Free Agent Frenzy 2014

[JJFIVEOH]

We don't have to have to spend money. Not as much as some seem to think. Nowhere even in the same stratosphere as the 11 players Florida had to sign.

 

The cap floor in 2011-12 was $48 million. The Panthers' payroll was $52 million. They were over by $4mil partially because they took on Campbell's salary as a favor to the Hawks. (Tallon has done significant business with Chicago since his departure).

 

Am I missing something?

Edited June 24, 2014 by JJFIVEOH

[Hoss]

 

 

The cap floor in 2011-12 was $48 million. The Panthers' payroll was $52 million. They were over by $4mil partially because they took on Campbell's salary as a favor to the Hawks. (Tallon has done significant business with Chicago since his departure).

 

Am I missing something?

 

I don't really understand what you're even getting at here. Why would Florida's cap situation matter to me if I believe that the situations and spending isn't comparable? We won't have to go on that type of spree to get above the floor like they did...

Edited June 24, 2014 by Tankalicious

[JJFIVEOH]

I don't really understand what you're even getting at here. Why would Florida's cap situation matter to me if I believe that the situations and spending isn't comparable? We won't have to go on that type of spree to get above the floor like they did...

 

Because they are comparable. I have given you about as much information as you need to prove so. How do you figure the Sabres aren't in the same situation? This forum has been talking about spending money to get to the cap floor for months now. They have to come up with $18 mil in salaries with only one significant contract to sign in the offseason (Ennis). I'm sorry you can't see the similarities.

[Hoss]

We're currently at $36M with the cap floor being somewhere between $50-52M.

 

They have to make up $18M which sounds like a lot, but that's before signing Ennis or Foligno who will take up at least four of that.

 

The second pick will likely be here which is nearly $4M which gets the distance to about $10M.

 

There's a decent chance that the two cheaper dmen (Risto and McCabe at $925K) won't be around so that would leave three NHL dmen. McBain's QO is $1.8M and will likely be back on that for a one-year deal.

 

So that would leave 3 open d spots (for a top 7). Those three dmen, if they average, say, $1.66M per will take off $5M of that $10M.

 

So you're looking to bring in two players who total $5M which could come from taking on a player who a team wants to dump in a salary move.

 

If salary goes out we will likely look to take even salary back or find a way to bring on some bad deals to help even things out.

 

 

(Signing a guy like Callahan anywhere near $6M would make this even easier. Starting to warm up to that idea a bit. Like Stastny more).

Edited June 24, 2014 by Tankalicious

[JJFIVEOH]

2nd pick getting $4 mil? :huh:

 

McBain here for another year? :huh:

 

I've grown accustomed to your obsession with disagreeing with me. As much as this place has talked about spending to get to the cap floor, I can't help but think you're purposely going out of your way to discredit my point.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

Edited June 24, 2014 by JJFIVEOH

[Hoss]

2nd pick getting $4 mil? :huh:

 

McBain here for another year? :huh:

 

I've grown accustomed to your your obsession with disagreeing with me. As much as this place has talked about spending to get to the cap floor, I can't help but think you're purposely going out of your way to discredit my point.

 

I don't really understand what your issue is with dealing with the actual info. And, yes, the 2nd pick will be right around $4M with bonuses. Cap hits listed on CapGeek exclude the bonuses. Not sure if you can get to the floor using bonuses. If not then he's just over $1M and then it bumps all the numbers up $3M which still isn't huge.

 

I'm going out of my way to prevent misinformation -- giving the impression that this team will have to go out and have an offseason similar to that of Florida did in 11-12 which would derail the tankers.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Tankalicious

[JJFIVEOH]

I don't really understand what your issue is with dealing with the actual info. And, yes, the 2nd pick will be right around $4M with bonuses. Cap hits listed on CapGeek exclude the bonuses. Not sure if you can get to the floor using bonuses. If not then he's just over $1M and then it bumps all the numbers up $3M which still isn't huge.

 

I'm going out of my way to prevent misinformation -- giving the impression that this team will have to go out and have an offseason similar to that of Florida did in 11-12 which would derail the tankers.

 

Get back to me in 9 months when the Sabres don't finish in last.

[Hoss]

 

 

Get back to me in 9 months when the Sabres don't finish in last.

 

They may not, but I highly doubt it would be because of a huge spending spree this offseason...

[...]

I think JJ brings up a great point. It's simple: the Sabres are going to have to spend some money to get to the floor. I don't see people here saying they should overpay John Scott for a season or two. Rather, I see people day-dreaming about the better FAs. So, you get a decent FA or two to fill the gap between the RFAs and the floor, and you populate the team with the kids who last season were trying not to lose. I think it's pretty easy to imagine that next season's team could vie for a wild-card slot.

 

Which is not a prediction they will, but there's nothing saying the players themselves will be in on the tank.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2014 by sizzlemeister

[Hoss]

I think JJ brings up a great point. It's simple: the Sabres are going to have to spend some money to get to the floor. I don't see people here saying they should overpay John Scott for a season or two. Rather, I see people day-dreaming about the better FAs. So, you get a decent FA or two to fill the gap between the RFAs and the floor, and you populate the team with the kids who last season were trying not to lose. I think it's pretty easy to imagine that next season's team could vie for a wild-card slot.

