Dump & Chase Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 In signing Henrik, I fully expect the club to NOT sign Briere to his $5 mil+ arbitration award. Thus, we will lose Breire and have Novotny ont he 4th line with Roy moving up. $5 mill is just way to much to pay for 1 player - considering the clubs budget and need to sign the others. Briere was injured and while out, the club palyed great hockey without him. He is a wonderful player, nut the economics of the game in Buffalo will show him the door. The TAllinder signing was to show their desire to Briere to take the $4 they probably offered him. Briere will get the $ somewere else. Get used to the name -- Novotny.
Corp000085 Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 and where'd you hear about briere's award? I haven't seen anything official yet...
PTS Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Not to mention the fact that we still don't know how much Tallinder got. Tallinder is the core you want to build your defense around, much like Briere being the core piece on offense. I'm confident both will be retained for a long time.
Stoner Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 How can you be so confident about Briere. Barring a last-second long-term deal in the next few hours, Briere will be an UFA after next season -- a season in which you just know he is going to light it up. What will his worth be on the open market, and how can the Sabres in their current mindset possibly match an offer? And there's no guarantee he wouldn't Grier us and go someplace else even if we do match.
jad1 Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 How can you be so confident about Briere. Barring a last-second long-term deal in the next few hours, Briere will be an UFA after next season -- a season in which you just know he is going to light it up. What will his worth be on the open market, and how can the Sabres in their current mindset possibly match an offer? And there's no guarantee he wouldn't Grier us and go someplace else even if we do match. Really, who the F cares about next offseason? The goal is to win the Stanley Cup in '06-'07. And if they pay Briere $5 million on a 1 year deal, and they win it, his leaving means they'll have a Cup and $5million of cap space next season to sign his replacement(s). This idea of winning the Cup and having all the players signed for the next 5 years is nothing more than a fantasy. The realistic goal is next season, and if the team should do what it needs to get the team in place to meet that goal.
DaFan Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 and where'd you hear about briere's award? I haven't seen anything official yet... Exactly, there has been nothing official and no word on the $$ for Tallinder. Will gladly look at any link Dump&Chase can provide.
Stoner Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Really, who the F cares about next offseason? The goal is to win the Stanley Cup in '06-'07. And if they pay Briere $5 million on a 1 year deal, and they win it, his leaving means they'll have a Cup and $5million of cap space next season to sign his replacement(s). This idea of winning the Cup and having all the players signed for the next 5 years is nothing more than a fantasy. The realistic goal is next season, and if the team should do what it needs to get the team in place to meet that goal. You're on a roll today! The poster poster for fiscal sanity and Tommy's "right to earn a buck" is advocating overpaying a player on a one-year contract in a short-term bid to win the Cup! But... but... we could lose the franchise! Don't you love your hockey team?
IKnowPhysics Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Hrm. How much is a point-per-game game player, co-captain, hard worker, and lockerroom leader worth? Any two of those four characteristics might garner 3.5M. Briere's worth 5 million. We paid Satan that much (pre paycut), and in retrospect, Danny's a more complete player and a better influence on those around him. He wants to sign a long term deal, and that shows his dedication to the club. Something I didn't know is that under the new CBA, the arbitrator must pick either the salary proposed by the player or the one proposed by the team- no in-between like before. Thus, the question behind it all boils down to... How much did Briere ask for?
