nfreeman Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 A fitting end to one of the worst contracts in franchise history. In what may have been one of the worst off-seasons in Sabres history, retaining Darcy, signing Ehrhoff & Leino. Fixed (and frankly I'm surprised that I needed to do so). Ehrhoff certainly walked through the back end of the season. That doesn't change the fact he was our best player. I guess I understand the why after reading Vogl's story, but this really leaves a huge hole in the lineup and it's a step backward in our push to reach the floor. I don't do this unless I have a plan that I am pretty sure is going to work. I am very interested in what Tim will do next and will be second-guessing this until he makes his moves. Trade for Campbell, sign Orpik? It's a step backward on the ice as well. This doesn't sit well. If it wasn't a tanking move, then it feels like an ego-driven "I'll show you" move. Neither is conducive to long-term franchise improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Fixed (and frankly I'm surprised that I needed to do so). It's a step backward on the ice as well. This doesn't sit well. If it wasn't a tanking move, then it feels like an ego-driven "I'll show you" move. Neither is conducive to long-term franchise improvement. It really makes sense because of the potential recapture penalty. I don't think there's a need to read into it beyond that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Fixed (and frankly I'm surprised that I needed to do so). It's a step backward on the ice as well. This doesn't sit well. If it wasn't a tanking move, then it feels like an ego-driven "I'll show you" move. Neither is conducive to long-term franchise improvement. The guy MAILED it in. Even X thought it was sad as it happened. Pegula just burned $70 million on the extended contracts of Darcy, Ehrhoff and Leino alone...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 It really makes sense because of the potential recapture penalty. I don't think there's a need to read into it beyond that. It's certainly possible that the cap hit is the main reason. I just have a hard time reconciling that with TM's comments about Ehrhoff not wanting to be here and not contributing to winning, plus the avowed tank strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Fixed (and frankly I'm surprised that I needed to do so). It's a step backward on the ice as well. This doesn't sit well. If it wasn't a tanking move, then it feels like an ego-driven "I'll show you" move. Neither is conducive to long-term franchise improvement. Who is this 'Darcy" you speak of? It really makes sense because of the potential recapture penalty. I don't think there's a need to read into it beyond that. Erhoff was also a 32 year old blueliner on a team stockpiling young defensmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 The guy MAILED it in. Even X thought it was sad as it happened. Pegula just burned $70 million on the extended contracts of Darcy, Ehrhoff and Leino alone...... And yet there still are people who think he's not committed to winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 It's certainly possible that the cap hit is the main reason. I just have a hard time reconciling that with TM's comments about Ehrhoff not wanting to be here and not contributing to winning, plus the avowed tank strategy. But the (alleged, take that NHL upper brass) strategy is to lose 1 more season and then start winning. If the dressing room becomes toxic, it won't be a 1 year deal - it'll be Edmonton. Don't know it'll be toxic, but the threat plus the threat of trade recapture makes this move pretty much inevitable (in hindsight). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 And yet there still are people who think he's not committed to winning. This is a move that might prove once and for all Pegula regrets his first foray into ownership. If he meddled, he just proved himself to be foolish at the time. It's an expensive mistake to admit, but he just did so. And the more I see of Murray, the more it looks like he is the type of loose cannon that can cancel out the other loose cannons hanging around. For some reason I see him getting back to his condo today, putting on Aqualung, and spraying a can of RediWhip down his throat...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 putting on Aqualung, and spraying a can of RediWhip down his throat...... Nice JT reference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 This is a move that might prove once and for all Pegula regrets his first foray into ownership. If he meddled, he just proved himself to be foolish at the time. It's an expensive mistake to admit, but he just did so. And the more I see of Murray, the more it looks like he is the type of loose cannon that can cancel out the other loose cannons hanging around. For some reason I see him getting back to his condo today, putting on Aqualung, and spraying a can of RediWhip down his throat...... That last paragraph was funny. Good job. :beer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 If we draft a guy: "he's going to be great, what a steal" If we sign a guy (no matter how pedestrian the signing): "great pickup" If we get rid of a guy: "he had a bad attitude, he wasn't very good any way, ..." (same on pretty much every message board for every team in every sport) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 If we draft a guy: "he's going to be great, what a steal" If we sign a guy (no matter how pedestrian the signing): "great pickup" If we get rid of a guy: "he had a bad attitude, he wasn't very good any way, ..." (same on pretty much every message board for every team in every sport) Haha yup. Remember when Philly wouldn't ever win a Cup because Carter and Richards liked to party? