Was There A Better Option Than Connolly In FA

[bob_sauve28]

Could we have done better spending that $4 million on a different player? Was there anyone at that price that would have come here?

[dante23x]

Nope, Darcy told us that re-signing Tim Connolly was better than a trade. :wallbash:

 

In all honesty, I would have liked them get Cammalieri but he was signed at 6 mil a year I think. They should have let Connolly go or trade him at the deadline last season and trade for a center and sign a defenseman at free agency.

[thesportsbuff]

for 4 mil, no. though without his 4 mil we would have had the cap space to maybe get involved in Cammalleri/Kovalev/etc.

[Lanny]

I'd take a healthy* Connolly over Cammaleri or Gionta. And both cost MTL more.

[deluca67]

I'd take a healthy* Connolly over Cammaleri or Gionta. And both cost MTL more.

Saying you would take a "healthy Connolly" is like saying I would take a 6' 4" Brian Gionta. They just don't exist.

 

Connolly's $4.5 million is a reminder how Regier has really misjudged his own talent. What is done, is done. We would all liked if the Sabres went into free agency without Connolly, Hecht, Tallinder, Lydman and a couple of other's contracts on the books. There was some really good players available and they all didn't sign cap buster contracts.

[PASabreFan]

Saying you would take a "healthy Connolly" is like saying I would take a 6' 4" Brian Gionta. They just don't exist.

 

Connolly's $4.5 million is a reminder how Regier has really misjudged his own talent. What is done, is done. We would all liked if the Sabres went into free agency without Connolly, Hecht, Tallinder, Lydman and a couple of other's contracts on the books. There was some really good players available and they all didn't sign cap buster contracts.

 

Is it those contracts that kept Darcy from acting -- or OSP's unwillingness to spend to the cap?

[wonderbread]

Is it those contracts that kept Darcy from acting -- or OSP's unwillingness to spend to the cap?

 

 

Agreed, I think its a little bit of both. Which has us dead center of a shitstorm.

[deluca67]

Is it those contracts that kept Darcy from acting -- or OSP's unwillingness to spend to the cap?

You're only talking about $6 million difference between the Sabres and NHL caps. That is a low figure when you put it against $15-20 million of pretty much wasted cap space. I wouldn't trust Regier to do the right thing with the extra $6 mil, would you?

[shrader]

Saying you would take a "healthy Connolly" is like saying I would take a 6' 4" Brian Gionta. They just don't exist.

 

So what was that thing that played the last 40-some games last year? Hopefully he can build on that moving forward. Look, he's going to get hurt at some point, but how many people on here had their little joke pool running on how long he would last? No one would've cashed out on that.

[nucci]

So what was that thing that played the last 40-some games last year? Hopefully he can build on that moving forward. Look, he's going to get hurt at some point, but how many people on here had their little joke pool running on how long he would last? No one would've cashed out on that.

In all fairness, Connolly was playing for his next contract. It is very important for him to be a big part of the team this year.

[ROC Sabres]

So what was that thing that played the last 40-some games last year? Hopefully he can build on that moving forward. Look, he's going to get hurt at some point, but how many people on here had their little joke pool running on how long he would last? No one would've cashed out on that.

And the pool is still going, it just got extended to next season. $10 gets you a week. 15$ for 2 weeks.

[shrader]

In all fairness, Connolly was playing for his next contract. It is very important for him to be a big part of the team this year.

 

And he remained healthy after signing the extension. I'm not so sure how playing for a contract would keep him in the lineup if he really is this ball-less, soft player that people like to play him up as. That just doesn't make much sense to me.

[wonderbread]

And he remained healthy after signing the extension. I'm not so sure how playing for a contract would keep him in the lineup if he really is this ball-less, soft player that people like to play him up as. That just doesn't make much sense to me.

 

 

he's a self centered little dink.

[CallawaySabres]

You are going to see a fully healthy Connolly and Vanek this season - bank on it. Sabres are going to make a trade at some point here and add some more grit. Add a Ryan Miller breakout year and I think there are going to be a lot of VERY surprised people around here.

[That Aud Smell]

he's a self centered little dink.

you have to turn the volume up and forward to about 1:30 to hear it.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

don't have time to find and bump the thread, but i think i had him at right around 45 games - turns out he played 48 (according to yahoo sports).

[wonderbread]

you have to turn the volume up and forward to about 1:30 to hear it.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

 

Nice call! Milbury is a . Regardless of this statement.

[nfreeman]

Saying you would take a "healthy Connolly" is like saying I would take a 6' 4" Brian Gionta. They just don't exist.

 

Connolly's $4.5 million is a reminder how Regier has really misjudged his own talent. What is done, is done. We would all liked if the Sabres went into free agency without Connolly, Hecht, Tallinder, Lydman and a couple of other's contracts on the books. There was some really good players available and they all didn't sign cap buster contracts.

