BuffaloFansR_Crazy Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Well written article here: THW. I would gladly sign him up for 3 mil/year, but would like to see three seasons, not five. Darcy will offer him a Connolly Contract though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 see July 1st thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Zero chance Stafford is signed for $3 million a year. Aren't the situations with Grabner and Okposo completely different from Drew's, given their ages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanny Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Yes, they're giving up restricted years, not unrestricted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Well written article here: THW. I would gladly sign him up for 3 mil/year, but would like to see three seasons, not five. Darcy will offer him a Connolly Contract though. Just like in the past Darcy will throw large money in the wrong direction. Especially with mister moneybags telling his G.M. that the skies the limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Just like in the past Darcy will throw large money in the wrong direction. Especially with mister moneybags telling his G.M. that the skies the limit. Bun, please see Lanny's post. If the Sabres sign Stafford past one year, they are cutting into his UFA years, aka the $$$ years. The kids on the isles are only cutting into their RFA years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Bun, please see Lanny's post. If the Sabres sign Stafford past one year, they are cutting into his UFA years, aka the $$$ years. The kids on the isles are only cutting into their RFA years. Why do are we starting a new thread on this? Seriously there are 10 pages of it in the july 1 thread. Everyone has there opinion its all set and the isles signing only have a minimal impact but should be considered, Again drew doesnt get a huge raise just because hes becoming a UFA next year thats rediculous. Andrew Peters would have been making like 4mil a year if that were the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Again drew doesnt get a huge raise just because hes becoming a UFA next year thats rediculous. Andrew Peters would have been making like 4mil a year if that were the case. He's not getting a raise for the sake of just getting a raise, there has to be incentive for him to sign more than a one year deal or go to arbitration. His agent knows where that bar is and he's going to look just north of that, simple negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 He's not getting a raise for the sake of just getting a raise, there has to be incentive for him to sign more than a one year deal or go to arbitration. His agent knows where that bar is and he's going to look just north of that, simple negotiations. It would b exactly a raise for the sake of a raise. He gets hot for 30 games or so and that is to outweigh the rest of his career? Stafford hasn't earned a big raise if any raise at all. Look at what is being said. "He is cutting into his UFA years" and he needs "incentive to sign more than a one year deal." All I am hearing is let's sign Stafford for more than he is worth for every reason other than the player he actually is. It is a lot like the Donte Whitner situation with the Bills. Because of where they were drafted and when their contracts are up they feel they deserve compensation beyond what there play actually dictates. The Bills where smart enough to walk away from Whitner and an inflated contract. I hope the people that are building "Hockey Heaven" are just as smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 It would b exactly a raise for the sake of a raise. He gets hot for 30 games or so and that is to outweigh the rest of his career? Stafford hasn't earned a big raise if any raise at all. Look at what is being said. "He is cutting into his UFA years" and he needs "incentive to sign more than a one year deal." All I am hearing is let's sign Stafford for more than he is worth for every reason other than the player he actually is. It is a lot like the Donte Whitner situation with the Bills. Because of where they were drafted and when their contracts are up they feel they deserve compensation beyond what there play actually dictates. The Bills where smart enough to walk away from Whitner and an inflated contract. I hope the people that are building "Hockey Heaven" are just as smart. He scored 31 goals in 62 games. That hasn't been done much the last two or three years. Whitner has done nothing. The situations aren't even close. Its on the Sabres to know if he has "broken through" and is a legit 25 to 30 goal man. If he is, he is worth $4.3. If it turns out out he is a 35 to 40 goal man, they got a huge bargain for a couple of years. If he turns out to be a 15 to 20 goal guy, they made a mistake, but not a debilitating one. What TP offers is the luxury to make a mistake or two. You talk frequently of not being afraid to make a mistake when making a trade, this is the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 He scored 31 goals in 62 games. That hasn't been done much the last two or three years. Whitner has done nothing. The situations aren't even close. Its on the Sabres to know if he has "broken through" and is a legit 25 to 30 goal man. If he is, he is worth $4.3. If it turns out out he is a 35 to 40 goal man, they got a huge bargain for a couple of years. If he turns out to be a 15 to 20 goal guy, they made a mistake, but not a debilitating one. What TP offers is the luxury to make a mistake or two. You talk frequently of not being afraid to make a mistake when making a trade, this is the same thing. It's only the same thing if you trade for or sign a free-agent, who's entire career has been pedestrian, based on a small sample of games in a contract year. There is a difference between not being afraid to make a move and making a move out of sheer stupidity. Stafford & Whitner are two overrated players possibly facing huge raises despite lackluster careers. How is that not close? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Because Whitner has done nothing to show he is anything but ordinary. Stafford has shown he could be a star Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Because Whitner has done nothing to show he is anything but ordinary. Stafford has shown he could be a star That is ridiculous. He scored 5 goals over his first 15 games and 5 goals over his last 15 games. That leaves a stretch of 32 games where he was red hot and scored 22 goals. He was hot for 39% of a season and that is proof he can be a star? That would mean that all Whitner needed to do is play lights out for 6 games in one season and that is proof he could be a star? