Would you sign Briere to a contract larger than Drury's?

[LabattBlue]

If Darcy has an opportunity to sign Briere to a 3 year contract that is larger than Drury's in average salary, do you do it or would this be considered upsetting the Sabres salary structure?

 

I believe that Drury makes around 3.5 and I would have no problem giving Briere between 3.5 and 4.

 

Also, the Sabres have 3 players under contract for next year...Vanek, Drury & Hecht? I believe they had a similar scenario last off-season. Is this the norm in the NHL or do the Sabres like dealing with contract issues for the majority of the team each and every off-season? Seems very odd to me.

[BuffalOhio]

I think since they're co-captains and of equal value to the team, you pay them equally. Just my take.

 

I think they didn't want to commit a lot to their players before seeing what the "New NHL" would look like. Now that they see their players are well-suited for it, they should sign most of them to 3 years deals.

 

It's like the McKee situation - they didn't want to commit before seeing how they'd do. Most of them did well.

[Done]

Briere is worth the cash. I don't think Mckee is, at least not in our system.

[frisky]

I would also think that Briere would end up getting about equal to what Drury gets to maintain harmony as well as their pay structure.

 

Just my opinion, but fromtheir past behaviour, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't re-sign any of our UFA's. I wouldn't be surprised also to see more subtraction than addition to maintain their salary structure (~10 mil under the cap).

[hopeleslyobvious]

I would also think that Briere would end up getting about equal to what Drury gets to maintain harmony as well as their pay structure.

 

Just my opinion, but fromtheir past behaviour, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't re-sign any of our UFA's. I wouldn't be surprised also to see more subtraction than addition to maintain their salary structure (~10 mil under the cap).

 

I think McKee will get signed before July 1, but I wouldn't be shocked if he ended up somewhere else. I am pretty confident that Grier will be back.

[bob_sauve28]

If Darcy has an opportunity to sign Briere to a 3 year contract that is larger than Drury's in average salary, do you do it or would this be considered upsetting the Sabres salary structure?

 

I believe that Drury makes around 3.5 and I would have no problem giving Briere between 3.5 and 4.

 

Also, the Sabres have 3 players under contract for next year...Vanek, Drury & Hecht? I believe they had a similar scenario last off-season. Is this the norm in the NHL or do the Sabres like dealing with contract issues for the majority of the team each and every off-season? Seems very odd to me.

Briar probably deserves that, and I can see it happening. Darcy will play hardball though, we all know that. The salary for the team as a whole will have to go up. So many players had great seasons.

[deluca67]

No.

 

I can't say Briere had a great post season. He had some numbers and a couple of big goals. But he did not play as the teams #1 offensive threat which is what he should be.

 

I will say the same for Max. Max is fun to watch untill he gets close to the goal.

 

I would like to see the Sabres upgrade a little on the offense. ;)

[LabattBlue]

No.

 

I can't say Briere had a great post season. He had some numbers and a couple of big goals. But he did not play as the teams #1 offensive threat which is what he should be.

 

I will say the same for Max. Max is fun to watch untill he gets close to the goal.

 

I would like to see the Sabres upgrade a little on the offense. ;)

Briere had 19 points in 18 playoff games. I know he struggled in some games, but I think Briere deserves better than to be compared with Max who truly had a poor playoff.

[bob_sauve28]

Briere had 19 points in 18 playoff games. I know he struggled in some games, but I think Briere deserves better than to be compared with Max who truly had a poor playoff.

Yes

[hopeleslyobvious]

Briere had 19 points in 18 playoff games. I know he struggled in some games, but I think Briere deserves better than to be compared with Max who truly had a poor playoff.

 

I think we pay Briere what we need to to keep him here, and lock him up for a few years.

[deluca67]

Briere had 19 points in 18 playoff games. I know he struggled in some games, but I think Briere deserves better than to be compared with Max who truly had a poor playoff.

 

How many of those points came in the Sabres wins against Philly (3g 6a = 9pts)? He did have 4g and 2 assists against the Canes but at no point did I ever feel that when we needed a goal he would be the guy. When the game is close? Drury was the guy we all wanted out there. That's why he's at the top of the payroll. That's important.

