nfreeman
-
Posts
22,090 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by nfreeman
-
-
Gotta be this region. Everything here is wrong. Order a cheese pizza in northeastern Pennsyltucky and I will bet you that it has onions on it. When I order a large cheese pizza the phone call usually takes another 2-3 minutes to specify that I don't want onions, and that the pie should be NY style. "Don't you me round?" No! I mean NY ###### style pizza! There are 2 kinds of pizza, NY and Chicago. I might allow Sicilian as an option but you'd have to make a compelling argument. This area has a severe NY inferiority complex.
Anyway, new complaint: Furnaces! That is all.
Chicago style pizza is an abomination, like all Chicago food.
-
Well if the Vanek report didn't come from the agent, who's left? Didn't the Sabres say something similar after Drury and Briere left, that they were willing to match any offer?
It's quite possible that it came from the agent -- i.e. planting the "highest paid player in the NHL" concept for harvesting this July.
-
So here we have a dedicated player who is a hard working blue collar kind of guy, since he's had to prove himself through every step of his career. A player that gets in front of the net and gets most of his goals in close. A consistent 30+ goal scorer (who hasn't been with Tavares for all of those 30+ goal years) and could be had for a reasonably low price. Not to mention all the talk about hitting the cap floor if/when Stafford and Miller are eliminated from this roster, on top of the fact we got a 1st and 2nd round to boot.
Isn't he exactly the kind of player Sabres fans have been dying for for years? Am I missing something? I just don't get it.
What is the basis for this statement? He's got 3 consecutive 30-goal seasons -- and maybe 4 if he keeps it up this year. Someone will give him a fat UFA contract -- and for the Sabres to keep him they'll need to beat his other offers by 20% or more. Think $6.5MM x 6 years.
-
Also true, I do not deny this fact. I question it's merit however, given the youth on the team, would management really want to bring in players that are here merely for a pay check? Is it just me, or do others believe that is a bad example to be giving the youth of the team, especially when they see this and their 3rd contract comes up, or 2nd, depending on the talent level? I see all kinds of bad things happening if the team went that route contract wise.
Well, I agree that the attitude that a veteran brings is important. I think the Sabres will also view it as important, though, and will be careful about who they bring in -- and let's not forget that we're talking about a replacement for Stafford, so any vet with a reasonable work ethic and esprit de corps will be an improvement.
-
This is true. However, how many of those players signed and how many came via trade?
I think you may be failing to appreciate a critical fact: if a FA has a choice between playing in Buffalo (or for any other terrible team) for $4MM or not playing in the NHL, 90%+ of the time that FA will take the $$ and play for the lousy team.
-
Great, name me a few that would be willing to come to Buffalo at 4 mil or more a season. I doubt you'll find many, and in my opinion, any for that matter with Buffalo going into full rebuild mode.
Hate to say it, but Stafford and Leino aren't going anywhere anytime soon IMHO.
Your right, they don't, because of Stafford and Leino type contracts. Yet, once again, I think both of you are way off base. No player is coming to the Sabres at 4 mil or more a season and more productive than Stafford or Leino, if they are more productive, there are other destinations that aren't in full rebuild mode to go to.
I think your both wrong, it will prove to be much more difficult than you think to replace those contracts to reach the cap floor if you move them.
First, there are plenty of FAs who won't find a $4MM chair when the music stops in July.
Second, there are plenty of overpriced guys under contract whose teams will want to be rid of them -- so the Sabres can pick them up in trade.
I agree that no one is going to trade for Stafford or Leino -- but that doesn't mean the Sabres couldn't buy out or waive either or both of them.
Ennis and Foligno are UFA at the end of this season, IIRC.
Signing both will help with the floor situation. Foligno is coming off his EL contract and will be in line for a pretty big raise. Ennis is coming off a just shy of $3 million cap hit salary and will likely command more.
Then there is Ott to be resigned, if he isn't traded. Cody Mc and Moulson and Scott.
Ennis and Foligno are both RFA, not UFA.
-
Stafford isn't going anywhere until the end of his contract, the Sabres will need it to reach the Cap floor.
I think many on here forget about the Cap floor.
There are plenty of overpaid players in the NHL who the Sabres can pick up if they need to reach the floor -- and 90% of them will produce more than Stafford.
