Ristolainen Signed, 6yrs 5.4mil per

[LGR4GM]

Amazing how saying he wasn't a top-2, but a top 4 is met with such harsh objection.  I still think Risto is a stud, I just have a lot of questions on whether he'll ascend to a legit top-2 for a playoff team -- again, he and his agent are attempting to position the negotiations based on the quality of Buff D last year and where he stacked up -- the D was not good, being the best of an average group of D men, does not warrant a huge contract --- 

That isn't why you got a harsh reaction. You basically said Ristolainen was better in his Sophomore season and looked and played worse last year. That simply is not true.

 

 

Last year, it appeared as though he didn't make the necessary progress during the 1st half, and actually regressed in the 2nd half of the season.

 

 This was and is my biggest issue with your take. I don't think it is accurate in any way shape or form. Ristolainen was leaps better last year compared to his 2nd season. The agreement we have is I think after about game 50 Risto tailed off a bit and then seemed to surge for the final 5-10 games. 

[Georgia Blizzard]

That isn't why you got a harsh reaction. You basically said Ristolainen was better in his Sophomore season and looked and played worse last year. That simply is not true.

 

 

 This was and is my biggest issue with your take. I don't think it is accurate in any way shape or form. Ristolainen was leaps better last year compared to his 2nd season. The agreement we have is I think after about game 50 Risto tailed off a bit and then seemed to surge for the final 5-10 games. 

 

I think you are confusing my point a bit.

 

For a 19 year old, 20 year old to become a top 2 pairing D-man, I expected MORE progress than what I saw in Risto during the 1st half of 2015-16 season.  What I saw on ice was some progress during those first 40+ games, but not a ton.  In the second half of last season, I saw regression.  Now, that could have been because he was overused in first half, it could have been who he was paired with, but, what I didn't see was ascension and he taking that next big step, which is what you would need to see if he was on the trend for top-2

 

I will grant you that he looked better at the very end of the season.

 

Just because he didn't take that next big step last year, doesn't mean he won't this year, but it give me (and seems like GMTM) reason to pause and reassess whether he will be top-2 or top-4

[LGR4GM]

And again, I do not agree. He showed amazing progress between years for me. Last year he looked like the part. It was a huge step imo. 

[Randall Flagg]

I think you are confusing my point a bit.

 

For a 19 year old, 20 year old to become a top 2 pairing D-man, I expected MORE progress than what I saw in Risto during the 1st half of 2015-16 season.  What I saw on ice was some progress during those first 40+ games, but not a ton.  In the second half of last season, I saw regression.  Now, that could have been because he was overused in first half, it could have been who he was paired with, but, what I didn't see was ascension and he taking that next big step, which is what you would need to see if he was on the trend for top-2

 

I will grant you that he looked better at the very end of the season.

 

Just because he didn't take that next big step last year, doesn't mean he won't this year, but it give me (and seems like GMTM) reason to pause and reassess whether he will be top-2 or top-4

He was on a 55+ point pace during the first half. Do you need him to be Karlsson, at age 21? Lidstrom?

 

He took a step into the top 20 defensive scorers last year, was the youngest one in that list, and played harder minutes than many of the others on the list. 

I just don't know what you guys need to see from Ristolainen at this point. At his age, most stud defensemen had not touched NHL ice yet, let alone played top pairing minutes against the best players in the world every single shift every single night. OF COURSE he's going to have hiccups. He was by far the highest scoring defenseman of his age with all of this taken into consideration. The hard shifts, the partner in over his head that he dragged around half the time, starting in the d-zone against top lines 58% of the time. What do you honestly expect out of a kid in this situation? How is Risto not doing well enough? I cannot fathom what you needed to see out of him to be impressed. It appears that being a clear number one Norris-discussion defender at age 21 is what is required. Which I think is crazy.

 

We should be enjoying our young stud D that has potential to be among the best, if not the best, in this franchise's history, and don't let the occasional slump at an age where most defensemen are still playing in college or busing around the AHL, while he's playing against Bergeron/Stamkos/Barkov/Crosby/Giroux/Malkin/Ovechkin every single night, get you too worried about his future.