Wild Jay Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Something I didn't know is that under the new CBA, the arbitrator must pick either the salary proposed by the player or the one proposed by the team- no in-between like before. Thus, the question behind it all boils down to... How much did Briere ask for? Wow, are you sure about that? If that's the case, things could get dicey quick. I haven't heard anyone in the media report on that change in the CBA, though it wouldn't shock me. Just this morning on WGR, they mentioned how they said Danny asked for more than he's worth (reportedly 7 mill perhaps according to them) in hopes of getting something somewhere in the middle. Take that for what it's worth though
jad1 Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 You're on a roll today! The poster poster for fiscal sanity and Tommy's "right to earn a buck" is advocating overpaying a player on a one-year contract in a short-term bid to win the Cup! But... but... we could lose the franchise! Don't you love your hockey team? I know you're resident ranter and raver, and self-appointed sh!t disturber, so I can understand why you would (again) misrepresent my view to make your off-the-wall accusations. Let me help you out here. My focus has never been on Golisano's bottom line. Unlike you, I don't believe there is a huge profit to be made in owning an NHL team. My concern is something you never address, the CAP. If the Sabres could sign Briere to a one year deal for $18 million a year, I'd be for it, as long as they can still re-sign the rest of the team to fit under the cap. Unfortunately, like your hair-brain conspiracies, that's nothing but pure fantasy. I believe that the Sabres will be able to meet Briere's arbitration price, mostly because they didn't overpay guys like McKee, Grier, Pominville, and Roy when they didn't have to. Free agency and salary caps close the window of opportunity for franchises. UFA is an important goal to players in any sport, and contrary to what most of us junior GMs believe, it's a right they don't give up easily. So if the Sabres have to sign Briere to a one-year $5 million deal instead of a 3 year $7 million deal, and use the $2 million to sign other players, I'm all for it. And I love my team enough to acutally travel and pay to watch them play in person, unlike some empty-barrells on this board.
Taro T Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Hrm. How much is a point-per-game game player, co-captain, hard worker, and lockerroom leader worth? Any two of those four characteristics might garner 3.5M. Briere's worth 5 million. We paid Satan that much (pre paycut), and in retrospect, Danny's a more complete player and a better influence on those around him. He wants to sign a long term deal, and that shows his dedication to the club. Something I didn't know is that under the new CBA, the arbitrator must pick either the salary proposed by the player or the one proposed by the team- no in-between like before. Thus, the question behind it all boils down to... How much did Briere ask for? That is news to me as well. Might you provide the source of this information? I haven't seen anything in the CBA that says an Arbitrator has to choose one side or the other. (Not saying it isn't in there, but just that I have not seen it in Article 12 nor in any of the Exhibits and would be very surprised if it is in the CBA.)
apuszczalowski Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 And I love my team enough to acutally travel and pay to watch them play in person, unlike some empty-barrells on this board. So I see only people with big wallets can be fans now. I hate this attitude people have, "Well I traveled X miles to see the team play X amount of times, and I bought 100 level tickets to gold games so I am a bigger fan then you are" Thats good for you. I make a modest salary and attended games too. I was at the home opener and 4 playoff games, so I guess I'm not as big of a fan as some one with season tickets. So next year they should be going all out and pay whatever it takes to win the cup, no matter what it costs to the owner and if it could put the team in financial jeopardy and force them to move? Also, after they win the cup, the team shouldn't care who they keep and can just find replacements for them afterwards? Why can't they find a replacement now if Briere costs to much? whats going to be the differenece between keeping him this year and letting him go next year? The fans won't care if the team isn't a Stanley Cup competitor each year, they only have to win once and then the fans will let them go back to mediocrity? What if they sign Briere to a one year deal and the get hit with injuries again in the playoffs and don't win the cup next season?
IKnowPhysics Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Yeah, it could get dicey. Agent's might have to more careful about claiming their clients' values. I read about it here, after some quick googling: http://proicehockey.about.com/od/nhlfreeag...arbitration.htm "Under the collective agreement signed in 2005, the arbitrator must pick the salary figure proposed by the player or the team. This is a change from the previous system, under which the arbitrator could set a salary between the two figures." I know it was long talked about to be inserted into the new CBA before it was ratified. However, the current CBA doesn't list any such rules, as I understand them, in Article XII. http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/archive/cba/article12.html Maybe the about.com douche is wrong.