-
Doesn't that make this trade all the more a head scratcher from their side? So as someone pointed out the best they can do after realizing he isn't going to sign is to recoup their losses and blow any chance they had at re signing Moulson at the same time? Less they truly believe that Vanek plays lights out with Johnny T and they better their playoff berth and don't face Pittsburgh and get into the second round. I don't know. I just don't know.
FIRE SNOW!!! :-)
I think the most likely explanation is that (i) the Islanders' budget did not permit them to re-sign Moulson, (ii) they really want to try to win at least one round in the playoffs this year and were willing to sacrifice the value they would've gotten for Moulson at the deadline and (iii) they figured that Vanek is better than Moulson and, by the same logic, they were willing to sacrifice the extra draft picks to have Vanek for the rest of the season as opposed to Moulson.
I think that if the Islanders are on the playoff bubble or better at the deadline they will not trade Vanek and they will lose him to free agency after the season.
-
No, it just means that they want to have more flexibility for the remaining of THIS season. With the cap likely going up a lot next season and the fact that the Isles have a decent chunk of change coming off the book this offseason, they will offer him a good deal.
Even after adding Vanek, they still have almost $13MM in cap space this year. Do you think they are planning on adding more than that much in salary this year?
Tavares, a far better player than Vanek, only makes $5.5MM. I'm getting pretty skeptical that the Islanders are going to offer Vanek a fat extension.
-
True, but it makes more sense from the Isles' side of things now.
It also makes it seem less likely that they offer Vanek the moon and the stars to re-sign, innit? I.e. if they were concerned enough to negotiate for $1.3MM in cash relief, they are probably not inclined to offer Vanek a $60MM+ extension.
-
Hey! Joe Ba's in Buffalo!
Granted, Pegula and Joe Ba pile the kids in the same stationwagon for a Sunday trip to the beach....but he actually makes sense to hire.
There is something to be encouraged about here if it doesn't backfire....Battista is a good mix of business, hockey, common sense, and used car salesman. He is qualified for a position like this, and maybe even can help the fans out. He seems to have a high tempo common sense about him, which on one hand oozes out car salesman, but at the same time, he has some street smarts and honesty creeps into his comments all the time. He's as much of a good ol' boy Penn Stater as anyone, and runs the exact same lower level circles as Benson. He however took the Second Mile/Sandusky thing head on...and was unapologetic for seeing the good things about his dealings with some of the guilty people and organizations, while at the same time chastised the bad actions and apologized for not seeing things sooner. That was solid.
This is where I see this as a positive. Darcy.....you can't BS a BS'r. I can see Battista hanging around for a few months, scoping out Darcy, and having the actual balls to puff on a cigar with scotch in hand and tell Pegula.."This Darcy character ain't gonna get it done." Battista thinks big and has pulled off some projects in his time, and he says about 5x as many words as Darcy in the same period of time. I can see him taking command of a situation, and not being too impressed with Regier. I have heard a bunch of Battista's interviews and it seems he has a good feel for the intangibles of teambuilding and leadership.
Now....where this can backfire is if Pegula ends up putting Battista in as GM himself. I don't think they are that crazy, and Battista has enough common sense I would hope to push for an experienced NHL level guy. But between pushing Darcy out, overseeing some of the things with Black (I'd be a tad nervous if I were him as well, but not as much as Darcy), and doing deals on the Harbor Center front....Battista can make himself a hero. I don't think he sees any idea as too big, and even though he is buddy buddy with Pegula like Benson, he actually has played, coached, built a program, and run operations.
God Bless us all....I need a drink......
Good stuff. The idea that TP, seeing the train wreck on ice that is the Sabres this year, decided that he needed a trusted voice around who knows a bit about hockey and hockey organizations, and could evaluate the Sabres and DR is quite plausible.
-
What? He hasn't been on the losing end of a game with no points and minimal effect "for a long time?" Really?
I can appreciate that European translations aren't always indicative of the true intent of a message. But phuck that.
GO SABRES!!!
I think he was referring to the atmosphere, crowd noise, etc. The Nassau Coliseum is old and dumpy, but when the Islanders are good, the crowd is passionate and noisy and it's a great hockey atmosphere. Plus last night's opponent was the Rangers, so you had the civil war component.
Separately: I'm kinda hoping the Sabres re-sign Moulson (although I'm not expecting them to based on DR's presser), and I want to get rid of DR as much as the next guy, but it must be said that if DR got a #1 for Gaustad, he'll get at least that much for Moulson.
-
Shooting percentage is not too much different then. What about shot totals?