[Huckleberry]

Marchand with Boston gets 8 years 49M. No way Risto deserves more money. His potential is top notch but he hasn't produced as a 6.5M average per year Dman yet. As much as I like him, he's no where near Ekblad in talent nor what he has produced so far.

 

and Ekblad has the concussion monster looming over him already.

[pi2000]

He was on a 55+ point pace during the first half. Do you need him to be Karlsson, at age 21? Lidstrom?

 

He took a step into the top 20 defensive scorers last year, was the youngest one in that list, and played harder minutes than many of the others on the list. 

I just don't know what you guys need to see from Ristolainen at this point. At his age, most stud defensemen had not touched NHL ice yet, let alone played top pairing minutes against the best players in the world every single shift every single night. OF COURSE he's going to have hiccups. He was by far the highest scoring defenseman of his age with all of this taken into consideration. The hard shifts, the partner in over his head that he dragged around half the time, starting in the d-zone against top lines 58% of the time. What do you honestly expect out of a kid in this situation? How is Risto not doing well enough? I cannot fathom what you needed to see out of him to be impressed. It appears that being a clear number one Norris-discussion defender at age 21 is what is required. Which I think is crazy.

 

We should be enjoying our young stud D that has potential to be among the best, if not the best, in this franchise's history, and don't let the occasional slump at an age where most defensemen are still playing in college or busing around the AHL, while he's playing against Bergeron/Stamkos/Barkov/Crosby/Giroux/Malkin/Ovechkin every single night, get you too worried about his future.

 

He's had the worst +/- on the team for two years straight... and is a career -68.    

 

Yeah, I get it, +/- can be a misleading stat, but you can't ignore a -68.   That is the second worst +/- in the ENTIRE LEAGUE over the past 3 years.   Only Nail Yakupov is worse at -84, but wait, +/- doesn't mean anything right?  Yakupov is a fantastic defensive player.   Gimme a break.

 

Sure, Risto has been on some bad teams, but then why doesn't Gorges or Weber or any other Sabres defenseman have nearly as bad a +/-?   Nobody is willing to answer that question because they can't.    

[LGR4GM]

He's had the worst +/- on the team for two years straight... and is a career -68.

 

Yeah, I get it, +/- can be a misleading stat, but you can't ignore a -68. That is the second worst +/- in the ENTIRE LEAGUE over the past 3 years. Only Nail Yakupov is worse at -84, but wait, +/- doesn't mean anything right? Yakupov is a fantastic defensive player. Gimme a break.

 

Sure, Risto has been on some bad teams, but then why doesn't Gorges or Weber or any other Sabres defenseman have nearly as bad a +/-? Nobody is willing to answer that question because they can't.

I've answered and others but here we go. Rasmus played more minutes, against tougher competition, at a younger age then any other Sabres defender last year. The 2 years b4 he was a rookie or on team designed to lose. I don't care what his +- was in the tank year. I care that he's improved it.

 

You're on yet another crusade Pi.

Edited September 27, 2016 by LGR4GM

[woods-racer]

He's a bum get rid of him.

 

 

Now's good, right?

[Randall Flagg]

He's had the worst +/- on the team for two years straight... and is a career -68.    

 

Yeah, I get it, +/- can be a misleading stat, but you can't ignore a -68.   That is the second worst +/- in the ENTIRE LEAGUE over the past 3 years.   Only Nail Yakupov is worse at -84, but wait, +/- doesn't mean anything right?  Yakupov is a fantastic defensive player.   Gimme a break.

 

Sure, Risto has been on some bad teams, but then why doesn't Gorges or Weber or any other Sabres defenseman have nearly as bad a +/-?   Nobody is willing to answer that question because they can't.    

You're still referencing two tank seasons and a garbage stat.

 

Unbelievable. 

 

Just get Risto signed, GMTM.