 

You just can't start throwing money at players. You can't go into an off season saying "just give McKee $3 million" or "just pay Briere what Drury makes". If the Sabres start to do that then they would be right back in the same boat they were 5 years ago.

 

Again this off season the Sabres will be playing 'Small Market Economics'. They will not and can not get away from their plan. They will sign the players they feel will help the team in 2006-07 to contracts that reflect their value to the franchise. Darcy, Lindy & Co. will make the moves that will help the team on the ice and keep the Franchise financially healthy. After 63 wins? Who can argue with that?

[hopeleslyobvious]

How many of those points came in the Sabres wins against Philly (3g 6a = 9pts)? He did have 4g and 2 assists against the Canes but at no point did I ever feel that when we needed a goal he would be the guy. When the game is close? Drury was the guy we all wanted out there. That's why he's at the top of the payroll. That's important.

 

You just can't start throwing money at players. You can't go into an off season saying "just give McKee $3 million" or "just pay Briere what Drury makes". If the Sabres start to do that then they would be right back in the same boat they were 5 years ago.

 

Again this off season the Sabres will be playing 'Small Market Economics'. They will not and can not get away from their plan. They will sign the players they feel will help the team in 2006-07 to contracts that reflect their value to the franchise. Darcy, Lindy & Co. will make the moves that will help the team on the ice and keep the Franchise financially healthy. After 63 wins? Who can argue with that?

 

Just think it's important to note that Briere did have 2 game winners in OT during the playoffs. Seems to me that he came through when we needed a goal. Not to mention the fact that if you project his regular season stats over 82 games he would have had 99 points. That would have put him in the top 10 for the league.

[LabattBlue]

How many of those points came in the Sabres wins against Philly (3g 6a = 9pts)? He did have 4g and 2 assists against the Canes but at no point did I ever feel that when we needed a goal he would be the guy. When the game is close? Drury was the guy we all wanted out there. That's why he's at the top of the payroll. That's important.

 

You just can't start throwing money at players. You can't go into an off season saying "just give McKee $3 million" or "just pay Briere what Drury makes". If the Sabres start to do that then they would be right back in the same boat they were 5 years ago.

 

Again this off season the Sabres will be playing 'Small Market Economics'. They will not and can not get away from their plan. They will sign the players they feel will help the team in 2006-07 to contracts that reflect their value to the franchise. Darcy, Lindy & Co. will make the moves that will help the team on the ice and keep the Franchise financially healthy. After 63 wins? Who can argue with that?

If Briere had stayed healthy, he projected out to a 99 point season. If you don't think that those kind of stats are worthy of a 3.5+ million dollar salary, you can kiss Briere goodbye when he becomes a UFA.

 

I realize you can't pay everybody and that some UFA's over the years will have to be allowed to walk, but the ones they want to keep, need to be locked up to 4 or 5 year contracts the year before they hit UFA status...and Briere is a KEEPER.

[BuffalOhio]

If Briere had stayed healthy, he projected out to a 99 point season. If you don't think that those kind of stats are worthy of a 3.5+ million dollar salary, you can kiss Briere goodbye when he becomes a UFA.

 

I realize you can't pay everybody and that some UFA's over the years will have to be allowed to walk, but the ones they want to keep, need to be locked up to 4 or 5 year contracts the year before they hit UFA status...and Briere is a KEEPER.

 

Right on.

[nfreeman]

How many of those points came in the Sabres wins against Philly (3g 6a = 9pts)? He did have 4g and 2 assists against the Canes but at no point did I ever feel that when we needed a goal he would be the guy. When the game is close? Drury was the guy we all wanted out there. That's why he's at the top of the payroll. That's important.

 

You just can't start throwing money at players. You can't go into an off season saying "just give McKee $3 million" or "just pay Briere what Drury makes". If the Sabres start to do that then they would be right back in the same boat they were 5 years ago.

 

Again this off season the Sabres will be playing 'Small Market Economics'. They will not and can not get away from their plan. They will sign the players they feel will help the team in 2006-07 to contracts that reflect their value to the franchise. Darcy, Lindy & Co. will make the moves that will help the team on the ice and keep the Franchise financially healthy. After 63 wins? Who can argue with that?

