Bullwinkle Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 Teams are starting to take players to arbitration and I am getting pumped. I hope the sabres come out of the gate and just go big. I would give up anything just to see the list of players that regier has on his desk of players pegula said you better get or else. That's the intriguing question...is Pegula dictating to Regier or just standing back and trusting Regier to do his job? I know we're all hoping that he's handing Regier a list of names of guys he wants to get. I know that if I were the owner, that's exactly what I'd be doing - plus hiring Dudley in a supporting role. I guess we'll see in the coming weeks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swedesessed Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 The thought of getting a bona fide #1 center like Brad Richards is intriguing, I am scared that the Sabres might reach in years and money to get Richards. He is 31 and if the Sabres give him say 6 or 7 years, that contract can be cap hell. I say offer Richards 5 years at the most at 7M per, if he balks so be it and see if we can go the trade route to get a top flight center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 The thought of getting a bona fide #1 center like Brad Richards is intriguing, I am scared that the Sabres might reach in years and money to get Richards. He is 31 and if the Sabres give him say 6 or 7 years, that contract can be cap hell. I say offer Richards 5 years at the most at 7M per, if he balks so be it and see if we can go the trade route to get a top flight center. I would be good with that although I think it will take more than 5 @ 7 I feel like maybe I'm missing something with him because his stats do not warrant that type of deal. But he is a primary need here and would be an anchor and it's not my money so I say do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 I would be good with that although I think it will take more than 5 @ 7 I feel like maybe I'm missing something with him because his stats do not warrant that type of deal. But he is a primary need here and would be an anchor and it's not my money so I say do it. No one's stats warrant the deal they sign on the open market. That's just the way it is and it won't be changing any time soon... especially with this year's free agent "crop". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 No one's stats warrant the deal they sign on the open market. That's just the way it is and it won't be changing any time soon... especially with this year's free agent "crop". I am almost certain that the Sabres will make an offer to Richards - on their terms. I think they've figured out exactly how much they can afford and how long a contract they're willing to give. I think they will just offer it to him and let him decide. Obviously a 7 year deal at 7m per is absurd for a 31 year old guy with a concussion history. I keep hearing conflicting reports on his preferences...he doesn't want to be in the spotlight so he'd like a small town...he wants to play in a big city...etc. But I think that's what the Sabres will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swedesessed Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 I would be good with that although I think it will take more than 5 @ 7 I feel like maybe I'm missing something with him because his stats do not warrant that type of deal. But he is a primary need here and would be an anchor and it's not my money so I say do it. True but generally if you look at a UFA contract compared to what a player 'should get' it seems to be 30-35% higher then it should...so if a player gets say 7M a season they probably should get like 5-5.5M. That's why to me signing Richards after July 1st is so dangerous, and probably even if they traded for his rights because he made 7.8M last year and will command 7 easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 The thought of getting a bona fide #1 center like Brad Richards is intriguing, I am scared that the Sabres might reach in years and money to get Richards. He is 31 and if the Sabres give him say 6 or 7 years, that contract can be cap hell. I say offer Richards 5 years at the most at 7M per, if he balks so be it and see if we can go the trade route to get a top flight center. Where the hell is carp's post saying u could sign him for that money early but have a 5-5.5 cap hit. Dangit all. "LIKE A GOOD NEIGHBOR - STATE FARM IS THERE!