of his RFA status. This is a league where David Jones makes $4MM per year. Let me say that again: David Jones makes $4MM per year. Being a RFA means that we have him over a barrel. He can't really do much except hold out. And finding absurd contracts in the NHL is like finding leaves on a tree. But that doesn't mean we have to do it too...isn't the Leino contract proof enough? I think a bridge contract was the correct move here, but my feeling is that his agent (and maybe Cody) didn't want that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Being a RFA means that we have him over a barrel. He can't really do much except hold out. And finding absurd contracts in the NHL is like finding leaves on a tree. But that doesn't mean we have to do it too...isn't the Leino contract proof enough? I think a bridge contract was the correct move here, but my feeling is that his agent (and maybe Cody) didn't want that. It is 2nd line center money. You haven't seen enough out of Hodgson to feel 2nd line ability is a risk with him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 It is 2nd line center money. You haven't seen enough out of Hodgson to feel 2nd line ability is a risk with him? The money is okay. The length is the problem. A second line center that is a defensive liability shouldn't have more than two seasons to clean up his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Now that is a stat. Seriously though, dude's still young and has plenty of room to grow. This is neither the best signing ever nor the worst. Decent chance that the Sabres make out on the deal. I think it's a great signing. I'm really surprised they made a 6 year deal out of it. I think he realizes he has a shot to become a core guy in a team can only look up. Hopefully this plays on Vanek's decision to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I think a bridge contract was the correct move here, but my feeling is that his agent (and maybe Cody) didn't want that. Which suggests to me that Hodgson isn't confident he can improve his game. He'd rather have the cushy contract than the opportunity to earn a larger pay day. Learn to win more face offs than you lose, and learn to back check effectively and he could bank a 7m x 7yr or something close to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 The money is okay. The length is the problem. A second line center that is a defensive liability shouldn't have more than two seasons to clean up his game. It looks like a very tradeable contract to me. If a better #1 and #2 option ends up on our roster I think it is a very moveable deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I really can't fathom why some here don't like this deal. Are we pressed against the Cap? not at all. 4.25 should look like a steal in a few years when the cap is pushing 70 mil. I see no reason why the kid cant get better defensively. He's got a ways to go but he'll be learning HERE and i'd much rather he do it here than somewhere else. Its a fair deal for both parties considering the situation. The sabres may even look back on this and smile in a few years when he starts really hitting his stride. As for the comments probing his confidence in his ability to improve being reflected in his desire for a 6 year contract, give me a break. You don't become an NHL player with an outlook of yourself like that. We have in Coho a very bright hockey mind with skill at age 23. at that point it sounds like people are looking for things to hate about this deal. and say what you will about the sabres, most of us seem pretty high on their scouting department as of late, as seen in how much we love talking about their recent picks. You dont throw money like that at a guy without evaluating his likely trajectory. Hodgson is the kind of player who seems like he thrives under pressure, and i dont see any of our other young centermen stepping up like this quite yet. whats to hate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Any word yet if there is any no movement clause? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 So this basically comes down to two camps: 1) Hodgson is a safe bet to be at least a second-liner centre and that is second-line centre money. 2) Hodgson could easily be another Stafford and we can't get tied down paying a bunch of mid-range contracts to guys who don't ultimately make a difference Both fair comment, IMO It certainly does raise the question about Darcy's comments re: the Myers contract being too-much too-soon. Hope a reporter asks him that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 From WGR550: [stats] This is like Groundhog Day. The "smart" fans never, ever, EVER seem to learn around here. Hodgson's GVT was second highest on the team, next to Vanek. His DGVT was middle of the road, not even close to worst on the team. Ennis' DGVT was far worse. Accordingly, because he had a base salary of $816k last season, his GVS was highest on the team, almost three times higher than anyone not named Brian Flynn. There's a reason to keep him around. BUT, all things in moderation. If he plays the way he did last season and makes $4.25M, his GVS drops like a rock, from 3.9 to -2.1, good for 8th worst on this last roster. It's clear even from these few stats, that he's got to earn his way. I think he knows that. and I look forward to watching him work hard to exceed expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 The money is okay. The length is the problem. A second line center that is a defensive liability shouldn't have more than two seasons to clean up his game. I think most second line centers are defensive liabilities, and that's okay because it's relatively easy to feed them protected minutes if you have a legit 1st line and a checking line. We don't have those right now, but this contract isn't only for right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I think most second line centers are defensive liabilities, and that's okay because it's relatively easy to feed them protected minutes if you have a legit 1st line and a checking line. We don't have those right now, but this contract isn't only for right now. For what it's worth, the Sabre's aren't trying to be what most teams are: they're trying to win Buffalo a Cup. Unless the trying is all that counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 I like it. Could be a steal, and I don't think he'll be Stafford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 You can still just a portion counts towards cap which will be huge soon. I mean his cap hit would be approx. $3.7 mill there which doesn't really help haha. But I get your point. Hope it never comes to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Anyone care to venture a guess on the AAV? What do I win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.