pi2000

like this?

Was wondering why they didn't pull Gibson to try and win in regulation. How could they not know the situation? Inexcusable.

Caps re-sign Dmitro Orlov

That article (if you can call it that) was hard to read. Brutal.

-2 for the tourney.... the trend continues. Time to throw him in the woodchipper. Seriously tho, I liked his game this tournament was more assertive than he's been in the past.

My intention wasn't to slam Vanek. My point is that he peaked (statistically) at 21-22 years old. How do we know Risto hasn't peaked? Did Vanek slack off a bit after signing the 7-year deal? Probably some... did Myers? yeah likely. Let's not see what happens to Risto by giving him the same term at the same stage of his development. We'd all like to think he's the next Lidstrom, or OEL, or guys like that. But we don't know, and honestly his shortcomings are things like foot speed and agility, hand-eye, etc.. things I'm not convinced he can improve... maybe he can, maybe he does get a step quicker or more fluid. Let me put it this way.... if this is the best Risto will ever be, do you still offer him an 8-year deal?

Risto was a team worst -21 last season, on a .500 team that had a -21 goal differential. Bogo was a -11. Gorges a -7. Those are the only 3 d-men to avg >20min a game. Why is Risto so much worse than Bogo and Gorges? If his poor +/- is due to a ###### D partner, then why doesn't that guy have nearly as bad a +/-? I'm not being sarcastic, I'd really am trying to understand why we shouldn't read so much into Risto's terrible +/- when compared to others on the team. And you can't argue that he's out there all the time, because then he should be out there for goals for as well. I can name probably 5 times as many players who packed it in after signing a max term deal, than those who took their game to the next level. And how many players have career years coming up on their contract year? Too many to mention. You know Vanek and Risto personally? What makes them so much different than each other at 21?

McLellan should cut him some slack. It's widely known that he's still recovering from an acute case of veseyitis, he'll be fine.

He was supposed to be the cornerstone of the franchise, nobody predicted his decline back then, we all wanted him to get that long term deal. He scored 42g in Roch as a 19 year old, 43g in BUF two years later, hovered around the 40g mark during his ELC, then signed a 7 year deal and packed it in. Maybe if we only gave him a 4 or 5 year deal, he'd have maintained his work ethic?

This is where being a GM gets tough. You have to be very careful about who you give term. You have to be absolutely certain those guys are the future core of your franchise if you go max term. We all know how that worked out with Myers and Vanek.

+/- means something, it's a statistic for a reason. You can't make assumptions about players by looking only at their +/-, but it does help paint the picture of who that player is. Do you think OEL would be where he is today if signed for 8-years instead of 6? Maybe, maybe not. If Risto becomes OEL at age 26-27, then the team is like a contender at that point and he wants to stick around, so you open negotiations on an extension before the final year in his deal. This isn't Darcy running the team anymore.... eg, O'Reilly had one year left on his deal when GMTM signed him to an extension. Maybe Risto can get more money somewhere else at that point, but will he want to leave? Did Stamkos leave? Kopitar? Getzlaf? etc.. (not sure why I bolded everything, it) Anyway, like I said above, if he becomes a top defender the team is likely contending, he won't want to leave, we'll sign him to an extension before he even gets to his final year. Will it be costly? Likely, but you'll have a highly motivated player in years 3-4 of his deal so he can maximize his value... it's those years I want to see the Sabres hoisting the Cup, anything after that is just gravy. Yeah, OEL is great, that contract worked well, he has continued to develop knowing a career contract is on the horizon... if he signed 8 years, maybe he's not so motivated as a 22, 23, 24 year old. I'd be OK with 6 years, but no more. OEL has been a near 0 +/- player even on bad ARI teams, he was a -18 the year they tanked, Risto was a -32 that season. Therefore I grant Risto 5 years, not 6.

You can't just look at the contract the length from purely a salary cap standpoint. There is a chance that an 8-year deal at his age will derail his career by removing some incentive to reach his full potential. A 5-year deal keeps him motivated to keep improving... a 3-year deal likely pisses him off, I think he's shown enough that 5 years is fair value and keeps him working hard for his next contract. WRT +/-, I compared top defensemen (by TOI) on teams with similar goal differentials. Risto is by far the worst, I'm still waiting for an explanation why. OEL plays the same minutes on a worse team and is in the single digit range which is respectable. In fact, OEL signed a 6 year $5.5mil deal at age 21, which has worked out well... even he didn't get 8 years.

