tom webster Posted May 28, 2011 Report Share Posted May 28, 2011 Know they tried and couldn't pull it off within their parameters. The success they had this year without those pieces kind of proves my point. I also must admit that Darcy may have been right about Stafford and Gerbe which further gives me cause for optimism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted May 29, 2011 Report Share Posted May 29, 2011 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? What part of this is bad/ 5 in 15 is good 22 in 32 is really good 5 in 15 is good. Maybe I'm missing some part of your meaning here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 29, 2011 Report Share Posted May 29, 2011 What part of this is bad/ 5 in 15 is good 22 in 32 is really good 5 in 15 is good. Maybe I'm missing some part of your meaning here. It has to do with what a new contract is based on. I do not believe Stafford is due the raise that many say he is due based on a 32 game segment that has distorted his numbers. He is a 20ish goal scorer who is just as likely to score less than 20 goals in a given season than he is to score 20 or more in a given season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted May 29, 2011 Report Share Posted May 29, 2011 It has to do with what a new contract is based on. I do not believe Stafford is due the raise that many say he is due based on a 32 game segment that has distorted his numbers. He is a 20ish goal scorer who is just as likely to score less than 20 goals in a given season than he is to score 20 or more in a given season. Not sure how distorted his numbers are. Even when considering his 5 goals in 15 games that's a pace of 27 goals a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 There you go using real math. You have to use the -5 method when calculating Sabres effectiveness. This formula takes into account all the garbage goals Stafford scores, the lazy goals Vanek gets and the blind squirrel goals the power play gets when the crowd tells them to shoot. Using this base 15 formula allows you to truly see the pathetic group that is the Sabre forwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 There you go using real math. You have to use the -5 method when calculating Sabres effectiveness. This formula takes into account all the garbage goals Stafford scores, the lazy goals Vanek gets and the blind squirrel goals the power play gets when the crowd tells them to shoot. Using this base 15 formula allows you to truly see the pathetic group that is the Sabre forwards. Seems like a more reliable system than calculating goals not scored in games not played. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Seems like a more reliable system than calculating goals not scored in games not played. :thumbsup: what? Goals scored 31, games played 62. I was merely commenting on your point that the first 15 games and final 15 games were what? Not 'red hot'? My point was simply that even when he wasn't 'red hot' he was well above average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Seems like a more reliable system than calculating goals not scored in games not played. :thumbsup: As opposed to deciding which stretch counts more? Or as opposed to criticizing him for a stretch that would still make him a $4.3 million player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 It's starting to dawn on me now: Deluca doesn't like Drew Stafford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 As opposed to deciding which stretch counts more? Or as opposed to criticizing him for a stretch that would still make him a $4.3 million player? When a 32 game stretch is so far removed from the other 285 games? You don't think the Sabres wouldn't point out the exact same thing in a arbitration hearing? $4.3 million? I actually laughed out loud and startled the dogs. $4.3 for a 15-20 goal scorer who isn't particularly physical considering his size? This a clear case of trying to inflate a players monetary value in an attempt to inflate Stafford's value as a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 It's starting to dawn on me now: Deluca doesn't like Drew Stafford. When Stafford comes out and says he doesn't need to fight because that is the job of his teammates, that tells me a lot about his character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 When Stafford comes out and says he doesn't need to fight because that is the job of his teammates, that tells me a lot about his character. Vanek is about the same size as Stafford. Why don't you get on him for not fighting, too? If Drew had to sit because he got a broken hand in some stupid fight that had no bearing on a game anyway, I'd be pissed. He's right. It isn't his job to fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 When a 32 game stretch is so far removed from the other 285 games? You don't think the Sabres wouldn't point out the exact same thing in a arbitration hearing? $4.3 million? I actually laughed out loud and startled the dogs. $4.3 for a 15-20 goal scorer who isn't particularly physical considering his size? This a clear case of trying to inflate a players monetary value in an attempt to inflate Stafford's value as a player. Again, why are you ignoring the first 15 and last 15 games? Even eliminating the middle 32 games he was at a pace of 27 goals for the year not 15-20. Who would have thought that a young player would actually get better and perform at a higher rate in his last 60 whatever games than his first 150? I'm not confident in Drew keeping that 30 goal pace and that's why it scares me that we are talking north of 4 mil per season. But it's not laughable as you stated. He probably will get 3.8 to 4.5 per depending on length of contract and any other clauses/incentives. I can see Darcy not wanting to pay 4.5 but I wouldn't be surprised if another team then signs him to an offer sheet. If that happens I don't even want to check this board for a few days as the Darcy haters will be out in full force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 So rather than look at streaks, lets look at the entire sum all 317 games. He's a 24 goal scorer. If you believe he's getting better, then his per season totals will be at least more than that going forward. If you think he's always gonna be the same Drew, then that's the number you work from. He's never had a season in the minus. So he must be reasonably responsible in his own end and on the backcheck. All you need to do now is find a comparable contract for a guy with 1 year remaining to RFA that is a career 24 goal scorer with solid defense. Just name those guys at $2.5M or whatever you think he should be paid, and you can win