I don't think you're speaking for everyone when you include Connolly in this list. There are probably just as many posters who would substitute Pommer for Connolly.

[gg1]

Connolly's $4.5 million is a reminder how Regier has really misjudged his own talent. What is done, is done. We would all liked if the Sabres went into free agency without Connolly, Hecht, Tallinder, Lydman and a couple of other's contracts on the books. There was some really good players available and they all didn't sign cap buster contracts.

 

And replace those 4 bodies with .....

[carpandean]

And replace those 4 bodies with .....

- There are plenty of solid two-way forwards, some of whom are actually natural centers, who could easily have replaced Hecht for less than his $3.8 million salary (ref: Todd Marchant just re-signed with the Ducks for $1.125 million; a little older, but also brings some intangibles.) He was at the high end of the payscale for that type of player, which one could argue he actually deserved (or, at least, close to it) based on his play prior to last season, but certainly didn't last season. Still, though, there are many similar players making far less and they are often many of the leftover UFAs after July 1st.

 

- Tallinder could easily be replaced with a far less expensive Dman, whether from within the system or from FA. He has long since (basically after his 2nd broken arm) fallen from being a $3.25 million caliber defenseman.

 

- Lydman brings more than Tallinder and his skill set would be harder to fill for much less than his $3.15 million salary this year.

 

So, even if you just replaced Hecht and Tallinder with similar caliber players, you could easily have save $3 million off of their combined $7.05 million in salary; more if you replaced them with young players. Add that to Connolly's $4.5 million and you've got $7.5 million to put toward a center. Even with Buffalo's difficulties, that's enough to sign most any FA center or to trade for one with a team looking to shed salary. It would have been a gamble to wait, but there were options.

 

As for including Connolly on that list (nfreeman's question), it's a matter of risk. Darcy has historically seemed risk-averse, but his signing was a huge gamble. Let's say, for example, that Connolly will do one of three things: (1) play most games, 75+; (2) play half the games, 40-45; or (3) play few games, 0-10. What is he worth in each of those cases? Let's say that it is $7 million, $3 million and $0 million (opportunity cost of not signing another player offsets any production; actually, should probably be negation) and that the estimated chances of happening are 25%, 65% and 10%. For a risk-neutral GM, his worth would be (.25)(7) + (.65)(3) + (.1)(0) = $3.7 million. A risk-adverse GM would give him a much lower worth (makes those injury cases more "bad".) So, as a risk-adverse GM, Darcy must have given him a MUCH higher chance of staying healthy. Based on what? He bet the last two seasons (especially last year when he flat out said that it depended on him staying healthy) on Timmy and got burned twice. What made him think that it wouldn't happen again? Remember that Timmy had only played something like 20 games without injury when re-signed. It may look a little better after he played 20 more and finished the season relatively healthy (he did have a wrist injury that he played with, but that had Pominville taking faceoffs and the team planning on him losing them), but that information wasn't available at the time of the decision.

[bob_sauve28]

I was happy Connolly got signed. But while I was watching the playoffs I kept thinking, "No way would Tim Connolly survive a playoff series or two." So I started having my doubts, but I really don't see anything in free agency that would have been much better. So I guess its better we kept him, I just hope he stays healthy and I'm hoping I'm wrong about him surviving in the playoffs.

[SabresFan526]

As for including Connolly on that list (nfreeman's question), it's a matter of risk. Darcy has historically seemed risk-averse, but his signing was a huge gamble. Let's say, for example, that Connolly will do one of three things: (1) play most games, 75+; (2) play half the games, 40-45; or (3) play few games, 0-10. What is he worth in each of those cases? Let's say that it is $7 million, $3 million and $0 million (opportunity cost of not signing another player offsets any production; actually, should probably be negation) and that the estimated chances of happening are 25%, 65% and 10%. For a risk-neutral GM, his worth would be (.25)(7) + (.65)(3) + (.1)(0) = $3.7 million. A risk-adverse GM would give him a much lower worth (makes those injury cases more "bad".) So, as a risk-adverse GM, Darcy must have given him a MUCH higher chance of staying healthy. Based on what? He bet the last two seasons (especially last year when he flat out said that it depended on him staying healthy) on Timmy and got burned twice. What made him think that it wouldn't happen again? Remember that Timmy had only played something like 20 games without injury when re-signed. It may look a little better after he played 20 more and finished the season relatively healthy (he did have a wrist injury that he played with, but that had Pominville taking faceoffs and the team planning on him losing them), but that information wasn't available at the time of the decision.