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 He scored 5 goals over his first 15 games and 5 goals over his last 15 games. That leaves a stretch of 32 games where he was red hot and scored 22 goals. So, for the two 15 games stretches where he was only on a 27G per season pace, he was what? Just hot? There are a lot of reasons to be afraid about Stafford, but having 5G in 15GP as the two "low" points of the season doesn't seem like one of them. Ovechkin had 6 goals in a 30GP stretch in the middle of this season; Stamkos has 6G in his last 30 regular season games. Bums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 So, for the two 15 games stretches where he was only on a 27G per season pace, he was what? Just hot? There are a lot of reasons to be afraid about Stafford, but having 5G in 15GP as the two "low" points of the season doesn't seem like one of them. Ovechkin had 6 goals in a 30GP stretch in the middle of this season; Stamkos has 6G in his last 30 regular season games. Bums. A 27g pace doesn't make him a perennial 30-40 goal scorer some have no problem with Stafford being paid like. The best you had were two 50 goal scorers who have scored as many goals in one season as Stafford has in his two best seasons? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 A 27g pace doesn't make him a perennial 30-40 goal scorer some have no problem with Stafford being paid like. The best you had were two 50 goal scorers who have scored as many goals in one season as Stafford has in his two best seasons? :doh: A few things: 1) What do you think perennial 30-40 goal scores are paid right now? Because I haven't heard any numbers thrown out for Stafford that are near that. 2) 27G pace as the low points in his season; 56G pace at the high side. Roughly half of each. One season doesn't prove anything about a player, but that certainly suggests that he is capable of 30-40G. 3) The other two were chosen because they are 50G scorers, yet they still had worse and longer low points this season. Do you want me to find some "perennial 30-40 goal scorers" and show you that most had similar or worse low points in their seasons. Goal scorers are notoriously streaky; not just ours, but all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 A 27g pace doesn't make him a perennial 30-40 goal scorer some have no problem with Stafford being paid like. The best you had were two 50 goal scorers who have scored as many goals in one season as Stafford has in his two best seasons? :doh: 98% of this leagues scores are streaky. Breaking down the season into stretches of games for players is as ridiculous as breaking down a season for teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 He scored 31 goals in 62 games. That hasn't been done much the last two or three years. Whitner has done nothing. The situations aren't even close. Its on the Sabres to know if he has "broken through" and is a legit 25 to 30 goal man. If he is, he is worth $4.3. If it turns out out he is a 35 to 40 goal man, they got a huge bargain for a couple of years. If he turns out to be a 15 to 20 goal guy, they made a mistake, but not a debilitating one. What TP offers is the luxury to make a mistake or two. You talk frequently of not being afraid to make a mistake when making a trade, this is the same thing. how many not debilitating mistakes add up to a a debilitating mistake? He's not a legit anything. A lot of players around the league every year have career years in which they reach the 30 goals plateau and then never ever do again. This team needs to stop rewarding mediocrity, 52 pts in 62 games is nice but 12 of those points game in 4 games. Inconsistency marks the difference between good and great and 4mil and 5+. I agree with Deluca, it makes no sense to pay drew for something he hasnt done or earned because it cuts into his UFA years and he scored 30 goals once. ps. yes when drew scored at the 27g pace he was just hot, it happend to Stamkos when he was scoring ridiculously every game. Players get hot that doesnt mean they should get a tripling almost of there salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 98% of this leagues scores are streaky. Breaking down the season into stretches of games for players is as ridiculous as breaking down a season for teams. When one segment of games is so far removed from all other segment of games it is not only the furthest thing from "ridiculous" it is pertinent to the conversation. There is a difference from a league scorer being "streaky" and grossly overpaying a player based on one "streak." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Tell me, since 06/07, when the current league scoring settled in, how many players scored 30 goals never to do it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 98% of this leagues scores are streaky. Breaking down the season into stretches of games for players is as ridiculous as breaking down a season for teams. Correct. Which is why the Sabres are an average team. :clapping: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Tell me, since 06/07, when the current league scoring settled in, how many players scored 30 goals never to do it again. Wow! Let's start with.....I dunno.....ummmnn......ALL $5.3 MILLION OF JASON POMINVILLE????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Good example. And if he was making $4.3 million, he'd be a good contract. By the way, he's really not a good example as I meant every season after 06/07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Correct. Which is why the Sabres are an average team. :clapping: I agree that like teams 6 through 20, they are, as presently constituted, an average team. I believe that they will add the 2, maybe three pieces that will put them on par with anybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 I agree that like teams 6 through 20, they are, as presently constituted, an average team. I believe that they will add the 2, maybe three pieces that will put them on par with anybody. I know you wrote that exact same thing last year. :doh: ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.