dudacek Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 1> Playoff run (not in Buffalo's case) 2> Fear that he might agree on a deal with another team in a trade-sign arrangement. If you wait until FA, you're hoping he doesn't sign with the Rangers or the team he gets traded to. Normally those are factors. But the issue is the massive overpayment Callahan is demanding. Who is willing to give him that much, and give the Rangers fair value in a trade? This isn't Steven Stamkos we are talking about here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Re: Callahan for $Texas. Why not? We're likely dumping Leino, so he'll be off the books. And if we're going to waste money, let's gamble it on someone who may or may not be the second coming of Chris Drury. It'll also make Drew Stafford even more expendable. Additionally, examining why the Oilers suck fat ######, it's not just their lack of defensemen. They have a distinct lack of veteran leadership on that team. I get why we'd want to stock up a few character guys to lead the youngin's into battle for the next few years. It's the same reasoning for why you'd want to keep Steve Ott around. I understand the counter argument: cap space is an asset, especially 4-6 years down the road. But you're getting veteran leadership and goal scoring from a Rochester, NY guy who had played for the Buffalo Jr Sabres. He could end up being the captain his entire time here. He is not and never will be on par with Drury, who had way more offensive output. Its not even close. @WFAN660 Sather needs to trade Callahan before #Sochi freeze, or he'll be playing with fire, writes @HartnettHockey. http://newyork.cbslo...mpics-freeze/ … #NYR This article explains exactly why I don't want Callahan at that cap hit. Ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MILFHUNTER#518 Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Not worth the $$$, I agree with the article... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 He is not and never will be on par with Drury, who had way more offensive output. Its not even close. You mean the numbers Drury got during the two seasons of interference? (2005-2007) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 You mean the numbers Drury got during the two seasons of interference? (2005-2007) I mean most of his seasons were better than Callahan's best. There are plenty of reasons to love Callahan but he isnt a offensive player and he is no where as good as Drury was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 I mean most of his seasons were better than Callahan's best. There are plenty of reasons to love Callahan but he isnt a offensive player and he is no where as good as Drury was. Well hopefully he can be better for us than Drury was for the Rags (if we get him, of course). If he signs with the Leafs or the Bruins on the other hand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 I think realistically going forward we can expect Callahan to have 20g and 30-35a in a full season. I think that can be +/- 5-10 points but the fact remains you don't pay a 60pt a year forward 6.75mil for 7 years. It just doesn't make good financial sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) It was just one of two examples (one of which was incorrect as you pointed out) of teams purposefully acquiring the top pick in the past for a generational talent. Those examples taken together was also just one of several signs the Sabres were willing to actually see the tank through (into next year) and really restock the cupboard. My point stands. In fact I was misremembering who tanked for whom. It wasn't for Lemieux and Crosby as I stated but Pittsburgh's coach admitted they tanked for Lemieux, and the NHL investigated Ottawa losing on purpose for Daigle, thus instituting the lottery system moving forward. My memory of the draft process was hazy too. I remembered the Sabres had the same number of chances as the Penguins, but I also remember your chance was reduced if you had the #1 pick recently, so I looked it up. The Sabres, Penguins, Blue Jackets and Rangers all had the best chance (three balls in the lottery). Not sure why the Penguins don't seem to have been penalized for drafting Fleury 1st in '03, although it might have to do with recent playoff appearances also. In my search, I also happened on this video, which shows how the draft lottery works now (or at least how it worked last year): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWVtqAQzjYY Edit: ...and not to get all conspiracy theory but why does the video cut out each time the gentleman picks a ball out of that machine? Was this broadcast live anywhere? If the point of the video is transparency, why blatently edit the video like that? Pittsburgh picked Fleury 1st overall, but they had traded for the pick, so it didn't count against them. Edited February 4, 2014 by Taro T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Edit: ...and not to get all conspiracy theory but why does the video cut out each time the gentleman picks a ball out of that machine? Was this broadcast live anywhere? If the point of the video is transparency, why blatently edit the video like that? I predict Pittsburgh gets the hog testicle again this