Dump & Chase Posted July 22, 2006 Author Report Posted July 22, 2006 Sabres season was lightening in a bottle. A lucky season. A good business man/ woman does not throw their economic plan in a tail spin to appease a few ill advised fans on a chat board. The club has an economic structure and plan. Briere is a great player, but the reality is that he is looking at $5 mil - minimium. He rocked in the playoff and that garners as much money, if not more than Havlat just got. Stillman, last year was given almost $4 mil by arbitrators. He is a winger and a 2nd liner. Breire is the Sabres best player. But remember, there are other guys to sign. The team has depth at center. And when he was out with is torn ball sack, the team palyed great. I expect Danny to sign with Philly before Monday.
jad1 Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 No, I just find it funny that "fans" who bitch and moan about Golisano being "cheap" are the first ones to cry poor when it comes to paying for the product. Sorry to hit a nerve. I'll be more sensitive to our fellow 'cheap' fans when they insult our 'cheap' owner. Meanwhile, keep on stealing the sugar packets! Let me make clear to you my position, for the last time. The Sabres have a window of opportunity here, if they can return the majority of players from last year. Because Regier has made some good financial decisions, I believe the Sabres can sign their key players for next season for another run. After that, who knows? Can you tell me what the cap is going to be next off-season? Who are going to be the big players when it comes time to sign talent? Could the Sabres sign somebody better than Briere next year? Again who the hell knows? Let's deal in the here and now. The main priority is to get Briere signed to a contract for next season. Anything after that is an added bonus. So I see only people with big wallets can be fans now. I hate this attitude people have, "Well I traveled X miles to see the team play X amount of times, and I bought 100 level tickets to gold games so I am a bigger fan then you are" Thats good for you. I make a modest salary and attended games too. I was at the home opener and 4 playoff games, so I guess I'm not as big of a fan as some one with season tickets. So next year they should be going all out and pay whatever it takes to win the cup, no matter what it costs to the owner and if it could put the team in financial jeopardy and force them to move? Also, after they win the cup, the team shouldn't care who they keep and can just find replacements for them afterwards? Why can't they find a replacement now if Briere costs to much? whats going to be the differenece between keeping him this year and letting him go next year? The fans won't care if the team isn't a Stanley Cup competitor each year, they only have to win once and then the fans will let them go back to mediocrity? What if they sign Briere to a one year deal and the get hit with injuries again in the playoffs and don't win the cup next season?
shrader Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Have you every actually seen Cory Stillman's career stats? :rolleyes: I can't wait until the arbitrator awards Briere $5 million and then follows that up by awarding me $500K. I was hoping for more, but I'll settle for that.
Dump & Chase Posted July 22, 2006 Author Report Posted July 22, 2006 Jimmy Snuka stabbed his girlfriend in a fit of rage years ago. He served time in the big house. I saw him wrestle with HOgan v. Piper and Orendorf at the old Aud about 20 yrs ago. He flew off the top drop with his chest dive. Stillman is a great player. He is a palyoff gem. The Sabres were going to deal for him when he was Calgary -- per James Patrick's advice. But Regier got cold feet. He looks lazy out there , but is crafty around the net. Afinogenov is looking at $3.2mil
IKnowPhysics Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Don't forget to grab the strawberry jam.
