UPDATE: Sam Reinhart signs 2-year extension -- $3.65MM per year

[erickompositör72]

Give him 8 years at his full ask. Do it.

[JJFIVEOH]

1 minute ago, erickompositör72 said:

Give him 8 years at his full ask. Do it.

I agree. 

[nfreeman]

IMHO, if we want Reino to become Bergeron or Toews, and not Roy or Stafford, a short-term deal is the way to go.

[woods-racer]

If Botterill is holding firm, and I have no problems with that, then there's more to the core change he believes is needed than just Kane and ROR.

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

If Botterill is holding firm, and I have no problems with that, then there's more to the core change he believes is needed than just Kane and ROR.

If that were true he would have dealt Reinhart

[Thorner]

 What if the 5.75M Reinhart is allegedly asking for is his AAV ask for a long-term deal? And Botterill's 4.5M AAV is regarding a short term pact?

Would people be disappointed if Botterill is adamant on a bridge contract, even with Reinhart asking for the aforementioned $? 

Ehlers is a decent comparable, from the same draft year, and he signed a 7 year deal with a 6 million dollar AAV. 5.75 would seem reasonable for Sam. 

Edited August 8, 2018 by Thorny

[dudacek]

I’ve brought them up many times: Horvat and Drouin are among the best comparables.

Each signed last summer for 5.5 over 6.

Edited August 8, 2018 by dudacek

[Eleven]

5 hours ago, JJFIVEOH said:

I agree. 

Do it now.  Right now. Yes, it could backfire, but fortune favors the bold.

[woods-racer]

On 8/8/2018 at 7:05 PM, WildCard said:

If that were true he would have dealt Reinhart

He is dealing with Reinhart as if he is not part of the core.

Botterill obviously has reservations above Sam and whether there should be a long term commitment.

I feel the same as Botterill and am glad he is taking this  approach.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Dvorak just re-signed an extension starting in 2019-20 for 6 years @ $4.45 per season.  

Dvorak, 22, has two NHL seasons under his belt and had 33 & 37 pts respectively. 

Reinhart has three seasons of 42, 47and 50 pts.  

Both players are 22.  

Larkin, 22, also is still un-signed.  He has 3 seasons of 45, 32 and 63 pts, although his goal scoring has decreased each year; 23, 17, 16.

I don’t Reinhart signs long-term.  I’m thinking 3 years 15 mill.

[dudacek]

42 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

He is dealing with Reinhart as if he is not part of the core.

Botterill obviously has reservations above Sam and whether there should be a long term commitment.

What are you basing this on?

[dudacek]

Larkin just signed for five years, $30.5 million.

The five years is really interesting to me; they only bought one year of UFA.

[Huckleberry]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Larkin just signed for five years, $30.5 million.

The five years is really interesting to me; they only bought one year of UFA.

Then I'd rather give him 8x6 mil.    Been saying it for a while, his stats are similar then Scheifele's first 3 years.

Problem for Bots might actually be our cap space this year, if you pay samson 6 mil we barely have cap room left.

Next year we got pommer and Moulson coming of the books, but we'll have to pay Skinner and Samson their big deals.

We are tighter against the cap than some think.   Zemgus/larsson might give us a bit of breathing room but the ugly contract is that of Okposo.

If he doesn't start performing again its real ugly.

 

CURRENT CAP SPACE  : $6,465,476

DEADLINE CAP SPACE  : $30,064,463

TODAYS CAP HIT  : $73,034,524

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/sabres

 

I see more like a 1x 5 mil deal being worked for Samson because of our cap space.   Unless he is confident he can get rid of 2/3 of Larsson, Girgensons, Hunwick.

 

 

 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Larkin just signed for five years, $30.5 million.

The five years is really interesting to me; they only bought one year of UFA.

I’ve said before that a 5 year deal is very possible for Samson.  From Samson’s point of view he hits the market again at 27, gving him the possibility of another big payday in his prime.  From our point of view it locks up a piece of the core for what should be the heart of this group’s run to the top and gets us past Okposo’s deal if we want to retain Samson after the deal.

