bbb Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 How can you waive a hometown kid who came to play during the playoffs over a relative pittance?!? http://blogs.buffalonews.com/sabres/2010/0...edy-waived.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 How can you waive a hometown kid who came to play during the playoffs over a relative pittance?!? http://blogs.buffalonews.com/sabres/2010/0...edy-waived.html This comes apparently over $200K!!! Sabres offered $800K, the arbitrator ruled $1M. And it was the Sabres idea to take him to arbitration. Fuggin' insane! PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 This comes apparently over $200K!!! Sabres offered $800K, the arbitrator ruled $1M. And it was the Sabres idea to take him to arbitration. Fuggin' insane! PTR But not totally surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopsGuy Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 I thought the Sabres were the "smart" one in this town? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 It is tough being a Buffalo fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 I thought the Sabres were the "smart" one in this town? What made you think that? I mean, they couldn't fix a fricking fax machine and kept Vanek over Drury and Briere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted August 2, 2010 Share Posted August 2, 2010 How can you waive a hometown kid who came to play during the playoffs over a relative pittance?!? http://blogs.buffalonews.com/sabres/2010/0...edy-waived.html You can waive because he simply isn't a very good hockey player. I hope it was about that, and not the arbitration money, but obviously I could very well be wrong. Either way though, I'm not losing sleep over it at all. Insert any other player in the system into his spot and do you really think you're going to lose tangible production? Good kid, hard worker, but not a full-time NHL player IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 You can waive because he simply isn't a very good hockey player. I hope it was about that, and not the arbitration money, but obviously I could very well be wrong. Either way though, I'm not losing sleep over it at all. Insert any other player in the system into his spot and do you really think you're going to lose tangible production? Good kid, hard worker, but not a full-time NHL player IMO. If it wasn't about the money, why would the Sabres have bothered to go to arbitration with him? They could have just let him go, before the deadline... they liked him enough to wait for arbitration, and then dump him over $200 thousand? I agree, this isn't really a major move, but it does give some interesting insight into how the franchise operates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 This comes apparently over $200K!!! Sabres offered $800K, the arbitrator ruled $1M. And it was the Sabres idea to take him to arbitration. Fuggin' insane! PTR Exhibit A: Blackhawks lost money last year, so they say. 200 there, 200 here... I am glad everybody is like a drunken sailor on shore leave... What is up with these arbs anyway... The 'Hawks just lost their SC winning goaltender the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 I agree, this isn't really a major move, but it does give some interesting insight into how the franchise operates. Yeah... They want to make money not LOSE it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 Yeah... They want to make money not LOSE it. So, they believed in Tim Kennedy, enough to try to re-sign him, and have it go to arbitration, and then, let him go over a measley $200,000? It is just kind of stupid...and makes it sound like they really don't know what they are doing, IMO. Personally, I wouldn't have been upset if they had just let Kennedy walk, and never try to re-sign him. But why go through all that, for this result? It doesn't make a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted August 3, 2010 Author Share Posted August 3, 2010 So, they believed in Tim Kennedy, enough to try to re-sign him, and have it go to arbitration, and then, let him go over a measley $200,000? It is just kind of stupid...and makes it sound like they really don't know what they are doing, IMO. Personally, I wouldn't have been upset if they had just let Kennedy walk, and never try to re-sign him. But why go through all that, for this result? It doesn't make a lot of sense. Exactly - they would have looked much better if they just let him walk............You do this to someone else, it's no big deal.............You look like you just got rid of a hometown kid because you didn't want to pay what the arb. thinks you should, you look cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 So, they believed in Tim Kennedy, enough to try to re-sign him, and have it go to arbitration, and then, let him go over a measley $200,000? It is just kind of stupid...and makes it sound like they really don't know what they are doing, IMO. Personally, I wouldn't have been upset if they had just let Kennedy walk, and never try to re-sign him. But why go through all that, for this result? It doesn't make a lot of sense. Maybe they are totally misjudging what the arbitrators are going to rule? The arbitrators do seem to be going high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 He'll be a Leaf by the end of the week. Burke is a big fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 If it wasn't about the money, why would the Sabres have bothered to go to arbitration with him? They