 

Which is not a prediction they will, but there's nothing saying the players themselves will be in on the tank.

 

The players 100% will not be in on the tank. At least not voluntarily. But a run at a wild card spot is incredibly unlikely.

Want only gets you so far. I want to win the lottery, but I don't buy lottery tickets.

 

If this team gets out of the bottom five then Ted Nolan should coach the Olympics. All countries. Simultaneously.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Tankalicious

[Johnny DangerFace]

Don't you all remember how bad this team was with an outstanding miller, moulson/vanek, ott??? What makes you think large free agents like we had last year will much a HUGE difference

[...]

 

 

The players 100% will not be in on the tank. At least not voluntarily. But a run at a wild card spot is incredibly unlikely.

Want only gets you so far. I want to win the lottery, but I don't buy lottery tickets.

 

If this team gets out of the bottom five then Ted Nolan should coach the Olympics. All countries. Simultaneously.

 

Unlikely, sure. Incredibly unlikely, not so sure.

[TrueBlueGED]

I think JJ brings up a great point. It's simple: the Sabres are going to have to spend some money to get to the floor. I don't see people here saying they should overpay John Scott for a season or two. Rather, I see people day-dreaming about the better FAs. So, you get a decent FA or two to fill the gap between the RFAs and the floor, and you populate the team with the kids who last season were trying not to lose. I think it's pretty easy to imagine that next season's team could vie for a wild-card slot.

 

Which is not a prediction they will, but there's nothing saying the players themselves will be in on the tank.

 

This team was 14 points out of 29th place in the league 36 points out of 10th place in the East last year...I think it's extremely difficult to imagine them vying for a wild card slot.

[Iron Crotch]

I don't really understand what your issue is with dealing with the actual info. And, yes, the 2nd pick will be right around $4M with bonuses. Cap hits listed on CapGeek exclude the bonuses. Not sure if you can get to the floor using bonuses. If not then he's just over $1M and then it bumps all the numbers up $3M which still isn't huge.

 

I'm going out of my way to prevent misinformation -- giving the impression that this team will have to go out and have an offseason similar to that of Florida did in 11-12 which would derail the tankers.

 

I'm pretty sure there is a salary cap for entry level contracts of just under $1 million and signing bonuses can't be more than 10% of the total compensation. So we're not paying our new draftee $4 million.

[...]

Don't you all remember how bad this team was with an outstanding miller, moulson/vanek, ott??? What makes you think large free agents like we had last year will much a HUGE difference

 

I think the stats guys would be happy to answer this, but I would guess that it's pretty difficult to tank so hard on a consistent basis. You'd be better off trying to actually win than tank if you can tank so well.

[Hoss]

 

 

I'm pretty sure there is a salary cap for entry level contracts of just under $1 million and signing bonuses can't be more than 10% of the total compensation. So we're not paying our new draftee $4 million.

 

Barkov, last year's 2nd pick, fell just short of $4 million after bonuses. $925K in salary, $90K signing bonus, just under $3M in performance bonuses.

[JJFIVEOH]

- They're going to have an entire season under stable coaching staff and a stable front office.

- They're going to go into opening night with a pretty good idea of what the roster will look like all year.

- While they did have Miller, they also finished the season with their 6th and 7th string goaltenders.

- They'll have at least a couple of at least bigger name UFA's on board. Maybe a big name or two via trades.

- The Rangers, Flyers and Penguins won't be the same teams next year. The conference is weak.

- Some of the Sabres recent top picks are bound to be in the lineup to compliment The UFA signings.

 

It's not entirely impossible to think this team might have some moderate success next year.

[Lanny]

 

 

Because they are comparable. I have given you about as much information as you need to prove so. How do you figure the Sabres aren't in the same situation? This forum has been talking about spending money to get to the cap floor for months now. They have to come up with $18 mil in salaries with only one significant contract to sign in the offseason (Ennis). I'm sorry you can't see the similarities.

After signing Ennis, Foligno Ruhwedal and Conacher and bringing up players like Larsson Ristolainen and Pysyk, they end up only like $7M under the floor. Two or three acquisitions should cover it. Edited June 24, 2014 by Lanny

[TrueBlueGED]

- They're going to have an entire season under stable coaching staff and a stable front office.

- They're going to go into opening night with a pretty good idea of what the roster will look like all year.

- While they did have Miller, they also finished the season with their 6th and 7th string goaltenders.

- They'll have at least a couple of at least bigger name UFA's on board. Maybe a big name or two via trades.

- The Rangers, Flyers and Penguins won't be the same teams next year. The conference is weak.

- Some of the Sabres recent top picks are bound to be in the lineup to compliment The UFA signings.

 

It's not entirely impossible to think this team might have some moderate success next year.

