Corp000085 Posted August 25, 2005 Report Share Posted August 25, 2005 I read the buf. news article on the homepage, and he's basically giving the old "the ball is in their court" cliche. Basically, he accepts a 1 year qualifying offer by next week and becomes an UFA next year, or signs a long term deal before next week. Seems to me that the sabres can save some face by signing mckee, our new #1 defenseman. giving this guy the 1 year qualifying offer is a slap in his face for one, and it blatently shows the financial direction that the team is going towards. I'm at a loss as to what will happen with this one, but i do hope jay mckee is a sabres lifer. He's also one of the, if not, the last link to the 99 stanley cup championship* team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawerchuk Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 I know. But where is his game now? He's not the same as far as agressivness. I'd be fine if he stays another year and / or if Darcy has something in mind for him ; as in TRADED. I don't think they should "nickle and dime" him though. That cheap crap ain't right. Pay him or trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted September 1, 2005 Report Share Posted September 1, 2005 SIGN HIM! The Sabres and defenseman Jay McKee don't appear close to settling on a contract despite today's soft deadline for the club's lone unsigned player to accept his one-year qualifying offer for about $1.6 million. Look for Regier to extend the deadline again. McKee, who has stated he won't miss training camp, wants a long-term deal that would take him into unrestricted free agency. He's eligible to walk next summer. "I'm not optimistic a long-term deal will get done with the way talks have gone to date," said McKee's agent, Pat Morris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 1, 2005 Report Share Posted September 1, 2005 Does anybody know what sort of deal McKee is looking for? $2MM?, $2.5MM?? 3 yr? 5 yr? Thanks in advance, Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted September 2, 2005 Report Share Posted September 2, 2005 Does anybody know what sort of deal McKee is looking for? $2MM?, $2.5MM?? 3 yr? 5 yr? Thanks in advance, Dave. If he's smart he'll look for a trade. or He can make the $1.6 over in Europe. Play a year in Europe and come back and make some real money. And this is from a guy who doesn't like McKee. He will never be the player he was before the head injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ron-in-DC Posted September 2, 2005 Report Share Posted September 2, 2005 due to the cap you can't take a chance and sign mckee to a long-term deal this year. Darcy is playing the supply-demand game based on teams having less demand or cap room next season and with the UFA age dropping to 29 more players supply the market thereby dropping the market price. This off-season had a pent-up, frantic pace to it, led by the Flyers and Hawks and Pens. Once we sign Mckee to his one-year tender our cap will already be at 29 mill. Plus Darcy wants to sign one more vet d or trade for him. Mckee has played hurt the past 2-3 seasons, but healed this past season. Which player is he now, worn-out or re-born ? Darcy wants to wait and see. If you think I am Darcy fan I am not, but I know he always has plan,lets see if the team has matured to a playoff level. Now Darcy is down to 2 years to go on his contract, so its playoffs or else for him, and rightly so. The good thing is you wont see the Sabres with cap issues, or dead cap space with Darcy and I do believe we offered Aucoin the same or nearly the same $ as the Hawks did, but he chose Chi over Buff - that is what led to the articles about former Sabres (peca) dissing Darcy and Buf - Peca and Aucoin were mates with the NYI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knightrider Posted September 2, 2005 Report Share Posted September 2, 2005 The good thing is you wont see the Sabres with cap issues, or dead cap space... I get the feeling that there isn't as much opportunity for dead cap $ as the NFL. I didn't think you could pro rate the bonuses... Maybe the cantract is garaunteed though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 2, 2005 Report Share Posted September 2, 2005 I get the feeling that there isn't as much opportunity for dead cap $ as the NFL. I didn't think you could pro rate the bonuses... Maybe the cantract is garaunteed though... My understanding of how the cap works, is that teams can bail on contracts in the future by buying them out at 1/3 or 2/3 value (depending on player age and contract size), but that that money counts toward the $39MM cap. So if a $3MM / year player gets bought out, that team's cap would effectively be $37MM for the remaining players. Also, I had read where the cap counts all players on the roster, so if you have an injury and are already at $39MM, you are in a position where you can't just bring another player on board. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabres703 Posted September 4, 2005 Report Share Posted September 4, 2005 at this point i would be suprised to see mckee in a sabres uniform again. i think you will see him traded with biron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted September 4, 2005 Report Share Posted September 4, 2005 My understanding of how the cap works, is that teams can bail on contracts in the future by buying them out at 1/3 or 2/3 value (depending on player age and contract size), but that that money counts toward the $39MM cap. So if a $3MM / year player gets bought out, that team's cap would effectively be $37MM for the remaining players. Also, I had read where the cap counts all players on the roster, so if you have an injury and are already at $39MM, you are in a position where you can't just bring another player on board. Dave. The Sabres are so far under the cap that if 10 players got hurt they could replace them. Not that they would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Playfair Posted September 4, 2005 Report Share Posted September 4, 2005 Good Q above - anyone have any insight into the issue in the mckee negotiations? Is it that he wants a long term deal, and the sabes want a 1 year deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber61 Posted September 5, 2005 Report Share Posted September 5, 2005 well Mckee has really lost his intensity since '99 i mean the last few season's ive watched him he is either injured or just waiting to get injured cuze he's sorta coasting... he's alright but maybe better packaged in a trade... well see i suppose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted