Report Sabres Considering Internal Salary Cap

[Zamboni]

9 minutes ago, tom webster said:

So if Servelli reported that the Sabre’s were interested in Pietrangelo we’d all laugh at the rumor and carry on.

He reports that the team is “considering” an internal cap and it’s taken as gospel.

Hey, you should know this by now ... Some fans want to believe any and all “negative” news. And view anything “positive” as BS. And then proceed to make threads that rail on that negative news for multiple pages and multiple days. Until the next negative spin story develops 😂

[Thorner]

Haha I agree - when will we ever learn! It always works out for us, why worry. We'll get our high first next year boys don't fret.

- - - 

Sarcasm aside, I would be surprised if those "in on so and so" rumours aren't often true. It's just hard to end up with the player. Sabres were/are probably interested in Alex - don't see why they wouldn't be. 

Edited September 12, 2020 by Thorny

[JohnC]

41 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Hey, you should know this by now ... Some fans want to believe any and all “negative” news. And view anything “positive” as BS. And then proceed to make threads that rail on that negative news for multiple pages and multiple days. Until the next negative spin story develops 😂

If the owner is going to ask the coaching staff for a second round of salary cuts (that they declined) then how does anyone not believe the many reports that there is going to be an internal cap that is lower than the established cap. This probable lower internal cap is a response to this Covid era of lower revenues. And the lower cap that the Sabres will institute will be similar to lower internal caps that many other teams will institute. The owners have fired their GM because they couldn't convince him to go along with thinning out the staff and cutting expenses. You may think that this is "negative" news that the gullible are willing to swallow when it is realistic news that is associated within the context of a dramatic decline of revenue in the industry. 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

So if Servelli reported that the Sabre’s were interested in Pietrangelo we’d all laugh at the rumor and carry on.

He reports that the team is “considering” an internal cap and it’s taken as gospel.

I don't think the media has very many insiders left in the Sabres hockey department; what they do have are a number of hockey insiders who lost, or whose friends lost, jobs in the purge. There will always be some fans eager to believe the best or the worst, and people ready to spread either.

I am interested, of course, in the Sabres cap figure. But I am more interested in budgets of other teams and what they will have to do to make those budgets work and how the Sabres can potentially benefit.

We just don't know what their plan is, or what opportunities may materialize based on the plans of others. This next month is tabula rasa for the entire league.

16 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If the owner is going to ask the coaching staff for a second round of salary cuts (that they declined) then how does anyone not believe the many reports that there is going to be an internal cap that is lower than the established cap. This probable lower internal cap is a response to this Covid era of lower revenues. And the lower cap that the Sabres will institute will be similar to lower internal caps that many other teams will institute. The owners have fired their GM because they couldn't convince him to go along with thinning out the staff and cutting expenses. You may think that this is "negative" news that the gullible are willing to swallow when it is realistic news that is associated within the context of a dramatic decline of revenue in the industry. 

Maybe the drastic cuts off-ice happened in order to subsidize the team on-ice.

[Brawndo]

3 hours ago, tom webster said:

So if Servelli reported that the Sabre’s were interested in Pietrangelo we’d all laugh at the rumor and carry on.

He reports that the team is “considering” an internal cap and it’s taken as gospel.

I believe there is legitimate interest in bringing in Pietrangelo. And with the reports the Blues and he are not close on a new deal that interest will only grow.  
 

I think Terry will set the Sabres Cap at 73-75 Million and if Adams wants to exceed it, they will need to show their work. Gone are the days of trading for Frolic and Simmonds resulting in cap overages. But if they can find someone who will legitimately help, I think they get the green light 

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

I think Terry will set the Sabres Cap at 73-75 Million and if Adams wants to exceed it, they will need to show their work. Gone are the days of trading for Frolic and Simmonds resulting in cap overages. But if they can find someone who will legitimately help, I think they get the green light 

This just feels right. Terry has never once through words or actions given off the vibe that he's not willing to spend on helping the hockey team win.

It feels that he's saying that this team in this climate is not willing to spend on things that generate no tangible return.

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

This just feels right. Terry has never once through words or actions given off the vibe that he's not willing to spend on helping the hockey team win.

