LabattBlue Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 Way to let the price go up. :( Wah....we don't want to upset team chemistry. http://buffalonews.com/editorial/20070209/1009372.asp ..."I think the collective wisdom of both management and the players is that [contract negotiations are] not really something to do in the season," Sabres managing partner Larry Quinn said Thursday. "Once you do that, you go down a road that could divide the team, create anxiety for the player, create confusion. I understand the importance of both players, and it's our intent to try and keep them here. There's a time and place for it. It's just hard to do in the season." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Way to let the price go up. :( Wah....we don't want to upset team chemistry. http://buffalonews.com/editorial/20070209/1009372.asp ..."I think the collective wisdom of both management and the players is that [contract negotiations are] not really something to do in the season," Sabres managing partner Larry Quinn said Thursday. "Once you do that, you go down a road that could divide the team, create anxiety for the player, create confusion. I understand the importance of both players, and it's our intent to try and keep them here. There's a time and place for it. It's just hard to do in the season." Did you ever think both players do not want to deal with their contracts until the season is over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Did you ever think both players do not want to deal with their contracts until the season is over? Did you ever think that maybe Darcy should have addressed it PRIOR to the season starting? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mediumishot Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 "The closer you get to July 1, the odds are increasing towards a player leaving," Briere's agent, Pat Brisson, said. "There's always an element of risk, but at this point it's a little premature to tell. But we respect the situation the Sabres are in. It's probably not a good time with potential distractions to discuss a possible extension. The team's doing well. So we're staying on the sidelines and letting Danny do his stuff." " "It's not even on my plate, not even on my mind," Drury said. "I'm sure when the season is over it's something we'll figure out then, but if I start dwelling on that with 20-plus games to go and then the playoffs, it's not fair to my teammates. It's not fair to me. I signed on, and I'm getting paid a fair amount to keep my focus where it should be." seems to me that they are about winning this season then figuring things out later. If a player agrees with the no contract talk, then i don't see it as a problem. why get their heads looking into next year when this could be the year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodfella25 Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 "The closer you get to July 1, the odds are increasing towards a player leaving," Briere's agent, Pat Brisson, said. "There's always an element of risk, but at this point it's a little premature to tell. But we respect the situation the Sabres are in. It's probably not a good time with potential distractions to discuss a possible extension. The team's doing well. So we're staying on the sidelines and letting Danny do his stuff." " "It's not even on my plate, not even on my mind," Drury said. "I'm sure when the season is over it's something we'll figure out then, but if I start dwelling on that with 20-plus games to go and then the playoffs, it's not fair to my teammates. It's not fair to me. I signed on, and I'm getting paid a fair amount to keep my focus where it should be." seems to me that they are about winning this season then figuring things out later. If a player agrees with the no contract talk, then i don't see it as a problem. why get their heads looking into next year when this could be the year? I do not think it's wise to not even attempt negotiation at this point. I know we have some cap restrictions to consider for the future but come on, I hope Darcy has some kind of an idea on a contract offer for both of these players. And how is it less of a distraction? I think it is, in fact, MORE distracting hearing the rumblings about how they are both UFAs at the end of the year. A new contract would shut that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Did you ever think that maybe Darcy should have addressed it PRIOR to the season starting? :doh: Didn't Regier try to get a deal done with Briere? It was Briere's choice to go to arbitration. I also thought I heard Regier say back in December he has had talks with Drury's agent to get an idea of what Drury may be looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Did you ever think that maybe Darcy should have addressed it PRIOR to the season starting? :doh: I think he did. Didn't Briere reject the offer and go to arbitration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 To all you Darcy apologists, I'll leave it at this... When the season ends and everybody gets in an uproar either because the Sabres don't sign Briere and/or Drury because the price is too high or the players now see how close they are to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and don't want to answer Darcy's calls, don't come here to do your crying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Labatt, is there a possibilty Darcy doesn't plan on signing either? If the Sabres actually win the cup, not holding my breath, do you think will have been their intentions to let them go all along? It certainly is a possibilty. Tommy G. know how to run a business, and with the young talent they have in the wings, I could see them letting both guys walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Labatt, is there a possibilty Darcy doesn't plan on signing either? If the Sabres actually win the cup, not holding my breath, do you think will have been their intentions to let them go all along? It certainly is a possibilty. Tommy G. know how to run a business, and with the young talent they have in the wings, I could see them letting both guys walk. There is a possibility of this, but if so, he needs to be prepared to replace them with a couple of 3 mil per year players or there will be a significant drop off in play next year. Yes, there is a lot of POTENTIALLY NHL caliber players in the system, but could they step in and help replace 60-70 goals and 150+ points right away? We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 I seem to recall the same talk about Zhitnik and Satan a couple years back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 To all you Darcy apologists, I'll leave it at this... When the season ends and everybody gets in an uproar either because the Sabres don't sign Briere and/or Drury because the price is too high or the players now see how close they are to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and don't want to answer Darcy's calls, don't come here to do your crying. Has something changed over this past year. Last I looked the Sabres are still a small market team with limited revenue streams. The Cap has helped the Sabres control costs and have brought other teams down to earth. As I said earlier. Look no further than the Tampa Bay Lightning. They are in a mess because they just had to sign those three players. Now they have have three great players and no money to help build around them. Is that what you want for the Sabres? Let's keep Miller, Drury and Briere at any cost. We can then say goodbye to Vanek, Max and Pominville who the Sabres won't be able to keep down the road. Let's turn a team that has succeeded for the past season in a half because they can roll four lines and turn them in to a one trick pony with a bunch