September 5, 2005 Report Share Posted September 5, 2005 well Mckee has really lost his intensity since '99 i mean the last few season's ive watched him he is either injured or just waiting to get injured cuze he's sorta coasting... he's alright but maybe better packaged in a trade... well see i suppose... If they can get something back they should trade him. But it has to be a player who comes right in and makes the roster. Many are in love with this Lydman kid and he only went for a third rounder. McKee's best days may be behind him. You could package with a goalie. Would the Sabres want two contracts coming back? Either way I still wouldn't pull the trigger on an Aaron Miller trade. Buffalo born or not the kid is injury prone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Colonel Forbin Posted September 6, 2005 Report Share Posted September 6, 2005 The best scenario would be to trade McKee and a goalie and get ANYTHING in return. It would free up more space to possibly improve on the Defense AND it would slay the 3-headed goalie-dragon. Please Please, Darcy, do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted September 6, 2005 Report Share Posted September 6, 2005 The best scenario would be to trade McKee and a goalie and get ANYTHING in return. It would free up more space to possibly improve on the Defense AND it would slay the 3-headed goalie-dragon. Please Please, Darcy, do it! What's that saying? If you have two #1 goalies (in the Sabre's case three) you don't have any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Playfair Posted September 6, 2005 Report Share Posted September 6, 2005 The only problem is getting something worthy in return. If a trade does go down, by seeing what we get in return, we will learn what the rest of the league thinks of McKee's value. I always thought he was very good, but its been 2 years and i forget! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 7, 2005 Report Share Posted September 7, 2005 The only problem is getting something worthy in return. If a trade does go down, by seeing what we get in return, we will learn what the rest of the league thinks of McKee's value. Agreed. Considering he has never been the same after the Lemieux hit, I'd be surprised if the rest of the league thought his value was very high right now. His value could go up a lot by the end of this season, if the year off has helped him recover from any nagging injuries and also get his confidence back that drilling someone like he used to (prior to the Lemieux hit) won't mess him up. (It used to mess up the other guy.) My 2 cents. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Repster Posted September 8, 2005 Report Share Posted September 8, 2005 From Eklund's hockey rumours at Also according to sources it is looking more and more as if the Sabres are finished with Jay McKee. There are plenty of teams out there that will be jumping into the fray...Phoenix (e3), San Jose (e1), and Calgary (e2) are the first rumors to circulate.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DanFan18 Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 TSN is reporting that McKee has signed with the sabres for 1 yr, 1.6 mil http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=135762 Interesting quote from the article : "He did not play during the 2004-2005 season." WELL DUH!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 Interesting quote from the article : "He did not play during the 2004-2005 season." WELL DUH!! The article was pointing out that he didn't play in Europe or any minor leagues in North America last year. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawerchuk Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 OK. THis is good. Hopefully his "head" is in the right place and he'll be ready to go. I'm not talking '99 Playoffs, but he's better back there than Janik. I still say trade BIRON now and get a return player (Another D man and/or Wing Sniper). Thats it, thats all we have to do and we're on to the CUP '06. Seriously, time for Marty to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 Now that McKee has been signed, do you think the group they have now is what they are planning to go with; or do they still try to make another move? I would definitely like to see another move. Right now, if they stay with this group, I see them going w/ Kalinin & McKee Numminen & Lydman (not sure which is 1st pair and which is 2nd pair) Jillson & Fitzpatrick with the gang banger and Campbell as extras and Janik stuck in Rochester. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Colonel Forbin Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 I thought Janik played pretty decent hockey and would be a good 5th or 6th defensemen. The continuing saga of Brian Campbell slags on..will he be a jedi or a jar-jar binks? YAWN! PS Bring back Gilbert Perrault!!!!!! My fav sabre! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 10, 2005 Report Share Posted September 10, 2005 I thought Janik played pretty decent hockey and would be a good 5th or 6thdefensemen. The continuing saga of Brian Campbell slags on..will he be a jedi or a jar-jar binks? YAWN! PS Bring back Gilbert Perrault!!!!!! My fav sabre! I agree that Janik is better than Campbell (or should we say Jar-jar?), but I would be surprised if he beat out Campbell for the role of non-dressing defenseman in the new "obstruction free" NHL at the beginning of the season. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 I agree that Janik is better than Campbell (or should we say Jar-jar?), but I would be surprised if he beat out Campbell for the role of non-dressing defenseman in the new "obstruction free" NHL at the beginning of the season. Dave. Janek and Campbell are complete non-factors. The Sabres are one of the few franchises that either of these kids could play for. That's the biggest problem the Sabres have. They have no Top Line guys and no depth. They have some guys that would crack other teams 2nd or 3rd lines. But they are weak at the top and the bottom of the roster. Players like Connolly, Pyatt, Campbell, Peters, Janek and Jillson have no business in the NHL. And that's what? Almost a third of the Sabres roster? Also, How cheap are the Sabres? They need another franchise to fill in the roster of the ROC. And, add Jay Mckee's name to the list of players that will be gone before or at the trade deadline. Look for a bunch of Sabres, of the one year deal variety, to be gone. The NHL's salary cap will be lower next season and the Sabres plan is to be $10+ million under that cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.