It feels that he's saying that this team in this climate is not willing to spend on things that generate no tangible return.

As opposed to other seasons when they would *willingly* seek out and spend on things that generate no tangible return? The spin is admirable, really. They added Frolik because they thought he would help. Adams is going to come to him with whatever moves he thinks are good and Pegula hired him for GM so of course he going to listen to him. 

Have to hope Adams is good. The news that we may spend in the lower 70s is not good. At best, if it happens, it was inevitable. But I don't believe that to necessarily be the case. 

The theory that Adams could exceed the self imposed cap upon convincing the owner is plausible, but that's not the same as the suggestion that the internal number the Pegulas came up with is somehow representative of a roster merely trimmed of the players providing "no tangible return".

Edited September 12, 2020 by Thorny

[Shootica]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

This just feels right. Terry has never once through words or actions given off the vibe that he's not willing to spend on helping the hockey team win.

It feels that he's saying that this team in this climate is not willing to spend on things that generate no tangible return.

But then how do you explain trading ROR for scraps at the eleventh hour on the day before his signing bonus is due?

I generally have had the same view of Terry, but I gotta say the ROR trade really has me questioning that view.

[nucci]

11 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Hey, you should know this by now ... Some fans want to believe any and all “negative” news. And view anything “positive” as BS. And then proceed to make threads that rail on that negative news for multiple pages and multiple days. Until the next negative spin story develops 😂

I'll take any positive news about this team you can give me.

[JohnC]

10 hours ago, dudacek said:

 

Maybe the drastic cuts off-ice happened in order to subsidize the team on-ice.

This excruciating financial environment that the Sabres are subjected to will be the same excruciating financial environment that many other teams will be subjected to. One way to adjust to this more stringent environment is to have a lower internal cap. That will be the same way that a lot of other teams will adjust. Paul Hamilton who used to work for WGR said he believed that there will be a lower internal cap. Elliotte Friedman on the Instigator Show stated that he believed that the Sabres, like many other franchises, will have a lower internal cap.

Even under the current circumstances I'm not ruling out the Sabres being able to upgrade the roster this offseason. The front office will have to be more creative in order to contend to the challenging fiscal environment. Trades for players/contracts coming in will be offset by players/contracts going out. And I suspect there will be more younger players with cheaper contracts on the roster. 

I'm somewhat disappointed because I felt that the former GM put us in a good cap position to make some major changes to the roster this offseaon. However, the financial climate has altered that ability to pursue a number of enticing players. But that doesn't mean that even under the current circumstances the organization can't make some impacting acquisitions to make this a better teams. I'm eager to see what transpires this offseason. 

[nfreeman]

On 9/11/2020 at 9:19 AM, sabremike said:

How does that explain them failing harder than any owners in modern NHL history the past 9 seasons? They literally did a powerpoint presentation telling their own freaking employees that a pillar of their organization was maintaining their lifestyles. Talk to anyone who has ever had the misfortune to work for them, there's a reason PSE has a higher turnover than a McDonalds.

Out of the employees that have left PSE, how many do you think have been fired vs left voluntarily?

Separately:  for those unhappy about the possibility of an internal cap:  how much money do you think the team will lose next year at a $72MM payroll?  And how much do you think it's reasonable to expect TP to lose?  $10MM?  $20MM?  More?

 

[Brawndo]

1 hour ago, Shootica said:

But then how do you explain trading ROR for scraps at the eleventh hour on the day before his signing bonus is due?

I generally have had the same view of Terry, but I gotta say the ROR trade really has me questioning that view.

Montreal according to an Athletic Article from Sept 2017 countered with Danault, Poehling and a 2nd. They also would have paid the bonus.  This would have been a much better return for Buffalo. 

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, Shootica said:

But then how do you explain trading ROR for scraps at the eleventh hour on the day before his signing bonus is due?

I generally have had the same view of Terry, but I gotta say the ROR trade really has me questioning that view.

 

23 hours ago, dudacek said:

My version of the O'Reilly trade is this:

"I just gave that punk $52 million and he celebrates by driving his truck into a Tim Horton's? How can he embarrass me like that?"

