All Activity

People seem to automatically conclude Kevyn does horrible trades. The Mitts trade was fairly good, so was the McLeod and JJP (although both of these will have to play out over the next 5 years). The Eichel trade was the best we could get - but if we have to argue this one, the real argument should be what led up to it. The Sammy trade is interesting. I always thought he was about to break out, especially given how well he played his final season here. But, he wanted to leave and given this, I’m sure Adams got what he could. I bet there are 31 other teams who wish they bid higher. Point your fingers at them. The Norris trade? I don’t know how this will eventually turn out. We got damaged goods. Cozens seems to be doing OK in Ottawa (14 pts in 19 gp) but still is -10. At least they have a real player, I suppose. Either way, both have bad contracts.

Details schmetails.

Josh Dunne, hits, fights and has an AAV of 775k.

I believe the window to get the best return and settle the goalie issue is open now while there are still players out with injuries. You waive UPL and he makes it through his value is virtually forever tarnished by that. It would take a long time and a consistent level of play UPL has barely managed once before to recover. GMKA needs to trade him now for whatevers and take what Adams would consider an ego punch, although, ironically, smart Sabres fans would actually appreciate the move.

Yes, UPL to the Blues rescue! 🤣

It's a team effort. Fairburn calls it Kev-mo. 🤣

And hardmans slot may be taken by Coleman? Maybe not, perhaps they keep him inactive and just elevate codrington.

Always worry about injuries but if you can trade UPL and one of Ellis or Lyon gets hurt, you call up Levi. If Ellis or Lyon fall off a cliff, you call up Levi. It’s not rocket science except for probably Adams

I am certain they are listening for offers on goalies right now. But they aren't going to fire sale them.

Except for one 3 month period, UPL has proven to be a below replacement level goalie, not counting his last year in juniors. He’s not becoming the next ullmark

Don't make it about his performance? It's entirely about his performance.

Nate Danielson scored a goal for the Red Wings by dragging the puck around the goalie and tucking it into the goal... and Mickey Redmond described it as "scored a goal like Tage Thompson." 🙂 But then they said it was offside.

Then again, UPL has one clean OT and 5 frame shoot out win. Ellis can’t say the same.

I'm thinking forward not creating crises. If you are a good GM you can't wait for the crisis, you have to think ahead about what is coming and what you need. You know there will be extra roster players very soon. You also see you just lost your D man for "an extended time" so if you want to compete seriously you make a move. You at least try and look for opportunities. I don't want to blow a season on any sort of if only they'd................

Fair points. My only q is: if Ellis keeps is play up, and I see no reason why he can’t given his style, and Lyon regresses just a little (it’s started already) but is still a decent 1B, what happens to Levi next year? I guess you could trade him but not sure what you’d get? If Ellis is really the real deal, there’s not much use for Levi as this 3 goalie thing is idiotic Played the last 2 games, will play again cs Calgary tomorrow and we have 2 other goalies who need work. Pretty obvious

Consistency is exactly the issue though. That's why he is garbage. You don't get that consistency or effort. Not just game to game, sometimes in the same game. If I'm the coach I want guys who I can rely on. Guys that give me whatever they give all the time and every shift.

Josh Allen final TD "Hit the ***** weight room! Hit the ***** weight room!"

Interesting. Thanks for that. Will stand corrected on this. The way the 2013 CBA is written, it reads that all salary due in an individual year would get prorated to either 1/3, 2/3, or in rare cases 3/3's should a buy-out occur. But it appears based on what you'd linked and a couple other sites that signing bonuses become guaranteed when the contract is signed even though the money can be deferred within the contract. Deferred bonuses expliciitly muut be paid after the contract runs out. Very interesting. Not the 1st item that is addressed in a manner that seems to contradict what is in the CBA; doubt it'll be the last. Again, thank you for that. 🍺

Probably getting the callas’s sanded off that……that beautiful glove hand of his…..

You are creating artificial crises. Nothing has to be done immediately. You can stash UPL while you yet to trade him.