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 The thought of getting a bona fide #1 center like Brad Richards is intriguing, I am scared that the Sabres might reach in years and money to get Richards. He is 31 and if the Sabres give him say 6 or 7 years, that contract can be cap hell. I say offer Richards 5 years at the most at 7M per, if he balks so be it and see if we can go the trade route to get a top flight center. Which reminds me. Can you imagine being stuck with Luongo's contract? He is virtually un-tradeable. Oh I'm sure someone would take him but has his stock not dropped regardless of the gold medal win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted June 18, 2011 Report Share Posted June 18, 2011 Where the hell is carp's post saying u could sign him for that money early but have a 5-5.5 cap hit. Dangit all. "LIKE A GOOD NEIGHBOR - STATE FARM IS THERE!" You called? If they go after Richards, I hope that they exploit the cap rules (even the new ones.) I believe that they are: (1) cap hit is average of all seasons not including 41st or higher birthdays, (2) years 36-40 have to have a minimum of $1M in salary. So, with Mr. Money Bags, we could give him something like: 11, 11, 9, 7, 5, 3, 2, 1, 1, 1 (10 yr, $51M) with a cap hit of $5.1M. The numbers could be off, but you get the idea. For once, let's play the big boy games. (It was in the Chris Drury thread, of course. ;) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Why not trade for a Center who makes 4 million per for 3 more years AND sign Richards to a 5 year contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Why not trade for a Center who makes 4 million per for 3 more years AND sign Richards to a 5 year contract? The thread you started is a very intriguing read, but i have some reservations about fielding Richard Roy and Pavelski. I know we need centers, but thats 3 top end guys amongst 3 lines. I'm not sure where the line gets drawn, but i have to think that a lack of grit can start to hurt you. If kassian indeed makes the big club, myers and weber get mean, we sign a big shutdown defensive vet, and kaleta and goose don't take any ######, i could see it working. In your previous thread you had roy on the fourth line. Retooling might need to be in order, but it could work. if you have that talent you'd need size so i think a better line up could look a little like this Vanek - Richards - Boyes Ennis - Roy - Stafford Gerbe - Pavelski - Kassian McCormick - Gaustad - Kaleta It's an incredibly skilled team, and i like it for the most part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 The thread you started is a very intriguing read, but i have some reservations about fielding Richard Roy and Pavelski. I know we need centers, but thats 3 top end guys amongst 3 lines. I'm not sure where the line gets drawn, but i have to think that a lack of grit can start to hurt you. If kassian indeed makes the big club, myers and weber get mean, we sign a big shutdown defensive vet, and kaleta and goose don't take any ######, i could see it working. In your previous thread you had roy on the fourth line. Retooling might need to be in order, but it could work. if you have that talent you'd need size so i think a better line up could look a little like this Vanek - Richards - Boyes Ennis - Roy - Stafford Gerbe - Pavelski - Kassian McCormick - Gaustad - Kaleta It's an incredibly skilled team, and i like it for the most part. Well done. I like these lines more than the ones I listed. The only thing I would do is maybe switch Boyes and Stafford, but they should work well on either line. That Gerbe Pavelski Kassian line would REALLY piss off other teams. I might be willing to trade Butler and Pysyk or McNabb for Robyn Regher or even explore what Minnesota would want for Brent Burns. Apparently they are willing to at least listen to offers. Myers and Burns as a top pairing would be crazy good. The asking price is probably way too high though. Myers Regher Sekera Leopold Weber Gragnani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Well done. I like these lines more than the ones I listed. The only thing I would do is maybe switch Boyes and Stafford, but they should work well on either line. That Gerbe Pavelski Kassian line would REALLY piss off other teams. I might be willing to trade Butler and Pysyk or McNabb for Robyn Regher or even explore what Minnesota would want for Brent Burns. Apparently they are willing to at least listen to offers. Myers and Burns as a top pairing would be crazy good. The asking price is probably way too high though. Myers Regher Sekera Leopold Weber Gragnani i keep stafford on the second line for two reasons. 1.) top line is mostly softies, so the top pairing of D can take the role of the tough guys. Stafford can bring a bit of a physical presence that would serve the second line well. 2.) Stafford and Ennis work extremely well. chemistry is huge in this sport and if we can keep them together i foresee good things. Obviously lines will shake up out of necessity, but i think with the given players, this is one of the better lineup options when it comes to starting the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warriorspikes51 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 i keep stafford on the second line for two reasons. 