"What the hell? I give your brother an NHL salary to play in the minors as a favour to you and he treats our top prospect like dogshit?"

"Terry, this team has deeper problems than I thought. Our best veterans are kinda dik-heads I think we should move them and turn the room over to Jack and the other young guys. Let me check the market."

"My God that O'Reilly guy is getting annoying with his drinking and his holier-than-thou attitude. He's not playing hard any more. Got any good offers for him yet?"

"Did you see that performance at clean out? I've had enough of that guy. It's time to pull the trigger. We're close, right?"

"Jason, you said that douche would be gone by the draft. Why is he still here? I told you, I'm not letting him steal another $10 million from me on July 1. Get it done."

It was personal, as opposed to coldly financial. The money was more a matter of principle on this player, than not wanting to spend.

 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

This excruciating financial environment that the Sabres are subjected to will be the same excruciating financial environment that many other teams will be subjected to. One way to adjust to this more stringent environment is to have a lower internal cap. That will be the same way that a lot of other teams will adjust. Paul Hamilton who used to work for WGR said he believed that there will be a lower internal cap. Elliotte Friedman on the Instigator Show stated that he believed that the Sabres, like many other franchises, will have a lower internal cap.

Even under the current circumstances I'm not ruling out the Sabres being able to upgrade the roster this offseason. The front office will have to be more creative in order to contend to the challenging fiscal environment. Trades for players/contracts coming in will be offset by players/contracts going out. And I suspect there will be more younger players with cheaper contracts on the roster. 

I'm somewhat disappointed because I felt that the former GM put us in a good cap position to make some major changes to the roster this offseaon. However, the financial climate has altered that ability to pursue a number of enticing players. But that doesn't mean that even under the current circumstances the organization can't make some impacting acquisitions to make this a better teams. I'm eager to see what transpires this offseason. 

Just think about it....those higher profile UFA's and RFA's are going to sign somewhere, they aren't going to sit the season out (minus opt-out for Covid maybe). We have just as much chance to sign someone as any team.

Just trying to be positive. We might be able to get talent and fill in cheaper roles with younger guys. It boils down to picking the right players and can KA get them or willing to chance guys like Tage/Cozens/etc.

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Montreal according to an Athletic Article from Sept 2017 countered with Danault, Poehling and a 2nd. They also would have paid the bonus.  This would have been a much better return for Buffalo. 

It's actually a great example of how Botterill focused more on assets than actual players.

Bear with me here because I know this trade comes with a lot of baggage:

The late 1st-round prospects cancel out, the 2nds cancel out. And you're left to choose between a pair of middle six forwards: one younger, the other with both a $3m cap dump, and a 1st rounder thrown in.

Purely from an asset view, one could easily argue at the time that the St. Louis offer was better. Of course since then Danault has gone from a 35-point 2-way 3C to a 50-point 2-way 2C, while Berglund was out of the NHL within months. Botterill and his scouts whiffed badly on the actual players.

Edited September 12, 2020 by dudacek

[dudacek]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

As opposed to other seasons when they would *willingly* seek out and spend on things that generate no tangible return? The spin is admirable, really. They added Frolik because they thought he would help. Adams is going to come to him with whatever moves he thinks are good and Pegula hired him for GM so of course he going to listen to him. 

Have to hope Adams is good. The news that we may spend in the lower 70s is not good. At best, if it happens, it was inevitable. But I don't believe that to necessarily be the case. 

The theory that Adams could exceed the self imposed cap upon convincing the owner is plausible, but that's not the same as the suggestion that the internal number the Pegulas came up with is somehow representative of a roster merely trimmed of the players providing "no tangible return".

Don't know that we are talking the same thing here.

What I'm trying to say is that Terry has never once let money get in the way of the Sabres being competitive; on the contrary, he has spent lavishly on trying things that have provided little to no return. I think he is doing what he can to minimize COVID losses, and that he is clearing the building of people he doesn't think are his people, or providing good value.

But I also think he will give the on-ice team a budget that will be competitive with other teams around the league, and if he is presented with a deal that clearly improves the Sabres, he won't let that self-imposed budget get in the way.