 

DeLuca -- while I agree that Briere came up small in a few games (most notably game 7 vs Carolina), overall I think he did have a pretty strong playoffs. Drury also came up small in game 7. I'm not going to hold that against those 2 guys. Both had a strong playoffs. Neither of them is as unstoppable as Jagr or Ovechkin -- but look at how those teams did in the playoffs.

 

As far as salary, I think Drury makes about $3 million (not $3.5). I think Briere will get a little more (maybe around $3.5 million, but not more than $4 million), just because Drury's contract was signed a couple of years ago and some inflation in this salary range is inevitable. I think this is the right decision. Briere is about as valuable to the team as Drury is, IMHO, and it just happens to be Danny's turn to get a contract. If the roles were reversed, Drury would get a bit more.

 

As far as adding some more offense -- I go back and forth about this. Everyone took shots at the Canes for picking up Weight and Recchi b/c they didn't do much in the regular season -- but it seemed like they sure contributed against us in the playoffs. I must say it would have been pretty nice if we could have rotated 2 guys like that in when Max, Al, JP and Jochen were struggling in the conf. finals. On the other hand, those are expensive guys (Recchi at $2.3 million, Weight at a ridiculous $5.7 million), and we don't have that kind of cash to throw around.

 

As you point out, we can't start spending like drunken sailors in pursuit of offensive numbers. Our offensive growth is going to have to come from development of the guys in our system. For that matter, our homegrown offense was pretty GD explosive all year. I think the biggest reason for our offensive constipation in the playoffs was the loss of Connolly in game 2 of the Ottawa series. Our power play totally fell off the table after he went out, and we didn't get anything from Max or Al.

 

Next year, with Connolly back, and Max, Al, Roy and Pominville having another year under their belts, I'd expect much better offensive production in the playoffs. Roy in particular could have a big year. I also wouldn't be surprised to see Paetsch become a top 6 defenseman and have a Campbell-type year (he was the 3rd leading scorer on the Amerks this year -- pretty good for a defenseman).

 

Like you, I trust Darcy and Lindy to keep making the right moves.

 

Go Sabres.

[deluca67]

If Briere had stayed healthy, he projected out to a 99 point season. If you don't think that those kind of stats are worthy of a 3.5+ million dollar salary, you can kiss Briere goodbye when he becomes a UFA.

 

I realize you can't pay everybody and that some UFA's over the years will have to be allowed to walk, but the ones they want to keep, need to be locked up to 4 or 5 year contracts the year before they hit UFA status...and Briere is a KEEPER.

 

He wasn't healthy and didn't score 99 points. That is just a fact.

 

I'm not saying cut Briere or trade him. All I saying is that he is not Buffalo's top forward so you can't pay him like he is. If Briere wants to play hockey next year? He'll sign his offer. By the time he is an UFA his replacement may already be on the roster. Look at McKee. He had a great year. But having Tallinder, Campbell and Lydman step up as they have lessons the sting if McKee doesn't sign.

 

Only teams like the Leafs are giving out 4-5 year deals. The Sabres can't not sign players long term. If a player is signed then goes down for good the Sabres are still on the hook for that money. You sign Briere for a big 4 year deal and game one he gets nailed like Connolly that money stays on the cap despite Briere's ability to play.

 

The Sabres will and should continue to sign players by making the qualifying offers and then determining their value when they become an UFA. This roster can't become a roster of big ticket guys. Players like Briere may price themselves out of Buffalo. The trick is for the Sabres not to fall into the same pitfalls that have plagued this franchise for years. Everything the Sabres do has to take into account the bottom line. If they don't? We won't have a hockey team.

[Rabbit151]

I think Darcy has really bought into the NE Patriots way of thinking. They seem to have identified a few players who represent the team philosophy, and they keep those players. But they aren't afraid to move guys who want too much money, or who they think they can replace quickly.

 

McKee is a dilemma. He represents the team philosophy and is a great leader. But, can they find another team guy who blocks shots and is dependable? Absolutely. It comes down to what other teams are willing to pay him. Someone like Philly, Dallas or Colorado will offer him 4 or more mil a year, and Darcy will say "Thanks for your contributions, good luck."

