Sabres RFAs Receiving Qualifying Offers from the Team

[Tondas]

37 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

 

 

Meet the new team
Same as the old team

Who said we won't get fooled again.

[pi2000]

3 minutes ago, Tondas said:

Meet the new team
Same as the old team

Who said we won't get fooled again.

There's an old saying in Tennessee...

[Tondas]

9 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

If you give them a qualifying offer you can still trade them.  If you don't give them a qualifying offer they become UFAs. Who on that list deserved to be outright released because they have zero value?

What if they all accept and we can't trade them?

[Tondas]

1 minute ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

IIRC qualifying offers are 1 year long. Let's assume they all sign and nobody is moved.  If one of the kids take their spot you send them to Rochester and they have to clear waivers.  If they don't clear they are gone anyway.  I'll also go ahead and assume the Girgensons and Larsson are the ones you are upset about tendering. 

I'm not upset B-Lo.  They all will take up contract space and cap space even if sent down.  I would have thought that JBot would have traded some on the list prior to the draft to stockpile picks.  Maybe that's still possible.  Frankly, the only one on that list that I would be displeased if they didn't tender would be McCabe. 

[darksabre]

There's nothing wrong with Larry and Girgs. They'll be fine if Botts can put together a good second line in front of them.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Getpucksdeep said:

Yeah I couldn't remember either.  Sounds like basically you submit offer 99% of time, that gets ball rolling:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restricted_free_agent

NHL[edit]

A player who is no longer considered to be entry-level, but does not qualify as an unrestricted free agent, becomes a restricted free agent when his contract expires. A player may only declare himself to be an unrestricted free agent if he is over the age of 27 or has played in the league for a minimum of 7 years.

Qualifying offers[edit]

The current team must extend a "qualifying offer" to a restricted free agent to retain negotiating rights to that player. Qualifying offers are for one year contracts. The minimum salary for the qualifying offer depends on the player's prior year salary.

Players who earned less than $660,000 in the previous season must be offered 110 percent of last season's salary. Players making up to $1 million must be offered 105 percent. Players making over $1 million must be offered 100 percent.

• If the qualifying offer is not made, the player becomes an unrestricted free agent.
• If the player rejects a qualifying offer, he remains a restricted free agent.
• If the player does not sign before December 1, he is ineligible to play in the NHL for the remainder of the season.

Possible outcomes[edit]

If a player accepts a qualifying offer, he then signs a one-year contract with his current team under the terms of the offer. If the player rejects the qualifying offer, or has not yet accepted it, he is able to negotiate offer sheets with other teams. Qualifying offers are required for a team to retain a player's rights, but in most cases the player and team will agree to a contract differing from the qualifying offer. Should the player sign an offer sheet with another team, his current team is notified and can no longer negotiate a new contract or trade the player rights to another team. The current team has 7 days to make a decision whether to match the offer sheet, or decline and receive draft pick compensation from the team making the offer sheet.

• Accept The player remains with his current team on a contract identical to that of the offer sheet, with the exception that the current team does not have to match any clauses restricting their ability to trade or reassign the player like a "no trade clause". The team is not allowed to trade the player for one year.
• Decline The player becomes a member of the team with whom he signed the offer sheet under all the terms of said offer sheet. His now former team claims draft picks from the player’s new team as compensation. Compensatory draft picks are determined by the player’s new salary on a sliding scale.

For example:

• In 2008 a team that signed a restricted free agent to a salary averaging $2,615,625 to $3,923,437 per season lost a first-round draft pick and a third-round draft pick to the player’s former team.
• Signing a restricted free agent to a contract worth over $6,539,062 per year costs a team four first-round draft picks.

At any point during the negotiation process, if the player has been in the NHL for longer than 4 years (less if the player signed his first contract after the age of 20), either the player or his current team may file for salary arbitration as a means of settling a contract dispute. At this point the player may no longer sign an offer sheet. The deadline to file for salary arbitration is July 5 with cases being heard between late July and early August.

• Salary Arbitration. Both the player and his current team submit their expectations for the player's salary for the coming year. The team cannot request a reduction in salary of greater than 15%. The arbitrator hears the case from both player and team and renders a verdict. The verdict sets the salary the team is required to pay the player. After the arbitrator's verdict is rendered, the team must make a decision within 48 hours of the verdict being rendered. If the team accepts, the player is signed to a new contract at the salary set in the verdict. Should the team decline, the player then becomes an unrestricted free agent.

A team can take a player to arbitration once in his career. Players may request salary arbitration as often as they please.

 

 

Additionally, players can't accept their qualifying offer until 7/1.  The offers expire on 7/15.  If the offer expires the team retains their same rights to the player they had while the offer was active.

The qualifying offer oftentimes is merely a formality to get negotiations rolling.

[erickompositör72]

46 minutes ago, darksabre said:

There's nothing wrong with Larry and Girgs. They'll be fine if Botts can put together a good second line in front of them.

