Jump to content
BillsFan4

Buffalo Sabres and NHL: 2019/20 Next game: Thurs. Nov. 14th at 7pm vs Carolina

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said:

did you mean UFA?  I am really not sure how these things work when they sign the ELC as a free agent out of college. Same thing as if they sign before they graduate?

 

Oops.  Yeah, I went back and fixed that. 

 

For the majority of players, it's 27 years old or 7 years of service, whatever comes first.  There are some other ways to get there, but they're fairly rare (Danny O'Regan this year).  So for those college free agents who sign at an older age, it winds up being that 27 year old mark.

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nhl.com/news/sabres-forward-casey-mittelstadt-pleased-with-roster-additions/c-308239878?tid=277567768

 

Mittelstadt pleased with new-look Sabres

 

Quote

Buffalo also retained Jeff Skinner, who could have become an unrestricted free agent. The forward signed an eight-year, $72 million contract (average annual value $9 million) June 7 after he scored an NHL career-high 40 goals and tied a personal best with 63 points.

 

"I think it all started with getting (Skinner) back," said Mittelstadt, a 20-year-old forward who had 25 points (12 goals, 13 assists) in 77 games. "That's huge for me, especially since he's taught me so much and kind of has taken me under his wing..... 

 

I guess now we see why Casey thanked Skinner (on Instagram iirc) after he re-signed with the Sabres. Sheary thanked him too. I found that interesting. I can’t really remember seeing that happen too often (but maybe I just haven’t paid close enough attention...). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's official.  1-year, $2M.  Arbitrator's ruling.  

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stony said:

So it's official.  1-year, $2M.  Arbitrator's ruling.  

 

Seems kind of dumb that they didn’t settle at $2M x 1yr before the arbitration hearing seeing as the ruling landed exactly where pretty much everyone expected it to land when it came out that the Sabres were at $1.5M and ERod at $2.65M.

 

Also, Im guessing the reason that the Sabres chose a 1 year term is that he is a UFA in 2 years time. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stony said:

So it's official.  1-year, $2M.  Arbitrator's ruling.  

see above..arbitrator needs to pick on or tother, this was a negotiated deal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

see above..arbitrator needs to pick on or tother, this was a negotiated deal 

The arbitrator can pick whatever amount he wants. I believe you are thinking of baseball where iirc the arbitrator picks one of the 2 offers. But in NHL arbitration the arbitrator sets whatever amount he feels is right. 

 

The sabres press release even says it was the arbitrators ruling -

 

Quote

The terms of the contract were based on the ruling of an independent arbitrator.

 

Because ERod is the one who filed, the Sabres got to pick the term -> 1 or 2 years. 

 

And the Sabres could only walk away from the ruling if the arbitrator set a salary above $4 or $4.5M (or something like that). 

 

Edit - here’s a link explaining the NHL arbitration process if you’re interested 

 

https://www.dkpittsburghsports.com/2019/07/06/nhl-salary-arbitration-rules-faq-aston-reese-tlh/

Edited by BillsFan4
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillsFan4 said:

 

Seems kind of dumb that they didn’t settle at $2M x 1yr before the arbitration hearing seeing as the ruling landed exactly where pretty much everyone expected it to land when it came out that the Sabres were at $1.5M and ERod at $2.65M.

 

Also, Im guessing the reason that the Sabres chose a 1 year term is that he is a UFA in 2 years time. 

 

Sabres are super tight with the cap at just a hair over $3.1m of room and they still have a couple guys to sign like McCabe and Ullmark so perhaps they were hoping for a lower amount to be awarded. That half million is significant when you’re up against the cap. 

 

Methinks JBotts will be making some moves very soon. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, K-9 said:

 

Sabres are super tight with the cap at just a hair over $3.1m of room and they still have a couple guys to sign like McCabe and Ullmark so perhaps they were hoping for a lower amount to be awarded. That half million is significant when you’re up against the cap. 

 

Methinks JBotts will be making some moves very soon. 

Good point. I forgot how close to the cap they are after signing MoJo. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The below link is a Buffalo News article somewhat about Skinner and the additions to the roster. The article didn't offer anything new. It was noted that the additions were added without much cost. An interesting issue for this team is whether to keep the top line in tact or split it up to bolster the second line. My preference is to keep this superlative line in tact and do your best to cobble a respectable second line together. Hopefully, there will be more secondary scoring from the lower lines.

 

As others have pointed out the main issue of interest for this offseason is whether there will be a Risto deal or other deals. I would love to see some genuine second line talent added to the second line. We shall see.  

 

https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/25/buffalo-sabres-jeff-skinner-jimmy-vesey-smashfest-toronto-nhl-news-2019/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

The arbitrator can pick whatever amount he wants. I believe you are thinking of baseball where iirc the arbitrator picks one of the 2 offers. But in NHL arbitration the arbitrator sets whatever amount he feels is right. 

 

The sabres press release even says it was the arbitrators ruling -

 

 

Because ERod is the one who filed, the Sabres got to pick the term -> 1 or 2 years. 