 

I'd like to see him stay, but if he doesn't, a new guy steps in. Janik, Paetsch? Campbell, Lydman, Tallinder and Kalinin are all ready to log big minutes next year. Only problem is that none of them are as committed to blocking shots.

 

Jay has his future to think about and if big money is offered, he's got to take it. The mistake so many teams make is not realising that a player (other than a mega-super star) excels usually because of the people around him and the system his former team plays. It's useless to spend big money on the guy who got big hype on a team like Buffalo. He will never be the savior, just another rock-solid player who depends on the team around him as much as anything. Will Jay excel out of Buffalo? Who knows.

[deluca67]

I think Darcy has really bought into the NE Patriots way of thinking. They seem to have identified a few players who represent the team philosophy, and they keep those players. But they aren't afraid to move guys who want too much money, or who they think they can replace quickly.

 

McKee is a dilemma. He represents the team philosophy and is a great leader. But, can they find another team guy who blocks shots and is dependable? Absolutely. It comes down to what other teams are willing to pay him. Someone like Philly, Dallas or Colorado will offer him 4 or more mil a year, and Darcy will say "Thanks for your contributions, good luck."

 

I'd like to see him stay, but if he doesn't, a new guy steps in. Janik, Paetsch? Campbell, Lydman, Tallinder and Kalinin are all ready to log big minutes next year. Only problem is that none of them are as committed to blocking shots.

 

Jay has his future to think about and if big money is offered, he's got to take it. The mistake so many teams make is not realising that a player (other than a mega-super star) excels usually because of the people around him and the system his former team plays. It's useless to spend big money on the guy who got big hype on a team like Buffalo. He will never be the savior, just another rock-solid player who depends on the team around him as much as anything. Will Jay excel out of Buffalo? Who knows.

 

I'm not so sure about that. The young guys learned what it takes to win. They see McKee out there every night. To have an on ice mentor like that is part of the reason they came of age in the playoffs.

 

I'd like to see everyone back and a couple of more players added. I would also like a job where I made $30 bucks an hour neither is going to happen.

 

I wonder what the value for McKee is around the league? Is the FA market this year flooded with defensive tallent?

 

You hear a lot about the looker room and how much the guys like each other. I wonder if players like McKee and Grier will take less to stay apart of this team? It will be interesting to see if all the talk is just that? Talk.

[LabattBlue]

I'm not so sure about that. The young guys learned what it takes to win. They see McKee out there every night. To have an on ice mentor like that is part of the reason they came of age in the playoffs.

 

I'd like to see everyone back and a couple of more players added. I would also like a job where I made $30 bucks an hour neither is going to happen.

 

I wonder what the value for McKee is around the league? Is the FA market this year flooded with defensive tallent?

 

You hear a lot about the looker room and how much the guys like each other. I wonder if players like McKee and Grier will take less to stay apart of this team? It will be interesting to see if all the talk is just that? Talk.

Grier needs to take less. While he is a good player, he needs to be on the 4th line and killing penalties, not playing with one of your best offensive talents. The last 11 games he played in the playoffs...ZERO points. I've been down this road before with Grier and yes I know he is a banger, but a guy who can't contribute ANYTHING offensively for long stretches of time does not belong on a line with Drury who can be a creative offensive player. He's a 4th line player and deserves to be paid like one. If not, see you later.

 

I offer Grier about 1 million per year...TOPS, one year contract.

 

PS Don't tell me we need Grier for his chemistry.

 

He wasn't healthy and didn't score 99 points. That is just a fact.

 

I'm not saying cut Briere or trade him. All I saying is that he is not Buffalo's top forward so you can't pay him like he is.

I'll tell you what...If I had to pick a player to spend 3+ million on, I choose Briere over Drury any day of the week.

[hopeleslyobvious]

He wasn't healthy and didn't score 99 points. That is just a fact.