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Don't know that we are talking the same thing here.

What I'm trying to say is that Terry has never once let money get in the way of the Sabres being competitive; on the contrary, he has spent lavishly on trying things that have provided little to no return. I think he is doing what he can to minimize COVID losses, and that he is clearing the building of people he doesn't think are his people, or providing good value.

But I also think he will give the on-ice team a budget that will be competitive with other teams around the league, and if he is presented with a deal that clearly improves the Sabres, he won't let that self-imposed budget get in the way.

I actually would have to agree; while I'd imagine the Pegulas are trying to lessen their losses I don't expect Terry to turn down the opportunity to make the team better. If anything Pegula could have very well told Adams to go after big fish but not spend recklessly.

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Montreal according to an Athletic Article from Sept 2017 countered with Danault, Poehling and a 2nd. They also would have paid the bonus.  This would have been a much better return for Buffalo. 

 

Botts was so damn stupid its not even funny.

I'd love to understand how

Thompson, Sobotka, Berglund and a 2019 1st

equated to or came close to

(2018) 3rd Overall, Danault and Poehling

in his mind.

 

Montreal's 2nd Danault and Poehling should of been countered with either Danault, Poehling and a lottery safe 1st in 2019 and their 3rd in 2018

Ugh just ugh

[Curt]

I’m actually not too worried about these reports of a possible internal cap.  There are also reports that they will be in on Pietrangelo and McCann, so...............

[thewookie1]

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1911956

 

My newest version of the team.

Cap Hit is around 75mil with Salary at about 73mil give or take 

 

[Curt]

23 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1911956

 

My newest version of the team.

Cap Hit is around 75mil with Salary at about 73mil give or take 

 

Moving down from #8 to #16 hurts, but would probably be worth it if Danault signs a 3+ year extension immediately.  I think the chances of that are slim to none though.

[freester]

2 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

I actually would have to agree; while I'd imagine the Pegulas are trying to lessen their losses I don't expect Terry to turn down the opportunity to make the team better. If anything Pegula could have very well told Adams to go after big fish but not spend recklessly.

 

Botts was so damn stupid its not even funny.

I'd love to understand how

Thompson, Sobotka, Berglund and a 2019 1st

equated to or came close to

(2018) 3rd Overall, Danault and Poehling

in his mind.

 

Montreal's 2nd Danault and Poehling should of been countered with either Danault, Poehling and a lottery safe 1st in 2019 and their 3rd in 2018

Ugh just ugh

Botteril was the worst GM In NHL history. Lehner will soon win the Conn Smythe and Botteril will look even more incompetent than he already does. 

[Thorner]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

It's actually a great example of how Botterill focused more on assets than actual players.

Bear with me here because I know this trade comes with a lot of baggage:

The late 1st-round prospects cancel out, the 2nds cancel out. And you're left to choose between a pair of middle six forwards: one younger, the other with both a $3m cap dump, and a 1st rounder thrown in.

Purely from an asset view, one could easily argue at the time that the St. Louis offer was better. Of course since then Danault has gone from a 35-point 2-way 3C to a 50-point 2-way 2C, while Berglund was out of the NHL within months. Botterill and his scouts whiffed badly on the actual players.

Who's the cap dump, Sobotka or Beglund? I think Botterill viewed them both as valuable addtions - serving to further illustrate your point. Hell, Botterill probably looked at their hockey db pages, combined each player's best career season, and after it came out to more than ROR's most recent total considered him adequately replaced. 

Edited September 12, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorner]

Friedman on HNIC reports Vancouver is expected to be a cap team

Edited September 13, 2020 by Thorny

[Flashsabre]

12 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Montreal according to an Athletic Article from Sept 2017 countered with Danault, Poehling and a 2nd. They also would have paid the bonus.  This would have been a much better return for Buffalo. 

Imagine if the Habs said yes and they had Brady Tkachuk, Danault and Poehling right now

[freester]

38 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Friedman on HNIC reports Vancouver is expected to be a cap team

Does that mean they have an internal cap like the Sabres or that they will spend to the max?