 

And the Sabres could only walk away from the ruling if the arbitrator set a salary above $4 or $4.5M (or something like that). 

 

Edit - here’s a link explaining the NHL arbitration process if you’re interested 

 

https://www.dkpittsburghsports.com/2019/07/06/nhl-salary-arbitration-rules-faq-aston-reese-tlh/

did we not always learn it had to be one or the other?  i am just getting old i guess!

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/suomalaistahti-rasmus-ristolainen-vaihtaa-seuraa-nhl-ssa/7493272?fbclid=IwAR3VVkpuzji6gC7deVeJ45_PQhsKzMd9_t4JHaaccQt6dF74te_Qo86fENE#gs.rxhd2d

 

article from a Finnish news source (MTV it’s called) that I am told by numerous Finnish friends is very reliable and wouldn’t report this unless it was true. They said it’s kind of the equivalent of NHL.com - a site that only reports real, confirmed news. 

 

 

Apparently the title of the article is “Ristolainen switches to a new NHL team”. (according to my Finnish friend). He says there isn’t any real details on the trade in the article. no team is named but this MTV claims to have received confirmation that a deal involving Ristolainen is very close and will happen before the season starts.

 

 

Take it with a grain of salt, but I just figured I’d share. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli/suomalaistahti-rasmus-ristolainen-vaihtaa-seuraa-nhl-ssa/7493272?fbclid=IwAR3VVkpuzji6gC7deVeJ45_PQhsKzMd9_t4JHaaccQt6dF74te_Qo86fENE#gs.rxhd2d

 

article from a Finnish news source (MTV it’s called) that I am told by numerous Finnish friends is very reliable and wouldn’t report this unless it was true. They said it’s kind of the equivalent of NHL.com - a site that only reports real, confirmed news. 

 

 

Apparently the title of the article is “Ristolainen switches to a new NHL team”. (according to my Finnish friend). He says there isn’t any real details on the trade in the article. no team is named but this MTV claims to have received confirmation that a deal involving Ristolainen is very close and will happen before the season starts.

 

 

Take it with a grain of salt, but I just figured I’d share. 

 

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:
MTV Sports reports that defender Rasmus Ristolainen will not continue in the Buffalo Sabers next season. 

The 24-year-old Ristolainen is the No. 1 pick for the Sabers Round of Summer 2013. He has played in the club for six
seasons.

 

 

MTV Sports reports that a player trade is being built around Ristola in North America. The star defender still has 
three years left on his contract.

He signed a six-year contract with Sabers in the summer of 2016, earning him $ 5.4 million (about $ 4.86 million) 
in annual salary. There have been several rumors of transferring from Ristolainen over the summer and the player 
trade is now in the pipeline.

 

Buffalo has not survived the playoffs in the previous eight seasons, so Ristola has no playoff experience. 
He has played from season to season in the backfields of Buffalo in big minutes.  Ristolainen has scored 
42 + 368 = 194 in 424 NHL matches. He has broken the 40-point mark in the last four seasons.
 
 
 
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The deal doesn’t kick in until next year, but they’re going to Have To do something...

 

They still have to sign Point this offseason. How much he gets will determine a lot. 

 

They probably have to make a move this year, but definitely by next year for sure.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/lightning

 

looking at 2020, they have $14M in cap space (but that doesn’t include Brayden Point extension, so that number will definitely be smaller), but that’s with only 13 players on their NHL roster (14 if you count Point). They need 21. 

 

Plus they have some good RFA’s that will need deals in 2020. 

- Cernak

- Cirelli

- Sergachev 

 

 

The likeliest trade candidates (Palat, Gourd, Johnson) all have NTC’s and took more team friendly deals to stay in Tampa (no tax, cup contender). 

 

Ill definitely be interested to see what they do. 

 

Go get Point somehow, Botterill! lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

$9.5M AAV

 

I don't think ANY goalie in this era is worth that kinda coin.  These contracts are going to cause a lockout...almost guaranteed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

I don't think ANY goalie in this era is worth that kinda coin.  These contracts are going to cause a lockout...almost guaranteed.

Florida went out and spent a lot of money on Bobrovsky who was a free agent. Was he worth the contract? To Florida he was. If the organization believed that he was going to be a difference maker then he was worth the money to them. The same reasoning applies to Tampa with their expensive signing of Vasilevskiy. The Lightening are certainly a cup contending team. If they believe that he is going to provide elite goaltending on a consistent basis then he is worth the contract.

 

The amount of the contract isn't the challenging issue. As you imply it is the length of the contract that is the big issue. If you make a bad judgment on a player (regardless of position) with a long contract that will be debilitating. There are a variety of ways to build a good team. If an organization decides that their goalie is  going to be one of their anchor players for a long time then I don't see a problem using a larger portion of one's cap for a superior goalie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don’t blame them. IMO He was pretty awful and may have set that team backs years in his short time on the job. 

 

 

 

I followed him in Minnesota because he interviewed for the Sabres job and i guess he really, really wanted the job. Who knows, maybe it would have turned out different here since we were rebuilding. He reportedly wanted to start a rebuild in Minnesota but wasn’t allowed to by ownership (Leipold feels the team is a few tweaks away from contending...yikes! lol). 