of Andrew Peters filling out the roster. The success and the full building has been great. But let's not forget that this is still a small market team that needs to fight that battle daily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 To all you Darcy apologists, I'll leave it at this... When the season ends and everybody gets in an uproar either because the Sabres don't sign Briere and/or Drury because the price is too high or the players now see how close they are to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and don't want to answer Darcy's calls, don't come here to do your crying. Labatt -- a few points on this: 1. the quote in the buff. news is from LQ, who is Darcy's boss. It's quite possible that this is a TG/LQ decision, not Darcy's. 2. you (and a lot of other people) seem to be assuming that Drury and Briere are willing at this point (or were before the season started) to sign long-term deals, and it's accordingly Darcy's fault for failing to do so. Is there any evidence for this assumption? On the contrary, the quotes from Briere's agent and from Drury seem to indicate that they want to wait until after the season too. And why wouldn't they? Wouldn't anyone? There is a HUGE payday waiting for them. If you were either of them, why would you not wait 3.5 months and then find out exactly what kind of bonanza was there to be had? 3. As for whether management will be letting the fans down if either of both of them leave -- it really depends on the numbers. It's highly likely to me that someone will offer Briere a 5-year deal for $7 million per year, and someone will offer Drury 5 years x $6 million per year. It only takes one bonehead GM with someone else's money to burn and the fans screaming to do something. Is either of them worth that big a chunk of the cap? I do not think it would be unreasonable if the Sabres let both of them go at that level. Bottom line is if Drury/Briere get paid that much, there is a dollar-for-dollar reduction in the cap space available to keep guys like Vanek, Campbell, Roy, etc. 4. I do agree that if both leave, we need to be active in picking up replacements who can score, and not just hope to replace them from within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 To all you Darcy apologists, I'll leave it at this... When the season ends and everybody gets in an uproar either because the Sabres don't sign Briere and/or Drury because the price is too high or the players now see how close they are to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and don't want to answer Darcy's calls, don't come here to do your crying. If either Briere or Drury think that he is worth more than $6 million, well then he is gone anyway. If either would be happy with a contract between $5 and 6$ million, then it's do-able, but not until the season ends, becuase Buffalo would need to adjust contracts (Biron and Numminem) and use the salary cap increase to make it work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Has something changed over this past year. Last I looked the Sabres are still a small market team with limited revenue streams. The Cap has helped the Sabres control costs and have brought other teams down to earth. As I said earlier. Look no further than the Tampa Bay Lightning. They are in a mess because they just had to sign those three players. Now they have have three great players and no money to help build around them. Is that what you want for the Sabres? Let's keep Miller, Drury and Briere at any cost. We can then say goodbye to Vanek, Max and Pominville who the Sabres won't be able to keep down the road. Let's turn a team that has succeeded for the past season in a half because they can roll four lines and turn them in to a one trick pony with a bunch of Andrew Peters filling out the roster. The success and the full building has been great. But let's not forget that this is still a small market team that needs to fight that battle daily. Tampa is still paying good salaries to players who are under-performing in the defensive zone. Boyle makes $3.6 million is a -2. Kuba makes $3 million, and he's a -1. Sarich makes $1.9 million and is a -6. Those are 3 veteren defensemen pulling down solid salaries. Compare them with Numminem, Campbell, and Tallinder, who are making ra little less than the Tampa D men. These Buffalo defensemen are a collective +40. Sure they paid a bunch for their top 3 forwards, but their record would be a hell of a lot better if their well-paid defensemen posted numbers half as good as thier Sabre counter parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Has something changed over this past year. Last I looked the Sabres are still a small market team with limited revenue streams. This leads me to believe they are as good as gone. After this year they can lock up Vanek, Roy, Miller, Pominville and whoever else they feel will be a part of the organization long term. I honestly feel like Connolly can near Danny's production IF he get's back to 100%. While guys like Gaustad and Roy can pick up the production left by Drury, at least that is what I'm bracing for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodfella25 Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 If either Briere or Drury think that he is worth more than $6 million, well then he is gone anyway. I think that is the case for both of them, and why not? At their age this next contract is IT for them in terms of getting the most money in their prime. It will most likely be downhill in terms of $ after this, assuming each is looking for a 4 year or more deal which would make the next time they get UFA status 2011. So they have to cash in, and if Jay McKee got 4 MIL (16MIL total) last year on the open market, Briere was awarded 5 MIL by an arbitrator, as was Scott Gomez, something tells me that this year the floor on both of these guys, if allowed to hit the open market, will be $5.5 MIL and the ceiling...well, who knows? Maybe 7, 7.5. Teams are still crazy regardless of the salary cap. Look at Boston last year, 7.5 MIL for Chara, 5MIL for Savard (although I suppose that one has paid off). I guarentee you a team like Philadelphia would easily throw 7MIL at one of these guys, especially since Forsberg will probably be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Has something changed over this past year. Last I looked the Sabres are still a small market team with limited revenue streams. The Cap has helped the Sabres control costs and have brought other teams down to earth. As I said earlier. Look no further than the Tampa Bay Lightning. They are in a mess because they just had to sign those three players. Now they have have three great players and no money to help build around them. Is that what you want for the Sabres? Let's keep Miller, Drury and Briere at any cost. We can then say goodbye to Vanek, Max and Pominville who the Sabres won't be able to keep down the road. Let's turn a team that has succeeded for the past season in a half because they can roll four lines and turn them in to a one trick pony with a bunch of Andrew Peters filling out the roster. The success and the full building has been great. But let's not forget that this is still a small market team that needs to fight that battle daily. So instead of paying for quality players we will become the Buffalo Bills/Oakland A's of the NHL and hope our young guys can win until the become good and then move on for more money I understand letting either go may happen due to cost, but it is going to seriously hurt this team. Signing both can be done, but its going to require some cost cutting and cutting some dead weight. If I had the choice between keeping Briere/Drury or Kotalik, Hecht, or Timmy, I'd take Briere/Drury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.