apuszczalowski Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 No, I just find it funny that "fans" who bitch and moan about Golisano being "cheap" are the first ones to cry poor when it comes to paying for the product. Sorry to hit a nerve. I'll be more sensitive to our fellow 'cheap' fans when they insult our 'cheap' owner. Meanwhile, keep on stealing the sugar packets! Let me make clear to you my position, for the last time. The Sabres have a window of opportunity here, if they can return the majority of players from last year. Because Regier has made some good financial decisions, I believe the Sabres can sign their key players for next season for another run. After that, who knows? Can you tell me what the cap is going to be next off-season? Who are going to be the big players when it comes time to sign talent? Could the Sabres sign somebody better than Briere next year? Again who the hell knows? Let's deal in the here and now. The main priority is to get Briere signed to a contract for next season. Anything after that is an added bonus. Maybe they cry poor because they are expected to pay money to line the pockets of someone who has significantly more money then they do. I'm expected to shell out my hard earned money to go see a game and support the team, but he is not expected to lose any kind of money because he is a billionaire owner, who has the extra money to spare. Like I said, I make a decent living right now (not enough to be a season ticket holder yet) but enough that I can spend some money to go to games. I paid full price for my home opener tickets, and full price for the playoffs, I would have even went to more games but I couldn't get them because they sold out too quickly. I went into a bit of debt to buy the tickets, (putting them on a credit card), but I guess I'm supposed to to be a good fan, but the owner shouldn't have to spend a dime. How did Regier make some good financial decisions? His budget will have to go up significantly from last year just to cover the the salaries of players from last year cause almost everyone is due for a raise because they were only signed to one year deals. Could Regier sign someone better then Briere next year? Possibly, but not likely if you look at his track record. You aren't going to find a replacement for Briere in the Bargain Bin section of FA like Darcy shops in (and don't take that as me advocating spending top dollar on first day FA's) Although I'm sure next season everyone will say that we have our replacement for Briere coming up from Rochester next season anyway.
hopeleslyobvious Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 Maybe they cry poor because they are expected to pay money to line the pockets of someone who has significantly more money then they do. I'm expected to shell out my hard earned money to go see a game and support the team, but he is not expected to lose any kind of money because he is a billionaire owner, who has the extra money to spare. Like I said, I make a decent living right now (not enough to be a season ticket holder yet) but enough that I can spend some money to go to games. I paid full price for my home opener tickets, and full price for the playoffs, I would have even went to more games but I couldn't get them because they sold out too quickly. I went into a bit of debt to buy the tickets, (putting them on a credit card), but I guess I'm supposed to to be a good fan, but the owner shouldn't have to spend a dime. How did Regier make some good financial decisions? His budget will have to go up significantly from last year just to cover the the salaries of players from last year cause almost everyone is due for a raise because they were only signed to one year deals. Could Regier sign someone better then Briere next year? Possibly, but not likely if you look at his track record. You aren't going to find a replacement for Briere in the Bargain Bin section of FA like Darcy shops in (and don't take that as me advocating spending top dollar on first day FA's) Although I'm sure next season everyone will say that we have our replacement for Briere coming up from Rochester next season anyway. I don't think anyone is calling you cheap. No one is expecting everyone to go out and drop their whole paycheck on the team. But, if you're going to complain about the team being cheap, you should at least attend some games (if you can afford to). On a side note. It really shouldn't matter how much money the owner has. He shouldn't be expected to operate his business as a loss.
shrader Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 On a side note. It really shouldn't matter how much money the owner has. He shouldn't be expected to operate his business as a loss. Especially when he made it very clear from day 1 that he wouldn't.
Stoner Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 I know you're resident ranter and raver, and self-appointed sh!t disturber.... Well, you're disturbed, so I guess I'm guilty as charged. But I will not plead guilty to being a lesser fan because I haven't attended any games lately. There are plenty of ways to support a franchise. Despite the money-centric society we live in, not everything in the world can be quantified in dollars and cents. Speaking of fantasies, I'm surprised to hear that you advocate spending to the cap. hopeles, I've only half seriously said I don't care if Golisano makes a profit or not. In my saner moments, which are rare, time and again I have tried to spell out my position, which is sometimes you have to spend money to make money. I believe there is another road to profitability besides keeping payroll low and pricing everything to a "poor small market." Here's a thought: the Buffalo-Niagara region, east to Syracuse, south to northern PA, north to southern Ontario and west to eastern Ohio (anyone dizzy yet) has millions of people, not all of whom are dirt poor. All you need are 18,690 people to pay a pretty penny for season tickets, and your revenue problem is largely solved. We already know this is a hockey crazy area WHEN THE TEAM IS WINNING, and that should pump a lot more revenue into the Sabres bank account. As for corporate support, when there is enough fan support, enough fannies in the seats and enough eyes and ears on the TV and radio, that should follow. I guess what I'm wondering is whether the Sabres are truly hamstrung by the so called small market in which they reside or if they are just terrible at taking that product to market.