If you have the percentage and you have the goals, you oughtta be able to come up with the shot totals in about 10 seconds.
-
Let us take a look at 2009 to present. In 2009 Matt Moulson finally made the permanent transition from the AHL to the NHL which is the reason I am starting with that year. I am not counting this seasons stats so it ends with the regular season stats of the 2012/2013 season.
From 2009-2013:
Thomas Vanek - 106g, 122a, for 228pts
Matt Moulson - 112g, 102a, for 214pts
What this seems to equate to is that we traded Vanek's goal scoring prowess for better goal scorer with less assists plus we added picks. Now in the media and around the board a lot ppl have said that Tavares has inflated Moulson's numbers and that he is a average player who will see a big drop in his production. Until that does indeed happen, which I think is unlikely given how Hodgson passes, it seems Moulson may give us a little more in the goals department but overall Darcy got a very similar player back. Now obviously they have different styles of play but this trade is very interesting given that we saw Moulson's scoring already and the instant chemistry he generated with Hodgson.
This I think is the major draw back to Moulson is that he isn't as much of a two-way guy. Vanek definitely is better in his own end.
I would hold off on talking about the instant chemistry they have after a few games, It seems like every player that gets moved always has one of their best games in the first game they play in with their new team. If he continues scoring like he did on Monday, then we can talk about chemistry.
The commander is absolutely right about premature conclusions about Moulson and Hodgy.
I will also say that Ennis looked a lot better to me the other night than Hodgy did. In any case that line was much better than any Hodgy-Vanek line was at any point this season.
-
We'll, I'd like the Sabres to come out ahead in this trade too, but there's a whole lotta jumping to conclusions about Vanek in LI after one game going on here.
-
Toronto is in a pretty terrible cap situation, so them not taking on Vanek could be a result of that just as easily as Vanek being unwilling to sign there.
Edit: Put another way, how many teams want to invest $16MM in two wingers?
Well, allegedly Minnesota does (but I'm not convinced).
-
He'll never be waived. It makes no sense when they can just wait until the offseason, use a buyout, and have his cap hit completely removed. Some may say we could flirt with the cap floor with that and a few other moves, but I don't see that happening.
But can't they send him down (which involves waiving him) for the rest of the year and then buy him out? That would accomplish the "send the message" goal.
-
Stafford had an unforgivable failure to clear the puck on the PK last night that led directly to Dallas' 2nd goal. The Sabres had killed off 60%+ of the 4-minute penalty on Ott, Stafford had possession in the corner with plenty of time and space to clear it, and he just put it up the boards to Dallas' point man (who made a nice play to keep it in, but still).
I'm glad RR has been benching him. There needs to be some accountability in this franchise. Waiving Stafford would be a start.
-
I've seen some pretty ridiculous statements on here, and this is most likely the worst. Not even close to the right number.
Leaving aside the entirety of the group of posters here, I can think of several that you've authored that are substantially more ridiculous. In fact, there are a couple in this thread.
I agree with all of this. People seem to fail to realize he signed the offer sheet to leave. He was leaving. He didn't come back to the team and say look this is what I've got or anything just signed. So none of the current situation should surprise anyone. I did enjoy some of his time and often felt let down by him. As good as he is you there's more that he can give but chooses to coast etc. Good luck TV.
Good post.
F Vanek, I like Moulson better. :P
(I'm only half kidding, I always really liked Matt Moulson.)
Vanek never seemed like the "heart and soul" guy who wills his team to a championship through blood, sweat, and tears. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just never got the impression he was that sort of player. Talented for sure, but if he wants out, he wants out. Build around guys who want to be a Sabre.
+1
Keep going and get it closer to 100 and then I'll relax. Because that was more what I was calling out. It's somewhere between 40-70. Nowhere near 100.
Koivu (age), Eriksson (talent), Shattenkirk (position), OEL (position), Seguin (still unproven), Backstrom (talent) are not worth more than Vanek.
The point wasn't wrong, but the number was an exaggeration.
There is no "maximum salary." Nobody is paying him over $8 mill. I'd expect him to get something like 7 years, $49 mill or 8 and $53 million or so if extending.
Well there is a max, but Vanek isn't getting it. So I just pushed it aside.
It might be useful to think before you talk.
He's probably worth 6 for $45....someone will give him 7 for $56 if a crap team...and 7 for $50 if good. The Sabres would have had to give him 7 for $69 if reports are correct....