I could even see them separated, one on line 3, one on line 4. They are both good in the corners and seemed to be able to keep the puck in the offensive zone. If you add a skilled played on a line with one or both, their lines may actually see some chances, if the matchups are right.

[Weave]

Until we actually have rostered players that are more effective that Larry and Girgs they should be tendered.  And it's not their cap space or contract spot that is preventing it from happening.

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, Tondas said:

What if they all accept and we can't trade them?

We can trade them after they've accepted their QOs. 

2 hours ago, darksabre said:

There's nothing wrong with Larry and Girgs. They'll be fine if Botts can put together a good second line in front of them.

Amend that to second and third line and I agree. 

 

[Tondas]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

We can trade them after they've accepted their QOs. 

Amend that to second and third line and I agree. 

 

We can trade them, but would anyone want them?  That's my point.

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, Tondas said:

We can trade them, but would anyone want them?  That's my point.

No less so than before they sign those deals. 

[Tondas]

Just now, Thorny said:

No less so than before they sign those deals. 

Agree.  Then why has Jbot not traded them for draft capital for this weekend?  I feel if Jbot could have gotten anything for them by now, he would have made the trade.

[Huckleberry]

4 hours ago, Mustache of God said:

I am whelmed by this news. I do t think this team will ever be good with both of these two on the roster. They're infected with "tank stink" and need a change of scenery. Hopefully they're part of a package in a trade.

I think the both of them had a decent season and weren't really the problem, they are 2/3 of a decent 4th line.

[freester]

Botterils plan is to have Zemgus as our second line center.  ?

[Ho-Chi-Sock]

3 minutes ago, freester said:

Botterils plan is to have Zemgus as our second line center.  ?

[Tondas]

55 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I think the both of them had a decent season and weren't really the problem, they are 2/3 of a decent 4th line.

If the team needs secondary scoring, which Jbot has said, Girgs and Larry are not the ones to provide it.  ERod on the 4th line is a start.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Tondas

[#freejame]

5 minutes ago, Tondas said:

If the team needs secondary scoring, which Jbot has said, Girgs and Larry are not the ones to provide it.  ERod on the 4th line is a start.

Without looking at the combined goals of Larry and Girgs or the goal numbers of other teams fourth lines, how many goals do you want from your fourth line?

[Huckleberry]

5 minutes ago, Tondas said:

If the team needs secondary scoring, which Jbot has said, Girgs and Larry are not the ones to provide it.  ERod on the 4th line is a start.

Secondary scoring needs to come from  your 2nd and 3rd line.    They did what they were supposed to do last year, our 4th line often flipped the ice so the next shift could get a start in the offensive zone.    

[Tondas]

The Bruins and Blues 4th lines were effective and scored throughout the playoffs.  We need better 4th line players not just placeholders until Jack and Skinner get back on the ice.  I truly believe that McCabe is part of the solution, whereas Girgs and Larry are part of the problem.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Tondas

[Huckleberry]

11 minutes ago, Tondas said:

The Bruins and Blues 4th lines were effective and scored throughout the playoffs.  We need better 4th line players not just placeholders until Jack and Skinner get back in the ice.  I truly believe that McCabe is part of the solution, whereas Girgs and Larry are part of the problem.

I don't know how much more scoring you expect from your 4th line though

Zemgus 5+13=18  /  Johan 6+8=14

Boston

Nordstrom 5+7=12  Grzelcyk 3+15=18

 

 

 

[Zamboni]

38 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I don't know how much more scoring you expect from your 4th line though

Zemgus 5+13=18  /  Johan 6+8=14

Boston

Nordstrom 5+7=12  Grzelcyk 3+15=18

 

 

 

Yea... on the list of things wrong with the roster, the 4th line is way down on the list. Of course, if you can upgrade the 4th line for around the same price, you do it.

[...]

40 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I don't know how much more scoring you expect from your 4th line though

Zemgus 5+13=18  /  Johan 6+8=14

Boston

Nordstrom 5+7=12  Grzelcyk 3+15=18

The audacity!  Pulling out numbers.

Shamefull.

Edited June 20, 2019 by ...
oopsy

[Thorner]

Depends on which team you look at. The Jets had 37 goals from their 4th line, and 77 points. 

[...]

Sabres were #12 in the PK.  That's Girgs and Angry Larry for the most part.

[Thorner]

17 minutes ago, ... said:

Sabres were #12 in the PK.  That's Girgs and Angry Larry for the most part.

True, they certainly have value on the PK. The Jets were 22nd on the PK. 

But looking at the numbers a bit, had we had the Jets 79.2 PK % instead of our 80.9, it would amount to roughly 4 extra goals given up over last season's 82 game season. I'd happily take the dramatic increase in offensive production as a trade off. 

Girgensons and Larsson are not bad 4th line players, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't seek upgrade if an opportunity presents itself. 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Thorny