1.) top line is mostly softies, so the top pairing of D can take the role of the tough guys. Stafford can bring a bit of a physical presence that would serve the second line well. 2.) Stafford and Ennis work extremely well. chemistry is huge in this sport and if we can keep them together i foresee good things. Obviously lines will shake up out of necessity, but i think with the given players, this is one of the better lineup options when it comes to s starting the season. yea, I'd have to agree. Sign me up for that lineup. I'd make Vanek the Captain. Richards, Regher and Goose the A's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 yea, I'd have to agree. Sign me up for that lineup. I'd make Vanek the Captain. Richards, Regher and Goose the A's. Aren't there only two A's? :unsure: We only had three because we traded away the man with the C EDIT: I'd like to give Myers an A. It'll be his team in a few years anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetterDays06 Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 The thread you started is a very intriguing read, but i have some reservations about fielding Richard Roy and Pavelski. I know we need centers, but thats 3 top end guys amongst 3 lines. I'm not sure where the line gets drawn, but i have to think that a lack of grit can start to hurt you. If kassian indeed makes the big club, myers and weber get mean, we sign a big shutdown defensive vet, and kaleta and goose don't take any ######, i could see it working. In your previous thread you had roy on the fourth line. Retooling might need to be in order, but it could work. if you have that talent you'd need size so i think a better line up could look a little like this Vanek - Richards - Boyes Ennis - Roy - Stafford Gerbe - Pavelski - Kassian McCormick - Gaustad - Kaleta It's an incredibly skilled team, and i like it for the most part. WOW!! This is the best line up out of any of the threads :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSoldier2010 Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 WOW!! This is the best line up out of any of the threads :thumbsup: It's also not very likely we gain both pavelski and Brad Richards, but thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 holy crap someone still saying get Pavelski... i got away for a weekend and Pavelski gets brought up. Interesting but time will tell if anyone gets anything, or if darcy goes with the idea that even though last years team sucked this years will be better even though its the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Please back this fear up with a reason. Everyone seems to agree with you, I want to know why we need a 30 goal 80 point centerman. [this is a loaded request, but please humor me] This team has no catalyst. Brad Richards is a catalyst. Dude even has a Lady Byng, for goodness sake. Gretzky won the Lady Byng. Five times, actually. Byng-types are special. Everyone's numbers could go up substantially, including his own, if he comes here and we try him with all our top guys on his wings. Catalyst. All these young kids, ready to explode out there. A guy like Brad Richards could make that happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 I like the idea of acquiring Versteeg. Talented, young and only has 1 year left on his current deal. He shouldn't be the centerpiece of the off-season but would make a nice side dish. a wing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 my guess would be june23,24 is possible for moves than july 1-3 there will be some moves. Also, anyone else just not as high on Ehrhoff now? I kinda dont want vancouvers defense anymore lmao. Ok id take bieksa probably but ehrhoff's value dropped for me as the playoffs went on. Bieksa is not coming to Buffalo as his agent said no way Buffalo is an option for him. Detroit is number one on his wish list and they need a Dman. Don't ask for a link as this is a conversation I had with someone very high up in the NHL.....Still plenty of others to be had Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Bieksa is not coming to Buffalo as his agent said no way Buffalo is an option for him. Detroit is number one on his wish list and they need a Dman. Don't ask for a link as this is a conversation I had with someone very high up in the NHL.....Still plenty of others to be had as in my short time here, i have not known you to randomly post bs, I will believe you that this is indeed the case, but it is a shame because Bieksa could have been a great piece to help us win a cup. Hopefully Pitkanen does not feel the same. (ps. Thxs for the info :thumbsup: ) also: Lidstrom Will Return!!! Lidstrom is coming back for Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 as in my short time here, i have not known you to randomly post bs, I will believe you that this is indeed the case, but it is a shame because Bieksa could have been a great piece to help us win a cup. Hopefully Pitkanen does not feel the same. (ps. Thxs for the info :thumbsup: ) No problem, the reason this came up is because I mentioned that I wanted Bieksa very badly - basically, I was told "not happening." If Detroit wants him, they get him....Buffalo is WAY down on the list for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Buffalo is WAY down on the list for him. Sooooo ... you're telling us there's a chance. Yeeeeaah! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Dude even has a Lady Byng, for goodness sake. Gretzky won the Lady Byng. Five times, actually. Byng-types are special. Um...what? Did they change the criteria for the lady bing trophy while I was asleep? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.