apuszczalowski Posted July 22, 2006 Report Posted July 22, 2006 I don't want to see him have to operate at a loss either, and thats not exactly what I am advocating, but sometimes you have to be willing to spend money to make money. Typically you buy or start a buisness you take a loss for the first couple of years to build up the clientel and make sure buisness will be steady in the future. TG has stepped right in and has been trying to break even from Day one with the team. He still has to build back up the clientel that was lost due to the Regas situation and the lockout so opening up the purse strings now may help him in the long run insure the fans believe he only cares about winning and will be willing to spend their extra money on the team because they don't see it as the owner just trying to make a buck. Don't get me wrong, I like TG, I know the NHL is a buisness, but it is a differnet kind of buisness, he is selling a product that requires constant financial support from its fans to survive. Show us your willing to win at all costs, we (the fans) will show you we are willing to support the team at all costs.
hopeleslyobvious Posted July 23, 2006 Report Posted July 23, 2006 I don't want to see him have to operate at a loss either, and thats not exactly what I am advocating, but sometimes you have to be willing to spend money to make money. Typically you buy or start a buisness you take a loss for the first couple of years to build up the clientel and make sure buisness will be steady in the future. TG has stepped right in and has been trying to break even from Day one with the team. He still has to build back up the clientel that was lost due to the Regas situation and the lockout so opening up the purse strings now may help him in the long run insure the fans believe he only cares about winning and will be willing to spend their extra money on the team because they don't see it as the owner just trying to make a buck. Don't get me wrong, I like TG, I know the NHL is a buisness, but it is a differnet kind of buisness, he is selling a product that requires constant financial support from its fans to survive. Show us your willing to win at all costs, we (the fans) will show you we are willing to support the team at all costs. Well I think we've seen this off season that he is willing to pay money. Spacek didn't come cheap. I can't imagine locking Tallinder up for 4 years was cheap...I just don't think he's willing to overspend.
nfreeman Posted July 23, 2006 Report Posted July 23, 2006 I don't want to see him have to operate at a loss either, and thats not exactly what I am advocating, but sometimes you have to be willing to spend money to make money. Typically you buy or start a buisness you take a loss for the first couple of years to build up the clientel and make sure buisness will be steady in the future. TG has stepped right in and has been trying to break even from Day one with the team. He still has to build back up the clientel that was lost due to the Regas situation and the lockout so opening up the purse strings now may help him in the long run insure the fans believe he only cares about winning and will be willing to spend their extra money on the team because they don't see it as the owner just trying to make a buck. Don't get me wrong, I like TG, I know the NHL is a buisness, but it is a differnet kind of buisness, he is selling a product that requires constant financial support from its fans to survive. Show us your willing to win at all costs, we (the fans) will show you we are willing to support the team at all costs. This is not true. TG said all along that he knew he was going to lose money at first and in fact it's been disclosed that he lost about $10 million over the 1st couple of years. Now, certainly no one here has audited that claim, and it could be BS. However, I'm not aware of any evidence to support the statement that TG has been trying to break even from day 1. As far as our current situation goes -- I think at the end of the day the payroll is going to be quite a bit higher than either the fans or the team expected -- I'm guessing $36 - $38 million. I think the reason there hasn't been any announcement as to Briere's arbitration is that we are trying hard to lock him up to a big contract. I think even if we fail we are not going to walk away from his arbitration award, or Connolly's, or Max's, or anyone else's. And, if I'm right, I think that means that TG is pretty GD committed to continuing to take real shots at the cup. Come on Danny. Sign on the dotted line. It's nice here. You can be a star and you can take us to the promised land. Go Sabres.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.