rickshaw Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Day 2 of the new regime and it's clear money isn't an issue. While TG wouldn't pay Rivet or anyone else to go to the minors, TP will. This is a clear sign that he'll do what needs to be done to build a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Rivet won't play in the minors. If no one claims him he will just wait and try to hook up another team later in the year. He won't be in Portland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I'm inclined to agree with nucci, he won't report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 1. I agree that there is NFW this would've happened under TG. They did the same exact thing a couple years back with Adam Mair. Granted there's far less money involved here, but he was placed on waivers to see if anyone would take him. Until Rivet clears and is actually assigned to Portland, this move is no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 They did the same exact thing a couple years back with Adam Mair. Granted there's far less money involved here, but he was placed on waivers to see if anyone would take him. Until Rivet clears and is actually assigned to Portland, this move is no different. that's a good call too. Jeremy from WGR said he spoke with Paul hamilton and it's possible that Rivet asked to be released to see if he could catch on with another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 It only clears what he is due to be paid the remainder of the season, so as someone else said probably around $1.25 million. If he clears it doesn't free up any real money, just cap money. And the Sabres weren't that close to the cap to begin with for them to be looking to free cap space to make a trade. As I said it's more likely a move to give Rivet a place to play, perhaps a contender, rather than sitting in the press box the rest of the season. Meanwhile maybe saving a million or so. The remainder of his salary is $850K. Since rosters expand after the deadline, there really is no benefit to this move unless someone puts in a clame for him and relieves Buffalo of their $850K obligation. If that's the sole purpose for this move, it would seem to run contrary to Mr. Pegula's statement that money isn't a decision maker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 sad that the biggest deadline deal buffalo has made the past 5 years is waiving Craig Rivet... :beer: :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 It only clears what he is due to be paid the remainder of the season, so as someone else said probably around $1.25 million. If he clears it doesn't free up any real money, just cap money. And the Sabres weren't that close to the cap to begin with for them to be looking to free cap space to make a trade. As I said it's more likely a move to give Rivet a place to play, perhaps a contender, rather than sitting in the press box the rest of the season. Meanwhile maybe saving a million or so. Yea thats true, no real dollars saved unless he's picked up. It does give them cap room to add a player making 3.5 year but i think this is a nod to craig to see if he can catch on somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korab rules Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 The remainder of his salary is $850K. Since rosters expand after the deadline, there really is no benefit to this move unless someone puts in a clame for him and relieves Buffalo of their $850K obligation. If that's the sole purpose for this move, it would seem to run contrary to Mr. Pegula's statement that money isn't a decision maker. NO! It clears space to bring in an equal contract for the remainder of the season. As of right now, would we be able to bring in Brad Richards? Not without clearing cap space. Of course it doesn't clear 3.5 million, but it it clears the prorated portion of that contract, which would allow us to bring in the prorated portion of someone else's contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Yea thats true, no real dollars saved unless he's picked up. It does give them cap room to add a player making 3.5 year but i think this is a nod to craig to see if he can catch on somewhere. Based on capgeek.com. the most reliable cap site on the internet, the Sabres coud already add $17 million dollars worth of contract so I don't think the $3.5 is much of a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 NO! It clears space to bring in an equal contract for the remainder of the season. As of right now, would we be able to bring in Brad Richards? Not without clearing cap space. Of course it doesn't clear 3.5 million, but it it clears the prorated portion of that contract, which would allow us to bring in the prorated portion of someone else's contract. Read next post they have plenty of cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Montador is going. No true hockey man would accept another player's number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buftex Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I would like to give props to Rivet, also. It was a bad situation for him, all around. I almost think it would have been classier to take the "C" away from him when they realized he wasn't going to be a factor any more. A lot less awkaward than being the team captain who never dresses for games. I remember something similar happening to Lindy when he was a player/captain. Maybe I am mistaken. I never really liked the way Lindy has handled the whole captain thing...it may just be a meaningless title, to some, but it shouldn't be. You would think, being a team captain as a player, Ruff would have handled this a little better. I realize, there have been few guys worthy of the title over the years (and when they have been, they are as good as gone, under the old regimes), but it would seem like Lindy would make it mean something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 The remainder