So they need to compromise :) Which is why I think 5 gets it done. Doesn't mean he's gone after year 5, you resign him well before that if he develops, or you trade him for what would amount to a hefty return. I'll say it again, he hasn't shown enough to warrant an 8-year deal. He's slow on puck retrievals and doesn't have very good hands or quickness, his transitions (backward to forward mostly) are slow and clumsy at times. He gets beat wide quite often... see McDavid last season, or Matthews in the World Cup on Eichel's goal. Yeah, those are some great players, but you need your franchise defenseman to be able to defend those guys. Murray didn't draft him and yes, most folks who know anything about hockey like him as a prospect. He took his game to another level last season, but that needs to continue for another few years before you lock him up for nearly a decade. Dmitri Kalinin is a guy that comes to mind, he too was a nice prospect but never developed... how do you know this isn't the best we'll ever see from Risto? If this is his best, are you still willing to give him 8 years? Yeah I get it, +/- can be considered a team stat, but guess what... Risto is a big part of that team, he's on the ice for those goals against, so you can't just ignore that stat completely. He was a -21 on a .500 team last season.... that's terrible. Let's look at other .500 teams top defensemen (by minutes played).... BUF -21 (team goal diff), Risto -21, Bogo -11 NJD -24, Greene +7, Larsson +15 COL -24, Beauchamin -7, E. Johnson -19 MTL -15, Subban +4, Markov -6 ARI -36, OEL -6, Stone -10 WPG -24, Byfuglien +4, Myers +6, Trouba +10

That's all fantastic stuff, lets not take that away by giving him a career contract at this point. I want to see him contiue to improve and maximize his potential. Give him 5 now, then 8 later if he's worth it... right noe he isn't IMO.

I get the point about the plus minus is not a perfect stat and he's been on some bad teams and such. Yeah, but still when you commit $50mil to a guy you need to have something other than "he has potential" to hang your hat on. I dont care how bad the team is around you, if you're a -68 in less than 200 games, you have to shoulder some of the blame. Guys with potential who have a poor statistical history should not get 8 year deals. That's absurd IMO, maybe it's just me, maybe thats just the modern NHL? I don't know. 8 year deals are for guys who have a proven track record of excellence. Don't get me wrong I really like Risto as a PROSPECT, he's not yet a bona fide supestar, and by giving him that type of deal this early in his career may take away his incentive to fulfill his potential.

Risto has shown what exactly? He's a 21 year old defenseman who is a -68 in < 200 career NHL games, who is produces less offense than Tyler Myers. Sure, let's give him an 8 year deal, sounds reasonable.

They lose a lot of battles, not good.

So why not give every RFA on the team 8 year deals? No downside because you can just trade them right? Lock them up before they blossom?

Disagree. If he regresses you're stuck with his contract for at least 6-7 years. No team is willing to take on that contract in years 1-5. You better be damn sure he's the real deal and not another Tyler Myers.

Eichel and Reinhart have 2 years remaining.... Bogo is on the books at $5mil for 4 more years. Moulson and Ennis both around $5mil for 3 more years. UFAs coming off the books in 3 years or less... Kane (5.2), Gionta (4.2), Kulikov (4.3), Gorges (3.9), Franson (3.3). Some of those guys will be resigned, others won't, but they're all be replaced by another contract in some way shape or form. I'd go 4-years for Risto, but that doesn't buy any UFA years. 5-years seems like the sweet-spot, gives BUF time to evaluate his progress, keeps him motivated, gives them a likely solid piece moving forward they don't need to worry about resigning while taking care of guys like Eichel, Reinhart, Lehner, McCabe, Nylander when his ELC expires within 5 years, etc.. Also gives Risto some financial security, but not too much pressure of being the future franchise defenseman as BUF will have flexibility to be active on the free agent market... and when that deal is up, or after year 4 if Risto has taken his game to the next level he can get paid accordingly, if he sputters out, then move him or let him walk, but atleast you're not on the hook for another 3-4 years hoping to send the contract to Vegas or wherever. Again, it's not just numbers and wether or not it makes sense from a salary cap persepective, it's how an 8-year deal will affect his development vs a shorter deal that gives him plenty of motivation to continue developing his game. He's 21, not even he probably knows how he would react to a $50mil guaranteed payday. Money does strange things to people, let's not take the chance of ruining this young man's career.