That's apesh!t crazy!!!
I agree with all of this, and I can actually see him getting $60MM+.
Malcontent in that you can't leave a guy on your roster for 3/4 of a year when everyone in the room knows he doesn't want to be there. That Vanek wanted out was the worst kept secret in the world. IMHO, you are best off with guys like that out of the room sooner rather than later (certainly Darcy could have moved him this summer).
Yes.
yeah but vanek is less "moveable" because of his huge contract. And they won't move him if he and tavares find chemistry and are in a playoff spot.
The cap impact declines as we approach the deadline. You are likely right about them not moving him in those circumstances though.
Wonder if Vanek's agent is the source for the Vogl tweet?
Good call. It probably didn't come from the Sabres.
-
My bad. For some reason I thought they won it when they were the #1 seed two years ago. The 'Nucks edged them out by 2 points. The point remains they went from 1st in the East, to 6th, and now to 13th at this moment (and yes, I know he's injured). Pominville regularly got ripped for not elevating the team, and yet it seems Callahan isn't held to that standard--it's enough that he plays a style people want to see here.
Respectfully, I don't think It's just a question of style. The year Callahan was named captain, they went from bubble playoff team to #1 in the EC. They dropped to #6 last year, but I kinda think last year was a strange year league-wide and for the Rangers in particular (and that Slats mighta made too many big moves based on an abbreviated season).
I'll also say that Callahan would've responded forcefully in a Lucic-Miller situation, unlike Pommer.
And for the record, I wish Pommer were still here, although I didn't like him being captain and I really didn't like his contract.
You're right that Callahan is hurt this year -- I forgot about his recent injury. Still, though, it's not a TC-level of injuries.
-
I know you didn't say Nash was on Crosby's level, just some friendly chiding :)
As far as capitulation goes, never! I simply don't think score effects on how teams play is even remotely the same thing as "clutchness" which I believe is what you're getting at.
I appreciate the chiding -- I think my response sounded more uptight than I intended.
I was indeed getting at "clutchness." But I think it's the flip side of the notion that it's easier to produce when the other team has taken its foot off the gas -- i.e. it's harder to produce when the pressure is at its highest and the other team is giving the max.
I've got time to wait for you to come around...
-
That would be a disgusting overpayment for Callahan IMO. He should get the Pominville contract at most. Yea yea grit blah blah...how far is that getting the Rangers? They go from President's Trophy winners, to eking into the playoffs, to barely better than the Sabres this year. Plus he's about as durable as Connolly.
When did the Rangers win the PT?
As for durability, Callahan has only missed significant time in 1 season since becoming a regular.
It would certainly be an overpayment, but there are a bunch of teams that will give him a Pommer contract.
He's the kind of legit top 6 forward the Sabres need to show the kids how to play the game.
-
Are you confusing me with someone else? At least this season I've never taken the position that our third period competitiveness is anything more than the other team going into Alamo mode.
PS: I'm still waiting for you to come around on the whole Rick Nash is a superstar close to Crosby thing. Any time now :P
Well, I've never put Nash on par with Crosby, who is in a class by himself in this generation IMHO. I continue to think Nash is a much better player than Vanek, Heatley, Gaborik and other snipers of that ilk -- and I expect you'll see him playing a big role again for the Canadian Olympic team. It's also worth noting that he played last year for a pretty defensive-minded coach in Tortorella and has been hurt this year.
As for the Sabres' 3rd period competitiveness, I think it's of a piece with the "key saves at key times" and "no goals by the top 6 in the 2nd and 3rd periods of a 7-game playoff series" debates that we've had.
I'll look forward to your capitulation.
-
@ NS
Rangers are struggling on the ice and with the cap.
Pegula will have the dollars, the cap room and a burning need and desire for a leader that is a model of difficult to play against.
No one will outspend him, or will want to. And he will be able to sell hard the idea of bringing Western New York hockey fans to the promised land.
Seven years, $7 million per for Callahan to come home?
I don't think it will happen either, but you better believe it is on TPeg's radar.
It would be fairly ironic for the Sabres to lure Drury redux away from the Rangers via an overly generous UFA deal, innit?
I'd love to see it though.
Vanek Traded to NYI for Matt Moulson, 1st in 2014 (or 2015!), 2nd in 2015; 4 Months Later: Moulson to MN for 2014/2016 2nd Rounders
in The Aud Club
Posted
Or maybe you communicate poorly.