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 I like Ehrhoff a lot, but I understand why he's gone. Penalizing contracts that were signed before recapture penalties existed is ###### whack, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Serious question for the CBA aficionados: could we have just uses a regular buyout later in the contract to avoid recapture. Let's say Ehrhoff wants to retire at 35...those are the $1 mil seasons in the deal. Use the regular buyout (which would be very cheap). Keep a good player for 4-5 more years and avoid recapture all at once. I feel that makes too much sense for it to have been a realistic option. And if it was a real option, and they decided to amnesty him anyway (hi Shrader!) then they *really* must have thought he'd be a malignant cancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 (edited) Serious question for the CBA aficionados: could we have just uses a regular buyout later in the contract to avoid recapture. Let's say Ehrhoff wants to retire at 35...those are the $1 mil seasons in the deal. Use the regular buyout (which would be very cheap). Keep a good player for 4-5 more years and avoid recapture all at once. I feel that makes too much sense for it to have been a realistic option. And if it was a real option, and they decided to amnesty him anyway (hi Shrader!) then they *really* must have thought he'd be a malignant cancer. Serious answer: Yes. In fact, such a buyout would count against the cap. So we have to think that TM has another way to get to the floor, since the easy (but considerably more expensive) way would have been to use a non-compliance, "regular" buyout for Ehrhoff. (EDIT: TM also likely does not want the $4M cap hit continuing through 2020, since this team eventually will be spending to the cap again.) One thing to remember is that the Sabres never would have been able to trade Ehrhoff had they kept him. Another is that it's okay for a guy not to want to be around a rebuild in the later stage of his career. Perfectly okay. Edited June 29, 2014 by Eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Haha yup. Remember when Philly wouldn't ever win a Cup because Carter and Richards liked to party? I heard they partied like nuts after both cup wins. Just a rumour though.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Haha yup. Remember when Philly wouldn't ever win a Cup because Carter and Richards liked to party? It was a stupid move then and it looks even worse now. And I love that it happened to Philly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Haha yup. Remember when Philly wouldn't ever win a Cup because Carter and Richards liked to party? I remember us on this board running off every player from the conference final teams in the mid-2000s. Everyone was expendable. Everyone wasn't going to be missed. Everyone wasn't that good. Yet, we kept getting worse and worse with every move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Serious answer: Yes. In fact, such a buyout would count against the cap. So we have to think that TM has another way to get to the floor, since the easy way would have been to use a non-compliance, "regular" buyout for Ehrhoff. So no recapture then? Thanks. I wouldn't use the buyout now, I'm saying if Ehrhoff were to want to retire and we were faced with recapture, just use the buyout at that point. Get to hang onto at worst a #3 Dman for 4 more years while making it easier to hit the floor the next few, buy out the remaining 2 years $2 million for a negligible cap hit. I'd find that a thousand times better than a compliance buyout now. They must really think he was going to be detrimental to the development of the kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 (edited) So no recapture then? Thanks. I wouldn't use the buyout now, I'm saying if Ehrhoff were to want to retire and we were faced with recapture, just use the buyout at that point. Get to hang onto at worst a #3 Dman for 4 more years while making it easier to hit the floor the next few, buy out the remaining 2 years $2 million for a negligible cap hit. I'd find that a thousand times better than a compliance buyout now. They must really think he was going to be detrimental to the development of the kids. Look what happens if they do that, though: http://capgeek.com/recapture-grid EDIT: There still is a recapture penalty, just not the same penalty. Sorry my original answer was imprecise! Edited June 29, 2014 by Eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biodork Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Dammit. Just saw this and the thread is alread 6 pages long. I really didn't think they were going to buy him out. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaLaLaFontaine Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Ok I am really shocked! GMTM must hate CE, yes the cap penalty may be a pain for us in a critical time of success, but I am totally shocked and need some time to move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 It really makes sense because of the potential recapture penalty. I don't think there's a need to read into it beyond that. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Ehrhoff probably requested a trade, hence the inference that he "doesn't want to be here." But Murray saw that as too big of a risk down the road -- imagine it's 2018 and the Sabres are prepping to go after the big fish in free agency to put us over the top as cup contenders... but instead Ehrhoff retires and we are hit with the nasty recapture penalty. I think that is 100% what this was all about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biodork Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 95% of the team had quit by that point in the season. If Ehrhoff is going to be the scapegoat, whatever, but he was far from the only one to mail it in. Ehrhoff certainly walked through the back end of the season. That doesn't change the fact he was our best player. I guess I understand the why after reading Vogl's story, but this really leaves a huge hole in the lineup and it's a step backward in our push to reach the floor. I don't do this unless I have a plan that I am pretty sure is going to work. I am very interested in what Tim will do next and will be second-guessing this until he makes his moves. Trade for Campbell, sign Orpik? These pretty well sum up how I feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Ehrhoff probably requested a trade, hence the inference that he "doesn't want to be here." But Murray saw that as too big of a risk down the road -- imagine it's 2018 and the Sabres are prepping to go after the big fish in free agency to put us over the top as cup contenders... but instead Ehrhoff retires and we are hit with the nasty recapture penalty. I think that is 100% what this was all about. That's what I see, too. 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.