You lost me at "year 5 ends and you have all these players tied up..... Rasumus needs a new deal". If he's all that and a bag of chips, you don't let it get that point (unless you're Darcy). You either re-sign him to extension after year 4, try to sign him throughout year 5, or move him at the deadline for a nice return. There is ZERO chance GMTM would let it get to the point where he walks away for nothing. That said, let's say you offer a 3 year bridge. Rasmus is like "WTF Tim? Don't you believe in me?". 3 years go by, he gets moderately better then tells his agent he doesn't want to play in Buffalo for fear of another low-ball RFA deal. I don't see Rasmus accepting a 3 year bridge deal in any scenario. Also, the scenario about comfy cozy financial security and too much pressure are not mutually exclusive. He'll feel pressure to perform, to live up to expectations, feel like he has to do too much on the ice, but at the same time when he should be training in the offseason he might just decide he'd rather spend time enjoying his money. When you were 21, what decisions would you have made knowing you had financial security for life, with nearly $50mil coming your way over the next 8 years or so... GUARANTEED, no matter what you did with your life. But who knows, maybe he really is a hard-working type of person who doesn't value money... but are you willing to bet $50mil on it, when you could wager half that amount to find out?

First, just because you sign him to a 5-year deal doesn't mean he will undoubtedly hit free agency. If he continues his upward projection in years 1 to 3 and 4 of the 5-year contract, then you have more than enough time to start negotiating an extension. If he regresses in years 1-3, you're not locked in for 5 more years, you can either sign him for market value after year 5, or move him if some other team makes an acceptable offer. To your points (in bold).... Myers scored 37 points his second year, only 4 points fewer than Risto's 3rd year, and 10 points better than his second year. Risto's hasn't yet reached Myers rookie mark of 48 points in a season. Myers also won the Calder, I don't think anybody saw his decline coming. What is it about Risto's character that make you less concerned about him if he's granted life-long financial security at the age 21? I agree you can likely trade that deal to some team that needs to hit the floor. There's also the concern about how a long term deal will affect his mindset. I wonder what Myers could've become if he wasn't given that large deal at a young age. I'm a strong believer in dangling that carrot in front of these guys at a young age until they reach their full potential. You see it happen in every sport, young guy comes in lights the world on fire or everybody tells him how great he's gonna be. He gains financial security at a young age and suddenly stops developing and everybody wonders what's wrong with him. If you give him an 8-year deal you increase the chance that he regresses (comfy cozy financial security for life, additional burden as presumed future franchise defenseman). IMO if you offer only a 3-year bridge, it will likely rub him the wrong way and would be a bad message to the rest of the league on how Buffalo treats their star prospects. A 5 year deal is a nice compromise. You buy 1 year of UFA status, you keep him motivated for his next deal, and you don't put the burden of "future all-star defenseman" on his shoulders. All money aside, if Risto continues to work like he has, the sky is the limit for him, I truly believe that. But saddling him with a monster contract could backfire in a big way, not just for his development, but for the Sabres as a franchise.

Let's compare Risto's first 3 season to Tyler Myers: Risto: 194gp 19g 46a 65pts -68 Myers: 217gp 29g 69a 98pts +18 That's a +/- differential of 86 goals....Myers got a 7-year deal and got run out of town. You want to give Risto 8-years? What makes you think Risto is any different than Myers? If anything, he's shown much less his first 3 years than Myers did, and you're willing to bet the farm on him? So you give him an 8-year deal, and he regresses, what do you do? You're stuck with an untradeable contract. He's taking money away from guys like Eichel, Reinhart, Nylander, McCabe, maybe even guys like Lehner and O'Reilly. It could be a franchise alerting mistake unless you are 1000% sure that he'll be a top-10 defenseman in the league for years to come. And at 21 with < 200 NHL games played, you don't know the answer to that question unless he's Bobby Orr.

Who would you replace with Reinhart? Trochek maybe?

Disagree. An 8 year deal for a 21 year old defensemen who is a career -68 in 3 NHL seasons could turn out to be a huge mistake. Sure he's eating big minutes on Team Finland, but there are still areas of his game he needs to improve. Giving him a 6-8 year deal and you put yourself at risk should he regress due to a comfortable contract. 5-years seems fair, 3 would be even better IMO, but Bogo's $5mil doesn't come off the books for 4 more years, and you'll have guys like Eichel and Reinhart with new deals in 2 years... the money simply might not be there in 3-4 years... 5 years, definitely.