year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLT_fpFmA8M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Pittsburgh picked Fleury 1st overall, but they had traded for the pick, so it didn't count against them. Ahh thank you. I predict Pittsburgh gets the hog testicle again this year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLT_fpFmA8M :lol: and thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I think realistically going forward we can expect Callahan to have 20g and 30-35a in a full season. I think that can be +/- 5-10 points but the fact remains you don't pay a 60pt a year forward 6.75mil for 7 years. It just doesn't make good financial sense. Maybe not three years ago. But this year you certainly do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Normally those are factors. But the issue is the massive overpayment Callahan is demanding. Who is willing to give him that much, and give the Rangers fair value in a trade? This isn't Steven Stamkos we are talking about here. We are because we got the room, i'd start with giving him 8 mill first two years and have it drop to 5 mill last two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 We are because we got the room, i'd start with giving him 8 mill first two years and have it drop to 5 mill last two years. Doesn't the new CBA prevent these type of contracts now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Maybe not three years ago. But this year you certainly do Take a look at the players making 7mil per year. Ryan Callahan on a good day falls below 6mil per year. Doesn't the new CBA prevent these type of contracts now? I think you could actually do it. There can't be something like 20%(?) difference between years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) Take a look at the players making 7mil per year. Ryan Callahan on a good day falls below 6mil per year. I think you could actually do it. There can't be something like 20%(?) difference between years. Contracts go up over time. Some of those guys making that money would be getting raises if they happended to be pending UFA's now. Plus who else are we going to spend it on after Miller, Ott, and Moulson get traded away? Maybe there's a chance we can bring back Ott or Moulson, but without overpaying a guy like Callahan the roster is going to be twice as pathetic as it is now. If we go into next season trying to field a lineup that looks something like: Adam Hodgson Reinhart Omark Ennis Girgensons Foligno Flynn Stafford Scott McCormick Kaleta x Konopka/D'Agostini Ehrhoff Pysyk Tallinder Myers Weber Ruhwedel x McBain Enroth Hackett The league will probably make us forfeit our lottery pick. Signing Callahan shows we're at least trying and without Miller the tank would still be on next season. Hell, short of renting out and re-signing Ott, Moulson, and Miller then signing Callahan and adding Reinhart, I don't really see any way other we'll be a competitive team next season. Edited February 5, 2014 by Drunkard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Take a look at the players making 7mil per year. Ryan Callahan on a good day falls below 6mil per year. I think you could actually do it. There can't be something like 20%(?) difference between years. look at the ones who got their contract recently the 6-7 million guys are all in callahans class Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Contracts go up over time. Some of those guys making that money would be getting raises if they happended to be pending UFA's now. Plus who else are we going to spend it on after Miller, Ott, and Moulson get traded away? Maybe there's a chance we can bring back Ott or Moulson, but without overpaying a guy like Callahan the roster is going to be twice as pathetic as it is now. If we go into next season trying to field a lineup that looks something like: Adam Hodgson Reinhart Omark Ennis Girgensons Foligno Flynn Stafford Scott McCormick Kaleta x Konopka/D'Agostini Ehrhoff Pysyk Tallinder Myers Weber Ruhwedel x McBain Enroth Hackett The league will probably make us forfeit our lottery pick. Signing Callahan shows we're at least trying and without Miller the tank would still be on next season. Hell, short of renting out and re-signing Ott, Moulson, and Miller then signing Callahan and adding Reinhart, I don't really see any way other we'll be a competitive team next season. Gahhhhhh! Keep our 1st rounder next year away from that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 look at the ones who got their contract recently the 6-7 million guys are all in callahans class Joe thorton, patrick marleau, dion phanuef, all recently signed for what Callahan is asking 6-7M. He has never come close to their production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Contracts go up over time. Some of those guys making that money would be getting raises if they happended to be pending UFA's now. Plus who else are we going to spend it on after Miller, Ott, and Moulson get traded away? Maybe there's a chance we can bring back Ott or Moulson, but without overpaying a guy like Callahan the roster is going to be twice as pathetic as it is now. If we go into next season trying to field a lineup that looks something like: Adam Hodgson Reinhart Omark Ennis Girgensons Foligno Flynn Stafford Scott McCormick Kaleta x Konopka/D'Agostini Ehrhoff Pysyk Tallinder Myers Weber Ruhwedel x McBain Enroth Hackett The league will probably make us forfeit our lottery pick. Signing Callahan shows we're at least trying and without Miller the tank would still be on next season. Hell, short of renting out and re-signing Ott, Moulson, and Miller then signing Callahan and adding Reinhart, I don't really see any way other we'll be a competitive team next season. Well first off Sam Reinhart is a center, as for the rest of the roster we would need to start a new thread. I like Callahan but I don't like him at 7mil for 7years. 