Well...NJ has to actually want him first.

With regards to "buyout proofing" - my understanding is it's not about preventing the buyout, it's about preserving the cash coming to the player post-buyout. The signing bonus are essentially the player's guaranteed money, while the base salary is what gets cut down to 2/3 or 1/3 after the buyout. So, the contrast Skinner's recently bought-out Sabres contract (2 signing bonus seasons of $7.5M = $15M guaranteed https://capwages.com/players/jeff-skinner What was left of his $57M base was subject to the 2/3 reduction. vs. Necas' new deal with Colorado (signing bonuses each season to the sum of $60.4M, even if bought out https://capwages.com/players/martin-necas And he only has the buyout reduction applied to up to $31M in remaining base salary.

Keon will play and deliver.

Davis was interviewed today saying he is ready to roll against Houston and feels good.

A few items on signing bonuses. 1. Fairburn stated that a guy can get a lot of the contract in a single year because of the possibility of getting a signing bonus; but he walked that back a bit saying you can get x on July 1 and then get y on the next July 1. The latter is true. But, unlike NFL contracts, ALL money (except for in the case of the the rare performance bonuses which not many players qualify for; if a player earns them and they would put the team over the salary cap in that year, then the part that puts the team over the cap gets moved to the following year) earned in a league year counts against the player's share of earnings in that league year. And all of those earned $'s go into what the player nominally earns in a particular year and there are still limitations on how much salary can vary from year to year. The player's contract can't be overly front nor back loaded. 2. A signing bonus (that isn't accompanied with a NMC/NTC) ends up making a player much more tradable because salary cap salary gets charged against the cap each day of the regular season. So, if a guy got 90% of his contract in a salary bonus; then the next team gets 100% of the cap hit for the rest of that league year after the trade, but only has to pay the guy 10% of that contract's remaining value. 3. Ordinary course buy-outs happen at the end of a league year; so his stuff about a player becoming unbuyoutable by having a signing bonus which starts on the 1st day of the new league year doesn't really come into play. UNLESS the team has arbitration hearings and they then can buy-out salaries during the league year, or if the team and player agree to terminate the contract, or if the team is terminating the contract for cause. But in that very last case, the club could likely win a suit to claw back a portion of that current season's signing bonus. So, he's likely right in rare cases, but in general, don't believe it will actually factor in to a decision to buy-out a player or not. Teams buy-out the remaining years of a contract, not the current year of a contract (for most cases; not counting the few exceptions already described). EDIT: While all that is technically correct, it looks like signing bonuses are treated differently than other salary with regards to buy-outs; the "signing bonus" regardless of which league year it is due in apparently is considered to have already been earned at the time the contract was signed, so it is NOT subject to ordinary course buy-out haircutting. So, having a signing bonus does appear to guarantee a player additional money should his contract get bought out. 4. He is right that a team that doesn't want a cash flow hit, like the Sabres seem be in that category, will be less inclined to give a signing bonus than one that doesn't care. 5. Signing bonuses can be offered in particular years, all years, or no years during the duration of a contract. Players traditionally tried to include large signing bonuses in years that the CBA is expected to expire as a form of lockout/strike protection. The player can get through a lockout a lot easier if he's already been paid. And signing bonuses can also vary in how big they are too yearly. 6. And, yes, once the player has the money in pocket, he can be trying to put it to work for himself having it earn additional money; but at most he's getting 1 year of time with a fraction of that money. So, it isn't quite the boon that he makes it out to be. It's not like the NFL where a player gets the signing bonus today and it gets charged against the cap over a series of years. Again, that signing bonus counts against league player's total salary in the year it is earned and the total earned salary that year needs to be close enough to what the player is earning in other years to keep the contract compliant with cap rules. Tuch isn't goint to get $39MM in signing bonus in year 1 with $1MM in salary that year; get $10MM in salary in years 2, 3, and 4 and then get $2.5MM in salary in each of the final 4 years of the deal. Those Christian Ehrhoff style deals don't exist anymore.