 

And yes, I can answer that question. Gorges was only with us for one tank season. In that season, he ALSO had a terrible +/-. BECAUSE WE WERE A TERRIBLE TEAM. +\- is all you have, and it's been proven time and time again to be trash. You claim that no one is willing to answer that question. WE'VE ANSWERED IT THIRTY TIMES! Mike Weber got sheltered minutes against the teams' worst players! Josh Gorges DID have a terrible +/-, as he dragged Risto down playing against those same superstars that Risto did! All of this has been said a million times and explains why +/- is considered a joke by the hockey world, and why Risto's isn't where you want it to be. 

[pi2000]

I've answered and others but here we go. Rasmus played more minutes, against tougher competition, at a younger age then any other Sabres defender last year. The 2 years b4 he was a rookie or on team designed to lose. I don't care what his +- was in the tank year. I care that he's improved it.

 

You're on yet another crusade Pi.

 

This was a .500 team last season, yet he was still the 3rd worst +/- defenseman in the entire NHL.    BUF certainly wasn't the worst team in the league, so you can't use that as an excuse.

 

To clarify my point, I'm not saying Risto is going to be a garbage defenseman, he's still young and will get better.   The point I'm trying to make is that you don't give the worst +/- player at his position an 8-year mega deal at this stage of his career.    He still has lots to prove, let him grow and pay him when the time is right.   

[Randall Flagg]

This was a .500 team last season, yet he was still the 3rd worst +/- defenseman in the entire NHL.    BUF certainly wasn't the worst team in the league, so you can't use that as an excuse.

 

To clarify my point, I'm not saying Risto is going to be a garbage defenseman, he's still young and will get better.   The point I'm trying to make is that you don't give the worst +/- player at his position an 8-year mega deal at this stage of his career.    He still has lots to prove, let him grow and pay him when the time is right.   

Pi, you CANNOT base any decisions off of purely +/-.

[WildCard]

It's funny pi, because I've dug up the advanced stats on Risto and Gorges, trying to figure who drags who down, and I'll tell you right now, that's where your argument lies

[pi2000]

Pi, you CANNOT base any decisions off of purely +/-.

 

So, just for the record, you'd be willing to give the worst +/- player at his position in the NHL an 8-year mega deal?

 

8-year deals are for guys who check all the boxes.   +/- might be a small box, but it's one you still need to check, and with Risto you simply can't check that box.

 

I would prefer he get a 5 year deal, even be willing to go 6,  at around $5mil.... go lookup up my previous posts in this thread.   

[LGR4GM]

This was a .500 team last season, yet he was still the 3rd worst +/- defenseman in the entire NHL. BUF certainly wasn't the worst team in the league, so you can't use that as an excuse.

 

To clarify my point, I'm not saying Risto is going to be a garbage defenseman, he's still young and will get better. The point I'm trying to make is that you don't give the worst +/- player at his position an 8-year mega deal at this stage of his career. He still has lots to prove, let him grow and pay him when the time is right.

Omg, how many ways can I say this. Ristolainen played more minutes, against tougher competition, at age 20, then anyone else in the NHL.

[WildCard]

So, just for the record, you'd be willing to give the worst +/- player at his position in the NHL an 8-year mega deal?

 

8-year deals are for guys who check all the boxes. +/- might be a small box, but it's one you still need to check, and with Risto you simply can't check that box.

 

I would prefer he get a 5 year deal, even be willing to go 6, at around $5mil.... go lookup up my previous posts in this thread.

It's not a box, it's a hole to into

[pi2000]

It's funny pi, because I've dug up the advanced stats on Risto and Gorges, trying to figure who drags who down, and I'll tell you right now, that's where your argument lies

 

How many years would be willing to give him?  

 

Do you expect him to be a + player this season? 

[Huckleberry]

It's funny pi, because I've dug up the advanced stats on Risto and Gorges, trying to figure who drags who down, and I'll tell you right now, that's where your argument lies

 

this :p

[LGR4GM]

So, just for the record, you'd be willing to give the worst +/- player at his position in the NHL an 8-year mega deal?

 

8-year deals are for guys who check all the boxes. +/- might be a small box, but it's one you still need to check, and with Risto you simply can't check that box.