7mil for 2 years, sure why not? But for a long time making way to much money, it is just to much. look at the ones who got their contract recently the 6-7 million guys are all in callahans class I did look at the 7mil a year guys who got contracts at or around a similar cap. We are talking 60-70pt a year guys. Callahan is a 50-60pt a year guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Well first off Sam Reinhart is a center, as for the rest of the roster we would need to start a new thread. I like Callahan but I don't like him at 7mil for 7years. 7mil for 2 years, sure why not? But for a long time making way to much money, it is just to much. I did look at the 7mil a year guys who got contracts at or around a similar cap. We are talking 60-70pt a year guys. Callahan is a 50-60pt a year guy. No we are not. He scored 54 points once, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Well first off Sam Reinhart is a center, as for the rest of the roster we would need to start a new thread. I like Callahan but I don't like him at 7mil for 7years. 7mil for 2 years, sure why not? But for a long time making way to much money, it is just to much. I did look at the 7mil a year guys who got contracts at or around a similar cap. We are talking 60-70pt a year guys. Callahan is a 50-60pt a year guy. Jordan Staal, Ryan O'reilly. Those guys are callahan type players and that is the money they got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Well first off Sam Reinhart is a center, as for the rest of the roster we would need to start a new thread. I like Callahan but I don't like him at 7mil for 7years. 7mil for 2 years, sure why not? But for a long time making way to much money, it is just to much. I did look at the 7mil a year guys who got contracts at or around a similar cap. We are talking 60-70pt a year guys. Callahan is a 50-60pt a year guy. I know he's a center, but most teams break in new centers at winger because the defensive responsibilities are lessened. And I'm sure everyone would rather have Callahan on a 2 for 14 contract than a 7 for 49 (personally I'd prefer a 4 or 5 year deal) but he's not going to sign with us or anybody for just a 2 year term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 No we are not. He scored 54 points once, Jordan Stall has had 50 pts onces, O'reilly has never had a 40 pt season. between 6-7 million dollars is the market value for guys like callahan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Joe thorton, patrick marleau, dion phanuef, all recently signed for what Callahan is asking 6-7M. He has never come close to their production. No we are not. He scored 54 points once, I like Callahan, but you are spot with your take, I am of the opinion, just because Pegula has the resources to over pay every player in the league, it doesn't mean it should be done. Callahan is not a $6 -7 mil year player by any standard. A team will probably pay it, The only way it makes sense for the Sabres if the signing is used in a way to show other players around the league they are serious about turning things around. I just don't see it as a wise investment in the Sabres future. Jordan Staal, Ryan O'reilly. Those guys are callahan type players and that is the money they got. And neither are worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I like Callahan, but you are spot with your take, I am of the opinion, just because Pegula has the resources to over pay every player in the league, it doesn't mean it should be done. Callahan is not a $6 -7 mil year player by any standard. A team will probably pay it, The only way it makes sense for the Sabres if the signing is used in a way to show other players around the league they are serious about turning things around. I just don't see it as a wise investment in the Sabres future. And neither are worth it. Well more than one GM thought that they were. Which means that they are worth it. A player is worth what a GM is willing to pay, and there will be numerous GMs willing to pay 6-7 for Callahan. There is absolutely zero reason that we shouldn't give callahan that contract we have NOTHING to lose. We have the most desireable cap situation in the entire league and the ONE AND ONLY way we can get into cap trouble in 4-7 years is if we have 4-5 prospects become top players in the league where they will need 7 million+ themselves. That is a situation that we want to be in! It is the situation the blackhawks have been in. Who doesnt want that? The worst thing that could happen is that terry needs to buy out callahan towards the end or he could bury the contract if he cant retain some salary and trade him away. WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.