the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 He probably will get 3.8 to 4.5 per depending on length of contract and any other clauses/incentives. CBA doesn't allow for incentives in most cases. He won't be on an entry-level contract, won't be over 35, and won't be signing a one-year contract after missing a considerable portion of last season (that' my off-the-cuff memory, which may be off slightly, but I am certain that he doesn't qualify for any incentives.) For most players, all they can choose is the number of years and the salary in each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 CBA doesn't allow for incentives in most cases. He won't be on an entry-level contract, won't be over 35, and won't be signing a one-year contract after missing a considerable portion of last season (that' my off-the-cuff memory, which may be off slightly, but I am certain that he doesn't qualify for any incentives.) For most players, all they can choose is the number of years and the salary in each. Thanks, my mistake. I'm sure the term of this contract (like any for that matter) will play a large roll on the per year cap hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Vanek is about the same size as Stafford. Why don't you get on him for not fighting, too? If Drew had to sit because he got a broken hand in some stupid fight that had no bearing on a game anyway, I'd be pissed. He's right. It isn't his job to fight. Simple, Vanek is a legit 30-40 goal scorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 So rather than look at streaks, lets look at the entire sum all 317 games. He's a 24 goal scorer. If you believe he's getting better, then his per season totals will be at least more than that going forward. If you think he's always gonna be the same Drew, then that's the number you work from. He's never had a season in the minus. So he must be reasonably responsible in his own end and on the backcheck. All you need to do now is find a comparable contract for a guy with 1 year remaining to RFA that is a career 24 goal scorer with solid defense. Just name those guys at $2.5M or whatever you think he should be paid, and you can win the debate. Stafford is now a "solid defender?" Earlier in the week someone had him as a power forward. I wish the Drew Stafford that exists on this board was the same that wore a Sabres uniform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Phil Kessel 222 games 24 goals/season pace average $5.4M in 2009 (5 years) John Franzen 292 games 23 goals/season pace average $4M in 2009 (11 year superlong contract) Renee Bourque 314 games 21 goals/season pace average $3.3M in 2010 (6 years) Loui Eriksson 292 games 23.5 goals/season pace average $4.3M in 2010 (6 years) Drew Stafford 317 games 24.3 goals/season pace average $?.?M in 2011 (?? years) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Stafford is now a "solid defender?" Earlier in the week someone had him as a power forward. I wish the Drew Stafford that exists on this board was the same that wore a Sabres uniform. Reasonably resposible in his own end. "Solid Defender" maybe not, but his red light turns on more than the other guy's. Solid defensively, yes. Just looking at the numbers man, anecdotal coaching points are not admissable evidence during arbitration hearings. Like it or not, this is a $4.8M-$5M short term, $4.3M long term contract situation. If you want to avoid arbitration (probably $5M+ in the current salary arbitration system). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Phil Kessel 222 games 24 goals/season pace average $5.4M in 2009 (5 years) John Franzen 292 games 23 goals/season pace average $4M in 2009 (11 year superlong contract) Renee Bourque 314 games 21 goals/season pace average $3.3M in 2010 (6 years) Loui Eriksson 292 games 23.5 goals/season pace average $4.3M in 2010 (6 years) Drew Stafford 317 games 24.3 goals/season pace average $?.?M in 2011 (?? years) This partly goes to my point. Stafford'3 32 game hot streak brings that goals average up to 24.3 from 20.7. Signing Stafford to a contract as a 25-30 scorer is another Sabres contract that they will never see full value from. I don't believe in the idea that Pegula is simply going to buyout contracts or let players sit in the AHL getting paid NHL salaries. If Pegula did the NHL may have a huge problem with this. I do believe the Sabres still benefit from revenue sharing. Isn't that why they raised ticket prices? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 This partly goes to my point. Stafford'3 32 game hot streak brings that goals average up to 24.3 from 20.7. Signing Stafford to a contract as a 25-30 scorer is another Sabres contract that they will never see full value from. I don't believe in the idea that Pegula is simply going to buyout contracts or let players sit in the AHL getting paid NHL salaries. If Pegula did the NHL may have a huge problem with this. I do believe the Sabres still benefit from revenue sharing. Isn't that why they raised ticket prices? So is he worth $3.3M/yr for six years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 So is he worth $3.3M/yr for six years? I wouldn't because I simply do not trust him as a player. I believe 100% that this season was all about the contract and once he gets it he will disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 I wouldn't because I simply do not trust him as a player. I believe 100% that this season was all about the contract and once he gets it he will disappear. And that is a reasonable conclusion. I'm not sure I'd resign him either. Maybe a one year deal if I can't get anyone this summer to fill his skates (even at 20 goals). But 20 goal scorers are worth more than $3M in today's winger market. That is just the way it is. There is no sense in arguing you can get more for less. You can't. Contract values have gone up 50% in the last 5 seasons. The only way to get great players cheap is to have them still be on their cheap capped entry level contracts or guys that have breakout numbers they've never produced before. That said, the sabres have maybe $3-4M locked up in overvalued contracts, total (I'm sure you'll entertain us with what you think is a waste relative to the crazy low prices you believe are out there). Next season, they'll more than make up for that with the cheap production they'll get from the Tylers. So, there is no real cap room excuse for the Sabres. They should be able to fit what they need in the current system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 30, 2011 Report Share Posted May 30, 2011 Hang on a second......I think I have to sneeze.......Ahh......ahhh.....ahhh.........CHEECHOO!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.