 

I would prefer he get a 5 year deal, even be willing to go 6, at around $5mil.... go lookup up my previous posts in this thread.

Your 5 year deal idea is garbage. Utter garbage. We're not doing that debate again.

How many years would be willing to give him?

 

Do you expect him to be a + player this season?

3 or 8

[Randall Flagg]

So, just for the record, you'd be willing to give the worst +/- player at his position in the NHL an 8-year mega deal?

 

8-year deals are for guys who check all the boxes.   +/- might be a small box, but it's one you still need to check, and with Risto you simply can't check that box.

 

I would prefer he get a 5 year deal, even be willing to go 6,  at around $5mil.... go lookup up my previous posts in this thread.   

Wasn't this Ovechkin one year? YES.

 

No, +/- in tank seasons and then on a bottom-10-finish season, at 21 years old, of a #1 all-situations defenseman, is not a box that needs to be checked.

 

5 does nothing for anyone. I won't hate six, but I want 7 or 8.

[WildCard]

How many years would be willing to give him?

 

Do you expect him to be a + player this season?

I'd lock him up long term. I love what Florida did. I believe in Risto, but I'm not shelling out Ekblad money for hom

 

Still it is interesting. We have a view of Risto that, IIRC, the advanced stats did not support

Edited September 27, 2016 by WildCard

[Randall Flagg]

I need to chill out for a second, I'm letting school stress affect my posting here. Be back in a few :P 

[pi2000]

Your 5 year deal idea is garbage. Utter garbage. We're not doing that debate again.

3 or 8

 

Garbage?  Really?   If your 8-year deal makes the most sense, then why hasn't GMTM offered it to him yet?   What's the hold up on the contract?  

 

Could it be that GMTM doesn't want to commit that kind of term and money to an unproven kid?    

I'd lock him up long term. I love what Florida did. I believe in Risto, but I'm not shelling out Ekblad money for hom

 

Still it is interesting. We have a view of Risto that, IIRC, the advanced stats did not support

 

And don't ignore the fact that long term deals can have a negative impact on players growth, especially at a young age.   Is Risto that kind of player to slack off once he's financially secure?   Maybe, maybe not... but why take that chance when you don't have to?    Keep him motivated for his next deal, we all want to see him continue to grow as a player, and he likely will, but you're adding unnecessary risk to damaging his growth curve if you give him a long term deal at his age. 

[LGR4GM]

Garbage? Really? If your 8-year deal makes the most sense, then why hasn't GMTM offered it to him yet? What's the hold up on the contract?

 

Could it be that GMTM doesn't want to commit that kind of term and money to an unproven kid?

Yes, garbage. I explained why already.

 

It's over money not term according to what we heard yesterday.someone posted that tweet.

 

It's not my 8yr deal. I'm fine with a 3yr deal. A 5yr deal is garbage.

[Hank]

So, just for the record, you'd be willing to give the worst +/- player at his position in the NHL an 8-year mega deal?

 

8-year deals are for guys who check all the boxes.   +/- might be a small box, but it's one you still need to check, and with Risto you simply can't check that box.

 

I would prefer he get a 5 year deal, even be willing to go 6,  at around $5mil.... go lookup up my previous posts in this thread.

 

Who would you hope we're able to get for him in a trade? Because there is no way he settles for 5 mil, nor should he.

[pi2000]

Yes, garbage. I explained why already.

 

It's over money not term according to what we heard yesterday.someone posted that tweet.

 

It's not my 8yr deal. I'm fine with a 3yr deal. A 5yr deal is garbage.

 

If he gets an 8 year deal and is still a minus player this season on team contending for the playoffs, will that matter to you?  

Who would you hope we're able to get for him in a trade? Because there is no way he settles for 5 mil, nor should he.

 

He has no leverage, he either signs or doesn't play.

 

That said, if it gets nasty and they feel they need to move him... I'd like to see them try and pry Gaudreau away from CGY, or swing a 3-way deal to get Lindholm from ANA, but it will take much more than just Risto to get that return.