 

I'm not saying cut Briere or trade him. All I saying is that he is not Buffalo's top forward so you can't pay him like he is. If Briere wants to play hockey next year? He'll sign his offer. By the time he is an UFA his replacement may already be on the roster. Look at McKee. He had a great year. But having Tallinder, Campbell and Lydman step up as they have lessons the sting if McKee doesn't sign.

 

Only teams like the Leafs are giving out 4-5 year deals. The Sabres can't not sign players long term. If a player is signed then goes down for good the Sabres are still on the hook for that money. You sign Briere for a big 4 year deal and game one he gets nailed like Connolly that money stays on the cap despite Briere's ability to play.

 

The Sabres will and should continue to sign players by making the qualifying offers and then determining their value when they become an UFA. This roster can't become a roster of big ticket guys. Players like Briere may price themselves out of Buffalo. The trick is for the Sabres not to fall into the same pitfalls that have plagued this franchise for years. Everything the Sabres do has to take into account the bottom line. If they don't? We won't have a hockey team.

 

 

Yes, Briere was not healthy for the full season this year, but his injury is fixed. He had the surgery, and he has recovered. Now I am not a Dr, but I have not heard anything about sports hernias being a chronic problem. If someone with more knowledge on this says otherwise, then I would agree that it might be a bad idea to sign him long term. Also, I don't think his situation is analogous to Connolly. Connolly already lost a year of his career to a concussion, and then got another one. Maybe he is concussion prone, or maybe he just got two bad breaks. The point is that Briere is in a much different situation.

 

Finally, I believe you are wrong about the cap. If you have an injured player, I am pretty sure that while you still have to pay him, the money does not count towards the cap.

 

We don't have to keep this whole team intact, but we do have to keep some core players around. Seeing that Briere is a co-captian, and easily has the potential to hit 100 points, I think that qualifies him as part of the core of this team.

[nfreeman]

 

Finally, I believe you are wrong about the cap. If you have an injured player, I am pretty sure that while you still have to pay him, the money does not count towards the cap.

 

We don't have to keep this whole team intact, but we do have to keep some core players around. Seeing that Briere is a co-captian, and easily has the potential to hit 100 points, I think that qualifies him as part of the core of this team.

 

 

Hopelessly -- You may be right about the cap impact, but it really doesn't matter. The factor that affects the Sabres is their out-of-pocket costs vs. their revenues. In other words, in deciding what kind of contract to offer, they aren't going to factor in the fact that if Briere (or Connolly or anyone else) gets hurt, the cap rules permit them to spend an amount equal to his salary on another player (if the cap rules in fact do so). It's irrelevant to them. They are only going to consider the likelihood that the player is prone to recurring, major injuries that present a risk to their investment -- since the money they spend on him is NOT magically replenished in their bank account and thus there to spend on another player.

 

Having said that, I totally agree with you about keeping Briere.

 

Just trying to fill the hockey talk void so cruelly foisted on us...

 

Go Sabres.

[hopeleslyobvious]

Hopelessly -- You may be right about the cap impact, but it really doesn't matter. The factor that affects the Sabres is their out-of-pocket costs vs. their revenues. In other words, in deciding what kind of contract to offer, they aren't going to factor in the fact that if Briere (or Connolly or anyone else) gets hurt, the cap rules permit them to spend an amount equal to his salary on another player (if the cap rules in fact do so). It's irrelevant to them. They are only going to consider the likelihood that the player is prone to recurring, major injuries that present a risk to their investment -- since the money they spend on him is NOT magically replenished in their bank account and thus there to spend on another player.

 

Having said that, I totally agree with you about keeping Briere.

 

Just trying to fill the hockey talk void so cruelly foisted on us...

 

Go Sabres.

 

And I agree with you about the economic impact of a big injury. You have to balance the risk of having him injured while in a multi-year deal vs. the reward of not having him become a UFA for a little while longer. I think the benefits outweigh the risk.

[Taro T]

Yes, Briere was not healthy for the full season this year, but his injury is fixed. He had the surgery, and he has recovered. Now I am not a Dr, but I have not heard anything about sports hernias being a chronic problem. If someone with more knowledge on this says otherwise, then I would agree that it might be a bad idea to sign him long term. Also, I don't think his situation is analogous to Connolly. Connolly already lost a year of his career to a concussion, and then got another one. Maybe he is concussion prone, or maybe he just got two bad breaks. The point is that Briere is in a much different situation.