 

This is a really big assumption. And again, we were 14 points out of 29th and we have a horrid schedule...we can get better, and still be the worst team.

[Hoss]

After signing Ennis, Foligno and Conacher and bringing up players like Larsson Ristolainen and Pysyk, they end up only like $7M under the floor. Two or three acquisitions should cover it.

 

While the cap floor issue isn't a big deal, this isn't very accurate. Ennis and Foligno won't take up anymore than like $5M. Risto's number is already counted against the floor and is a small number. Pysyk and Larsson are also very small numbers.

 

 

On the performance bonus note: I've scoured all of the internet to figure it out but can't. You can have performance bonuses that have you go over the cap but it doesn't say anything about assisting yourself to the cap floor.

 

Also: when do teams have to be compliant with the cap floor? I'd guess opening night?

[JJFIVEOH]

This is a really big assumption. And again, we were 14 points out of 29th and we have a horrid schedule...we can get better, and still be the worst team.

 

I really should proofread, that sounded elementary.

 

It's no bigger of an assumption as the one that Murray will only spend to the cap floor. Not sure what is so horrid about the schedule, the back to backs? We'll have the youngest team in the league by a large margin. Somehow I don't think the B2B's will be an issue. Especially if we catch another team on a B2B, the Sabres might actually have the advantage there.

[...]

 

 

This is a really big assumption. And again, we were 14 points out of 29th and we have a horrid schedule...we can get better, and still be the worst team.

 

Again, what are they going to do with those slots? Why not over-pay Scott, or give Matt Ellis a $7 mil x 2 contract? That's the opposite of saying they're going to get a couple of good players. So, the middle is they find more McBains and D'Agostinis. To me, that's as large of an assumption as swinging high or low.

 

 

It's no bigger of an assumption as the one that Murray will only spend to the cap floor. Not sure what is so horrid about the schedule, the back to backs? We'll have the youngest team in the league by a large margin. Somehow I don't think the B2B's will be an issue. Especially if we catch another team on a B2B, the Sabres might actually have the advantage there.

 

The Sabres record was actually better in the seasons with the B2Bs, so, yes, I don't get why that's being factored in myself.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2014 by sizzlemeister

[Hoss]

- They're going to have an entire season under stable coaching staff and a stable front office.

 

There will still be an adjustment period early in the season if you're going to talk about coaching staff. Nolan will be the only one around.

 

- They're going to go into opening night with a pretty good idea of what the roster will look like all year.

 

No, probably not. If Stafford and Stewart are still around there's a strong chance one or both are dumped at the deadline along with some other guys.

 

 

- They'll have at least a couple of at least bigger name UFA's on board. Maybe a big name or two via trades.

 

Assumption. Maybe a fair one, but still may not come to be.

 

- The Rangers, Flyers and Penguins won't be the same teams next year. The conference is weak.

 

They'll still be head and shoulders above Buffalo. Maybe not Philly, but we only play them three times so it won't swing anything.

 

 

Haha I promise I'm not going out of my way to disprove anything you're saying. I just disagree. We both are making educated statements, we're just looking at things differently. I just disagree with most of what you're saying.

[JJFIVEOH]

 

 

 

The Sabres record was actually better in the seasons with the B2Bs, so, yes, I don't get why that's being factored in myself.

 

Right. I think it's a non-issue.

 

There will still be an adjustment period early in the season if you're going to talk about coaching staff. Nolan will be the only one around.

 

 

 

No, probably not. If Stafford and Stewart are still around there's a strong chance one or both are dumped at the deadline along with some other guys.

 

 

 

 

Assumption. Maybe a fair one, but still may not come to be.

 

 

 

They'll still be head and shoulders above Buffalo. Maybe not Philly, but we only play them three times so it won't swing anything.

 

 

Haha I promise I'm not going out of my way to disprove anything you're saying. I just disagree. We both are making educated statements, we're just looking at things differently. I just disagree with most of what you're saying.

 

Stafford and Stewart may be gone, but it's not going to warrant the non-stop distractions that followed Vanek, Ott and Miller around wherever the team went.

 

Nolan might be the only one around from last year, but they'll all be going through pre-season and training camp with the same coaches that they'll finish with. Some players played under 3 coaches in BFLO. The distractions hurt guys like Grigorenko. While they may be void of top notch talent for a while, the season will be a much smoother ride giving them all the chance to mature and improve. They didn't get that opportunity last year.

 

I don't think the Rangers, Flyers and Penguins going into a downturn will help the Sabres record because of the minimal amount of times we play them, but it will water down an already weak conference; making it anybody's game. I have a real hard time thinking any team is good enough to run away with the East this year.

 

It's all good. I can respect your disagreements. You backed up your argument with facts and substance, that's all I can ask for. ;)

[TrueBlueGED]

The Sabres record was actually better in the seasons with the B2Bs, so, yes, I don't get why that's being factored in myself.

 

Of course the record was better, the roster was better. But the record in the second game of those back to backs was not good. Tack on a worse roster on top of that, and I'm not sure why it's controversial to think the schedule will hurt us.