of his salary is $850K. Since rosters expand after the deadline, there really is no benefit to this move unless someone puts in a clame for him and relieves Buffalo of their $850K obligation. If that's the sole purpose for this move, it would seem to run contrary to Mr. Pegula's statement that money isn't a decision maker. If they think he's washed up and brings nothing to this team anymore, isn't that enough reason to make the move? I'm sure we can come up with a very long list of reasons that would make this move worthwhile, but that's the first one that comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Why has everyone been so quick to assume that Dallas is trading Richards? Even when Dallas was doing well, people assumed Richards was available. I don't get it. I don't know if they're trading him or not. I'd expect that they'd prefer not to, as he's stated that he wants to stay in Dallas. But he's also stated that he won't sign any extension with them until ownership is resolved. If the Stars don't think they can get something resolved by July 1, it makes sense to consider getting something of value for him. Also, if he really does want to end up long term in Dallas, a trade could be a St. Louis sort of deal where they trade the player away for the rest of this season and re-sign him in July. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickshaw Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I too applaud how Rivet has handled things. I think the C should go to Myers. This is going to be his team for many years. Get him started now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I too applaud how Rivet has handled things. I think the C should go to Myers. This is going to be his team for many years. Get him started now! That would make the kid fall apart. Sad thing is....there still is no REAL captain on this team. Vanek....maybe someday Gaustad circa 2007 Montador leaving shortly Pominville....he can date my sister, not lead my team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I too applaud how Rivet has handled things. I think the C should go to Myers. This is going to be his team for many years. Get him started now! Eventually, very possible. Today. It'd be a bad move IMHO. The kid has had too many growing pains this year; I wouldn't put the added pressure of 'leading' the team on his shoulders just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregkash Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 The C doesn't bring meaning to the player, the player brings meaning to the C. Since Drury and Briere left, I'm not really sure we've had a player that would bring much meaning to that C. I'm hoping Vanek is growing into that kind of guy right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 If they think he's washed up and brings nothing to this team anymore, isn't that enough reason to make the move? I'm sure we can come up with a very long list of reasons that would make this move worthwhile, but that's the first one that comes to mind. You make a very good point. Some moves are made for reasons that have nothing to do with finances. If anything, this move, since it doesn't inherently save/cost them much in terms of dollars, underscores Pegula's point that money won't be the driving force behind hockey decisions. From a team standpoint, it makes a helluva lot of sense to waive a captain who can't lead the team. It's refreshing money didn't get in the way of making a team decision for a change. GO SABRES!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 If they think he's washed up and brings nothing to this team anymore, isn't that enough reason to make the move? I'm sure we can come up with a very long list of reasons that would make this move worthwhile, but that's the first one that comes to mind. That would make sense. I really didn't mean to imply it was about money but rather state that all the previous reasons listed where without merit and of no benefit to the cap situation nor is there any benefit to the size of the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 That would make sense. I really didn't mean to imply it was about money but rather state that all the previous reasons listed where without merit and of no benefit to the cap situation nor is there any benefit to the size of the roster. Well there is a very short term benefit to the size of the roster. It probably would have made more sense a few days back when Enroth was up and Montador was coming back off that concussion. Still, I wish they'd pair this move up with adding a 13th forward. And back to my original point. I can't remember the last time we've seen a case like this where a guy has clearly reached the point where he has nothing left to offer. I know some are going to try to be smartasses and mention Connolly, but he still brings value to this team on the trade market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 The C doesn't bring meaning to the player, the player brings meaning to the C. Since Drury and Briere left, I'm not really sure we've had a player that would bring much meaning to that C. I'm hoping Vanek is growing into that kind of guy right now Well said. This is the way Rob Ray talked about in his book. He wasn't in favor during his playing career of giving a player a C to boost his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky's Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I would just like to point out how much dignity Rivet has handled himself with. His limbo situation must have been torture. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Based on capgeek.com. the most reliable cap site on the internet, the Sabres coud already add $17 million dollars worth of contract so I don't think the $3.5 is much of a reason. They have 4.5 is cap space this year. they could add 17 million now but that accounts for next yuears cap space i believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.