Carp, I love the analysis! Of course you know I'm a business/statistics geek like you. I think you did this for a risk-neutral GM's perspective as stated above. Given a risk neutral GM, what would be the worth of Martin Havlatt and Marian Gaborik. I would argue both players have similar injury proneness to Tim Connolly, but they got contracts more than Connolly's and in Gaborik's case, far more than Connolly (I think this goes back to our previous discussion in another thread about goals being weighted more than assists in terms of a player's value). If Connolly is worth $3.7 million based on a weighted probability, what would those two be worth? I'm fine with the percentages you came up with, but how did you come up with the dollar values? For example, do Gaborik and Havlatt become $10 million players if they play 75+ games? Just kind of curious. Thanks.

[thesportsbuff]

i think Connolly's better at staying healthy than half you people are at thinking

 

but thats just me

[carpandean]

Carp, I love the analysis! Of course you know I'm a business/statistics geek like you.

Yes, a small, but powerful club we are.

 

I think you did this for a risk-neutral GM's perspective as stated above. Given a risk neutral GM, what would be the worth of Martin Havlatt and Marian Gaborik. I would argue both players have similar injury proneness to Tim Connolly, but they got contracts more than Connolly's and in Gaborik's case, far more than Connolly (I think this goes back to our previous discussion in another thread about goals being weighted more than assists in terms of a player's value). If Connolly is worth $3.7 million based on a weighted probability, what would those two be worth? I'm fine with the percentages you came up with, but how did you come up with the dollar values? For example, do Gaborik and Havlatt become $10 million players if they play 75+ games? Just kind of curious. Thanks.

I did give the numbers for risk-neutral for a few reasons: (1) they serve as an upper bound, (2) they are easy to calculate, and (3) they are universally defined. Risk-aversion is modeled using strange and weakly justified assumptions usually involving squared values.

 

As for Gaborik and Havlat, I wouldn't necessarily consider those to be good contracts and, in fact, would consider both to be even riskier. The Rangers, as is their MO, way overpaid for an UFA, taking on a risk that no other team would (at near the price.) Their practices haven't really worked out well for them so far and I have little reason to believe that the results in this case will be any different. Of course, unlike Timmy, Gaborik actually has a complete season (using my 75+ games definition) since the lockout and in every season since the lockout has produce more than a point per game, including 1.19 ppg in his 48 game season; 1.35 ppg in 17 games last season. Additionally, he has scored over 30 goals three times during those four years, even when playing just 48 games, twice over 35 goals and once over 40. He certainly has proven that he can be an absolute game changer. Timmy's had his moments, but I would hardly say that he's proven anything close to that with his career bests: 18G, 29A, 47P.

 

Havlat's was a little more surprising. I believe that it was a new GM (correct me if I am wrong) and, while not responsible for him getting through the season un-signed, he did let Gaborik walk. So, he was likely looking for a replacement to temper the loss (hmm ... there's a novel idea.) Havlat does have a questionable history, but he also was coming off of a complete season (again, >75 games) with 29 G and 48 A. There's a lot of reasons in Chicago for his production, but recently completing a full season (again, something that Timmy hasn't done since pre-lockout) does give some level of comfort.

 

My numbers for Timmy were very rough, but those two contracts suggest both that those players have higher estimated values when healthy (especially Gaborik) and that their estimated chances of staying healthy are probably too high. I would also guess that in the Rangers' case, the GM is less risk averse than Darcy. I certainly wouldn't use those contracts to show that Timmy's contract was a good one (would be like a murderer pointing to a serial killer and saying "see, I'm not so bad"), but I guess you could use them to show that there are even worse ones. That doesn't provide me with much comfort.

[PASabreFan]

For the love of God.

[gg1]

- There are plenty of solid two-way forwards, some of whom are actually natural centers, who could easily have replaced Hecht for less than his $3.8 million salary (ref: Todd Marchant just re-signed with the Ducks for $1.125 million; a little older, but also brings some intangibles.) He was at the high end of the payscale for that type of player, which one could argue he actually deserved (or, at least, close to it) based on his play prior to last season, but certainly didn't last season. Still, though, there are many similar players making far less and they are often many of the leftover UFAs after July 1st.

 

- Tallinder could easily be replaced with a far less expensive Dman, whether from within the system or from FA. He has long since (basically after his 2nd broken arm) fallen from being a $3.25 million caliber defenseman.

 

- Lydman brings more than Tallinder and his skill set would be harder to fill for much less than his $3.15 million salary this year.

 

So, even if you just replaced Hecht and Tallinder with similar caliber players, you could easily have save $3 million off of their combined $7.05 million in salary; more if you replaced them with young players. Add that to Connolly's $4.5 million and you've got $7.5 million to put toward a center. Even with Buffalo's difficulties, that's enough to sign most any FA center or to trade for one with a team looking to shed salary. It would have been a gamble to wait, but there were options.

 

But in effect you'd be replacing known commodities, with something totally unknown and still not saving enough salary cap space to really go after the big hitters, which were mostly lacking in this FA. So in the end, you'd have reshuffled 20% of your roster with no meaningful improvement in talent, only to satisfy the need to do something.