Peterka contact : Long-term or Bridge

[Buffalonill]

I know some people are probably cringing but with 1 year left he Will most likely be signed in the summertime.

So long-term or Bridge 

 

[LGR4GM]

bridge

[SabreFinn]

Bridge. Not because I don't believe he will be a good player, but I think they should be more careful with long-term signings. And it is possible to resign him long-termlater.

[GoPuckYourself]

Bridge for me as well.

[DarthEbriate]

For properly building a lineup, you have to build the bridge.

For the GM Sheevyn way of youth: long-term so he's cheaper in the long run.

[PromoTheRobot]

Long term deals are the kiss of death for Sabres player's careers. At least it feels that way.

[That Aud Smell]

 

[Stoner]

He's gonna score 30. I don't see why his agent wouldn't be lined up at KA's trough. How do you justify long term deals for players who did virtually nothing at the NHL level then bridge Peterka?

[mjd1001]

It all depends on the money and your internal/analytical analysis.

If you think Peterka projects to be a 30 goal scorer for most of his career (he's there now, what will he be in his mid to late 20's?), then you give him the long term deal. You pay more now when you have cap space to save a little bit later when you have a lot of other bigger deals giving you less space under the cap.

You shouldn't bridge just because you are 'afraid' to make a mistake.  If he is really good, giving him a bridge WOULD be the mistake. Again though, it depends on your internal analysis and what the asking price is. Without knowing those things, its hard to answer.

If you don't trust the current managment to make that decision, that is a whole different issue.

Edited April 3 by mjd1001

[TageMVP]

49 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

He's gonna score 30. I don't see why his agent wouldn't be lined up at KA's trough. How do you justify long term deals for players who did virtually nothing at the NHL level then bridge Peterka?

This is a great point. I'm still not sure where the faith came from in signing Samuelsson to that contract. 

That's a bad contract in hindsight and it was bad to begin with. 

[msw2112]

Despite the drop-offs in play for Cozens and Thompson this season, I see Peterka's growth and potential continuing in the right direction and they will save money in the long run by going with a longer-term deal than a bridge.  I see him as a core piece.  He's improved every season, he's had few injury issues, and he's a talented guy who's only going to get better, in my opinion.

[Thorner]

Bridge his arse 

[inkman]

I think we’d need to know the numbers before deciding which term is best.  If it’s a 6 year deal worth $30 million, it’s a heck of a lot different than 8 years $56 mill.  

[DarthEbriate]

27 minutes ago, inkman said:

I think we’d need to know the numbers before deciding which term is best.  If it’s a 6 year deal worth $30 million, it’s a heck of a lot different than 8 years $56 mill. 

The 6x$5M is what Farabee signed with Philly (now in the 2nd year of that deal). JJP and Farabee's first three seasons are very similar, and JJP has six more games to close the points gap (12). If you can sign JJP to that deal and get him producing on the top line at ppg production, then it's a massive win.

https://stathead.com/hockey/versus-finder.cgi?request=1&seasons_type=perchoice&player_id1=farabjo01&p1yrfrom=2020&p1yrto=2022&player_id2=peterjo01&p2yrfrom=2022&p2yrto=2024 

[pi2000]

I choose long term. 

He's a future 40g scorer, lock him up now or pay much much more (or not be able to sign him) later. 

[PerreaultForever]

His asking price is what interests me. We have this obvious situation where contract year players here seem to have their best years and then drop off after. Peterka and UPL are interesting problems for Adams as Mitts would have been. He isn't likely to trade them all is he. 

I personally think it has to be bridge, but then I wouldn't have opened the vault for Power yet either. 

[SABRES 0311]

If the salary cap is expected to go up, wouldn't it make more sense for him to sign a bridge deal now and then long term/more money later? Incentive for both sides to do it that way IMO.

[dudacek]

Just so everybody is clear on the facts.

Dylan Cozens signed his extension in the middle of his career year.

Tage Thompson signed his big contract before his career year.

Mattias Samuelsson signed his deal the year before his “career” year too (if you can call it that.)

Rasmus Dahlin had a year left on his contract when he signed his extension. It was after his best year, but the year after signing has been his 2nd best. He has yet to collect a penny from his big deal.

Owen Power signed his after just 87 NHL games and also had a year left on his deal. He has yet to collect a penny of his big deal either. He’s going to finish with roughly the same numbers as in his only other full season.

I don’t think the bolded is as obvious as you say.

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

His asking price is what interests me. We have this obvious situation where contract year players here seem to have their best years and then drop off after. Peterka and UPL are interesting problems for Adams as Mitts would have been. He isn't likely to trade them all is he. 

I personally think it has to be bridge, but then I wouldn't have opened the vault for Power yet either. 

 

[thewookie1]

I’d bridge him barring his ask matches Muel’s numbers more or less. 

[Thorner]

*Samuelsson was assigned the contract upon being born 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Just so everybody is clear on the facts.

Dylan Cozens signed his extension in the middle of his career year.

Tage Thompson signed his big contract before his career year.

Mattias Samuelsson signed his deal the year before his “career” year too (if you can call it that.)

Rasmus Dahlin had a year left on his contract when he signed his extension. It was after his best year, but the year after signing has been his 2nd best. He has yet to collect a penny from his big deal.

Owen Power signed his after just 87 NHL games and also had a year left on his deal. He has yet to collect a penny of his big deal either. He’s going to finish with roughly the same numbers as in his only other full season.

I don’t think the bolded is as obvious as you say.

 

You can argue the details but there has been a drop off and sometimes dramatic (Skinner). The point for me really is if we keep rewarding big seasons for individuals on a loser team we will be stuck with a loser team. The make up of this team needs to change and not every goal scorer can have a place in it. 

If Peterka is your guy and you want to roll the dice on him as a top liner winger you can do that, but you better be sure he is the guy who can deliver the goods consistently. So really, to me, it depends on his ask. If he wants 20 goal scorer money great, if he wants top line money, that's another story and then I'm not so sure so imo better to place safe and bridge. 

[Archie Lee]

11 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

I know some people are probably cringing but with 1 year left he Will most likely be signed in the summertime.

So long-term or Bridge 

 

Generally players don’t sign bridge deals a year early. If he signs this summer it will be long term. 

[Pimlach]

Bridge.  We are getting maxed out with all the money tied up on the blue line. 

30 minutes ago, Thorny said:

*Samuelsson was assigned the contract upon being born 

And Power got his for a high school graduation present 

[Mr Peabody]

I voted bridge but they should make a substantial off season move first and then decide.  

[dudacek]

22 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

You can argue the details but there has been a drop off and sometimes dramatic (Skinner). The point for me really is if we keep rewarding big seasons for individuals on a loser team we will be stuck with a loser team. The make up of this team needs to change and not every goal scorer can have a place in it. 

If Peterka is your guy and you want to roll the dice on him as a top liner winger you can do that, but you better be sure he is the guy who can deliver the goods consistently. So really, to me, it depends on his ask. If he wants 20 goal scorer money great, if he wants top line money, that's another story and then I'm not so sure so imo better to place safe and bridge. 

The bolded is a far more salient point.

The flip side of “lock ‘em up while you can still afford them”.

Pretty hard to judge Adams 1 year into a half-dozen long-term deals.

But each one he adds makes the next one harder to accommodate and he has to get most of them right.