 

Finally, I believe you are wrong about the cap. If you have an injured player, I am pretty sure that while you still have to pay him, the money does not count towards the cap.

 

We don't have to keep this whole team intact, but we do have to keep some core players around. Seeing that Briere is a co-captian, and easily has the potential to hit 100 points, I think that qualifies him as part of the core of this team.

Teams are allowed to exceed the cap by an injured players' salary if necessary.

 

This will likely never be an issue for the Sabres, as I don't see them ever hovering around the cap.

 

What would become an issue for the Sabres is: NHL contracts are "mostly" guaranteed. A team can buy out a players' contract if it wants, but (for most players) the buyout is 2/3 the remaining value on the contract and that hit's the team's cap over twice the remaining years of the contract. (Again, due to where the Sabres payroll will likely be, the cap effects are negligible for all intents and purposes.)

 

However, although cap effects are negligible, revenue effects are not. If the Sabres signed a player to a 4 year contract (that they hadn't insured), and he got hurt in the 1st season or was ineffective that 1st season (not sure lengths of deals, but see the Devils and Mogilny or McGillis for prime examples) and the team then wanted to buy him out, they would have to pay the player 2/3 of what remained on the contract. At a hypothetical $3MM/year, the Sabres would have to pay the player $6MM to not play hockey (2/3 of $9MM). That kind of an outlay would be a significant hit to a team that budgets around $30MM/year for all their players.

 

The Sabres are not likely to risk throwing away that money, so unless a guy is named Miller or Drury, it is unlikely to see him get a 3-5 year deal. I'd like to see the Sabres get some guys signed to 2 year deals, but I don't know that any would go for that.

[nfreeman]

 

However, although cap effects are negligible, revenue effects are not. If the Sabres signed a player to a 4 year contract (that they hadn't insured), and he got hurt in the 1st season or was ineffective that 1st season (not sure lengths of deals, but see the Devils and Mogilny or McGillis for prime examples) and the team then wanted to buy him out, they would have to pay the player 2/3 of what remained on the contract. At a hypothetical $3MM/year, the Sabres would have to pay the player $6MM to not play hockey (2/3 of $9MM). That kind of an outlay would be a significant hit to a team that budgets around $30MM/year for all their players.

 

The Sabres are not likely to risk throwing away that money, so unless a guy is named Miller or Drury, it is unlikely to see him get a 3-5 year deal. I'd like to see the Sabres get some guys signed to 2 year deals, but I don't know that any would go for that.

 

 

I agree (and in fact Darcy said something essentially praising the 1-year contract in his news conf. on mon.), although I can see a larger pool of guys belonging to the group to which Darcy would offer a 3-year deal. For example, in addition to Miller & Drury, I could see us offering a 3-yr deal to any of McKee, Tallinder, Lydman, Campbell, Max, Connolly, Kotalik, Roy, Briere, Hecht and JP.

 

However, I don't see a 4-year offer for anyone other than Drury, Briere and Tallinder. I need to see another strong year from Miller before I commit for 4 years at big numbers. This btw is where I think we are vulnerable on McKee -- I can see us offering 3 years, $8 million, but someone else offering 4 years, $14 million, and then he's gone.

 

Go Sabres.

[BuffalOhio]

Grier needs to take less. While he is a good player, he needs to be on the 4th line and killing penalties, not playing with one of your best offensive talents. The last 11 games he played in the playoffs...ZERO points. I've been down this road before with Grier and yes I know he is a banger, but a guy who can't contribute ANYTHING offensively for long stretches of time does not belong on a line with Drury who can be a creative offensive player. He's a 4th line player and deserves to be paid like one. If not, see you later.

 

I offer Grier about 1 million per year...TOPS, one year contract.

 

PS Don't tell me we need Grier for his chemistry.

I'll tell you what...If I had to pick a player to spend 3+ million on, I choose Briere over Drury any day of the week.

 

I agree that Grier doesn't belong with Drury. He gets so many glorious scoring chances that he does nothing with. Very frustrating.