Huck we have even less cap then you think.  Nelson’s 812K deal isn’t in capfriendly’s numbers.  With Nelson and Reinhart we’ll be at 24 NHL players, including Thompson in the 14 forwards.  Something has to give.  Thompson can be sent down without clearing waivers, but if I’m Larry or Z, I think I’d be watching my back.

Also if Guhle and Baptiste (or Bailey) make the team, that could force others currently slated for Buffalo to find new homes.  Baloo and Hunwick are the obvious choices on D. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN

[Derrico]

Wow, I'll be pissed if we give Reinhart a Larkin type contract.  There's a reason you very rarely ever see 4 or 5 year deals after a players elc.

[WildCard]

10 minutes ago, Derrico said:

Wow, I'll be pissed if we give Reinhart a Larkin type contract.  There's a reason you very rarely ever see 4 or 5 year deals after a players elc.

Ken Holland, no longer a good GM

[dudacek]

Great analysis of the Larkin contract from the Athletic. It’s my opinion that Larkin is in a position to demand a better contract than Sam, but their ELC performances are close enough to be relevant. (Contract also puts the Wings over the cap)

The more interesting thing regarding this contract is the term. There really isn’t another contract like this. When you look at the comparable contracts that certainly came up during the negotiations, they are typically on longer-term deals....

This deal buys out one year of unrestricted free agency, which provides value for the Red Wings. But it’s only one year. Larkin will be 27 when he starts his next contract, and if he continues to progress as a player, he’s lining himself up for another big payday when it’s done....

In exchange, the Red Wings lock up what will likely be the best years of Larkin’s career. They weren’t willing to pay the premium that it would have required to get to eight years, in part because it was too much risk surrounding a player still establishing his ceiling...

Holland traditionally likes his players motivated to earn the next contract and by going five years, Larkin will eventually have the very real motivation to earn what could be a monster deal on his next one...

Edited August 10, 2018 by dudacek

[dudacek]

Another Athletic piece: this one an analytics-based piece that argues the Sabres might be better off with Reinhart at Centre.

I know @WildCard hates that stuff, but the choice quote:

“What we learn is that Reinhart has had a much greater impact in driving play than Eichel has since they’ve been in the league together.”

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Another Athletic piece: this one an analytics-based piece that argues the Sabres might be better off with Reinhart at Centre.

I know @WildCard hates that stuff, but the choice quote:

“What we learn is that Reinhart has had a much greater impact in driving play than Eichel has since they’ve been in the league together.”

An analytics article sounds like something I'd actually be interested in reading. Still won't pay for it though ?

[erickompositör72]

We haven't seen the 2018 version of Reinhart at center, correct?

His 2018 play makes me curious to have another look.

Edited August 10, 2018 by erickompositör72

[Derrico]

2 hours ago, WildCard said:

An analytics article sounds like something I'd actually be interested in reading. Still won't pay for it though ?

But but but....won't somebody think of the starving journalists???

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

Are any of these new contracts maybe taking into consideration that the current CBA expires in a few years?

Locking in to certain unknown factors beyond a new agreement(which could be as soon as 2020) could make a difference on BOTH sides of the table.

Just a thought as I'm not a lawyer or agent or GM or player.

[dudacek]

57 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Are any of these new contracts maybe taking into consideration that the current CBA expires in a few years?

Locking in to certain unknown factors beyond a new agreement(which could be as soon as 2020) could make a difference on BOTH sides of the table.

Just a thought as I'm not a lawyer or agent or GM or player.

Absolutely. A number of players are stacking money as bonuses. Larkin’s salary is considerably lower in the likely lockout year.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Absolutely. A number of players are stacking money as bonuses. Larkin’s salary is considerably lower in the likely lockout year.

Not knowing what changes may be coming could have a serious effect on the term length,too.

Players may be hitting prime or starting the declining side of their career at the time of new CBA. I wonder if either side is starting to think about what changes they are going to be asking for in the new agreement and looking at how contracts will be affected.

[Huckleberry]

I migth be drunk righ now.   but I want Samson with us for the next 8 years.  

there are few thing I lik about GMTM, but picking Samson isn't one.  8x6

and kick Larsson/Zemgus/Hunwick out to do so.