 

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/predators-paul-fenton-very-interested-in-sabres-gm-job

 

PREDATORS’ PAUL FENTON VERY INTERESTED IN SABRES GM JOB

‘Just in case the Buffalo Sabres didn’t already know, Paul Fenton is interested in being their next GM. Very, very interested. In a business where most people tiptoe around their prospects for future employment, the Nashville Predators assistant GM has done everything but hire a sky writer and fly it over the First Niagara Center.’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2019 at 12:08 PM, Alaska Darin said:

I don't think ANY goalie in this era is worth that kinda coin.  These contracts are going to cause a lockout...almost guaranteed.

There is probably going to be no hockey when the current CBA expires one way or the other.


The NHL loves to shaft fans in that manner.  

 

I would honestly miss 3 consecutive seasons with the mother of all labor wars if it would result in the elimination of guaranteed contracts for NHL hockey players.  That has ruined the game, at least in the regular season.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

There is probably going to be no hockey when the current CBA expires one way or the other.


The NHL loves to shaft fans in that manner.  

 

I would honestly miss 3 consecutive seasons with the mother of all labor wars if it would result in the elimination of guaranteed contracts for NHL hockey players.  That has ruined the game, at least in the regular season.

 

 

I don't have a problem with guaranteed contracts but they need to max at 4/5 years, not 7/8.  It's ridiculous that the Sabres are going to be paying Skinner that kinda coin in his mid-30s.

20 hours ago, JohnC said:

Florida went out and spent a lot of money on Bobrovsky who was a free agent. Was he worth the contract? To Florida he was. If the organization believed that he was going to be a difference maker then he was worth the money to them. The same reasoning applies to Tampa with their expensive signing of Vasilevskiy. The Lightening are certainly a cup contending team. If they believe that he is going to provide elite goaltending on a consistent basis then he is worth the contract.

 

The amount of the contract isn't the challenging issue. As you imply it is the length of the contract that is the big issue. If you make a bad judgment on a player (regardless of position) with a long contract that will be debilitating. There are a variety of ways to build a good team. If an organization decides that their goalie is  going to be one of their anchor players for a long time then I don't see a problem using a larger portion of one's cap for a superior goalie. 

I know why they do it...I just don't agree with the strategy.  In the analytics era, goalies are among the most replaceable players so it makes little sense to give either that amount or that term.

 

I'd bet good money that they end up regretting that contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

I don't have a problem with guaranteed contracts but they need to max at 4/5 years, not 7/8.  It's ridiculous that the Sabres are going to be paying Skinner that kinda coin in his mid-30s.

 

Agreed..NBA i think max at 5? maybe 4 i am not sure. 

 

But what is the NHL willing to give up for the players to agree to that?

 

And in terms of Skinner..are the Sabres still not paying Erhoff?🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

I don't have a problem with guaranteed contracts but they need to max at 4/5 years, not 7/8.  It's ridiculous that the Sabres are going to be paying Skinner that kinda coin in his mid-30s.

I know why they do it...I just don't agree with the strategy.  In the analytics era, goalies are among the most replaceable players so it makes little sense to give either that amount or that term.

 

I'd bet good money that they end up regretting that contract.

If a long termed contracted goalie is instrumental in helping your team be a Cup winner or a seriously contending team for an extended period of time then the signing would be worth it. There are ways to mitigate the downside of a long term contract such as front loading, buyout clauses and simply being judicious about who you offer the extended contracts to. If a player is over 30 and signs one of those bonanza and extended contracts then the risks increase. However, if a player such as Jack signs one of these deals when he is 22 then you are actually getting a bargain because the salary scale typically goes up each year.   

 

No one is forcing an organization to sign these types of contracts. It's not a bad strategy for some teams to not sign their star free agent and instead allow the player to leave and then use that salary amount to procure a player or two to add to the roster. In essence the decision to pay out or not has as much to do with cap management and analytics. No one is forcing an organization to pay out to keep a player or bring in a player. If the deal doesn't make sense for you then you go in a different direction. It happens all the time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

$800k is obviously a bit low, but $2.65M seems way too high to me. 

 

Hoping for something around $1-1.3M. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

 

 

 

$800k is obviously a bit low, but $2.65M seems way too high to me. 

 

Hoping for something around $1-1.3M. 

I’ll predict it comes in at $1.7m.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2019 at 11:38 AM, BillsFan4 said:

 

 

 

 

That picture reminds me of shrunken head Beatlejuice.  It's amazing what goalie pads can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, JohnC said:

There are ways to mitigate the downside of a long term contract such as front loading, buyout clauses 

Nada..neither one of those things are  readily available in the NHL. You can pay the player $60M as a signing bonus and $1M salaries for a 6 year deal, cap hit is still $11M per year for life of the contract.

 

Buyouts are regulated by the CBA..and if you front load the amount of salary cap relief becomes so small compared to say the $11M cap hit you have above. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...