could have just let him go, before the deadline... they liked him enough to wait for arbitration, and then dump him over $200 thousand? I agree, this isn't really a major move, but it does give some interesting insight into how the franchise operates. I agree that it probably was about money, that's why I said that I obviously could be wrong in hoping that it's not. Overall, it's a fine hockey move, but it brings up questions about the way the organization is run internally, as usual. My guess is that Quinn/Golisano are to blame for strange money moves such as this, if that's what this is, more than Regier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 This comes apparently over $200K!!! Sabres offered $800K, the arbitrator ruled $1M. And it was the Sabres idea to take him to arbitration. Fuggin' insane! PTR The Sabres didn't take him to arbitration. Kennedy elected to go that route. Kaleta was the one Buffalo took to arbitration, but he agreed on a deal before it went that far. The Sabres had no choice in the matter, once Kennedy chose to do so, they were locked in. They couldn't walk away from the deal either because the CBA doesn't allow a team to walk away from a deal that low. That said, this is a very strange move and there has to be more to it than we'll ever hear. I'm guessing that during the process, Kennedy pissed them off a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 Yeah... They want to make money not LOSE it. And they go out of their way to sully their reputation around the league even further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 The Sabres didn't take him to arbitration. Kennedy elected to go that route. Kaleta was the one Buffalo took to arbitration, but he agreed on a deal before it went that far. The Sabres had no choice in the matter, once Kennedy chose to do so, they were locked in. They couldn't walk away from the deal either because the CBA doesn't allow a team to walk away from a deal that low. That said, this is a very strange move and there has to be more to it than we'll ever hear. I'm guessing that during the process, Kennedy pissed them off a bit. But, they could have just let him go, as a free agent, before the deadline passed. Maybe they figured they could get him to agree to an $800,000 deal, before it went to arbitration? That is all I can figure. So, they are going to buy him out, from all I am hearing, and have to pay him at least a third of the arbitrated salary, to not play. If they liked him enough to keep him around this long, why not keep him, for a year, get to see some of that potential pan out, and then, decide if his worth keeping around. It seems like poor business to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveRalph Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 I agree with the majority of posters...Just seems to be more of the same from a joker front office...It's more about the handling of the situation rather than the player. Kennedy was a smallish, inconsistent forward with flashes of promise. The Sabres have been, and are currently, loaded with those players. But he was a local kid who had some grit (which they say they've been missing) and elevated his game during the postseason, when other more prominent forwards were looking over their shoulder to avoid the next hit. I was at one game in Tampa early in the season when Kennedy was easily the best Sabre on the ice. I liked Kennedy, but I don't think his absence is anything that would cost the Sabres a chance at another division title. It's just disappointing that they can't shake this rinky dink M.O. in the front office. He made $650K last year, and the Sabres reportedly offered him $800K for this year. Kennedy wanted about $1.5M. The arbitrator ruled (very fairly, by all comparisons) that Kennedy was due $1 million this year. So Buffalo waits four days, and then waives him, which if he clears waivers, they will have to pay him $333K to buy out his contract. In what universe does that make sense??? Add that Buffalo is currently about $9 million under the projected salary cap. It's worrisome to watch the same clowns who wasted Hasek's MVP prime with the 1-2 punch of Brian Holzinger and Derek Plante handle a roster with another world class goalie as the foundation. It would be a shame to waste that type of talent again. You'd like to think they know something about Kennedy that we don't....But then like Buftex said, why would they even offer him a deal for $800K in the first place? Just let him walk. For Exiled in Illinois...When an independent audit tells me the Blackhawks lost money last season, I will believe it. When their executive accountant and team president tell me they lost money, I will assume it's the same money that my business "lost" last year. There's very legal ways to report/distort/declare income, especially in a venture that large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted August 3, 2010 Share Posted August 3, 2010 How can you waive a hometown kid who came to play during the playoffs over a relative pittance?!? http://blogs.buffalonews.com/sabres/2010/0...edy-waived.html I still think Kennedy will be a Sabres next season, no one will pick him up that kind of contract for a 30'ish point player. He has to clear waivers for the arbitration ruling to be void and then they will work to sign him. But this is the reason you don't let anyone go to arbitration, it's a joke. Chicago just cut their Stanley Cup winning goalie because of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts