Are buyouts really a good option?

[Sabre fan]

I got to reading about Matt Moulson and his contract status and can't help but wonder if buying him out is a good option, or how do we proceed with him and Gorges?

 

Moulson apparently thinks he should be used MORE then he was under Bylsma. He finished with 14 goals and 32 points in 81 games. He stayed consistent, especially compared to the 44-game goal drought that marred his eight-goal output in 2015-16. Moulson was fourth on the Sabres in goals per 60 minutes (.89), trailing only Nick Baptiste (1.39), Evander Kane (1.25) and Jack Eichel (1.23).

 

That works out to $357,143 per goal and $277,778 per assist.

 

The left winger has a salary cap hit of $5 million per year, but he has just $5 million in salary remaining with an additional $3 million to be paid in signing bonuses, according to the buyout calculator at CapFriendly.com. If the Sabres bought out Moulson in June, he would count $2.83 million against the cap next season, $3.83 million in 2018-19 and $833,333 for each of the following two seasons.

 

It wouldn’t be huge savings, especially in 2018-19, but it would nonetheless be savings. Since Buffalo already needs to budget at least $61.3 million toward 19 players next year, savings could be needed for a cap estimated to be in the $73 million to $76 million range.

 

That big $3.83 in 2018-19 hurts BIG TIME. Somehow the leafs found takers for many big lousey contracts and I wonder if we need to seek the same help and get both Moulson and Gorges off the books. Gorges has a final year left at 3.9 mil.

That does go away next year either way, so I wonder if it's best to use him this year and save the buyout for Moulson. Or do we try to use Matt more and see if it pays off? This is a very important and real big decision facing whoever guides the ship next season. It is a ton of money tied up in two players that we could be put to far better use.

 

I am assuming that a new GM and Coach will not mind Bogo, and in fact I hope and expect him to excel under new leadership and I think he has top-4 potential without a doubt. he is much better then we've seen. His contract is big too of course ($5,142,857 per season for the next three years...OUCH). Maybe we should try to unload that contract too.

 

In the end, McCabe, Falk and Fedun, at a combined $2,850,000.00 for all three) were the best bang for the buck. We have Falk for anopther year at $650,000.00 (A steal) while jake is signed for another two years at 1.6mil (another steal) and Fedun is a free agent.

 

Anyways, I am curious what we think would be the best answer to these big contract questions moving forward. We have serious money that needs to be given (Jack, Sam.,Lerner etc) and think we need to do whatever we can to get out of these contracts ASAP...I also forgot Tyler Ennis at 4.6 mil for another 2 years. That sure adds up in just four contracts

Edited May 9, 2017 by Sabre fan

[pi2000]

Why does everybody think Bogo will be better under a different coach, but not Moulson?

[Drunkard]

A buyout would be stupid because while it cuts the cap hit basically in half it extends the term out twice as long. So instead of having Gorges cost us $3.9 million against the cap this year and finally being done with him we'd essentially deal with half his hit this year and half his hit next year. Moulson's 2 years at $5 million essentially become 4 years at $2.5 million. We've got Eichel and Reinhart on ELC's and McCabe is on a sweetheart of a deal so it's best to absorb these bad contracts while we can rather than dragging them out into the time periods where we'll be paying those guys real money. Instead of buying these bums out we should be looking to unload them on teams that have the cap space (Arizone, Jersey, Vegas, etc.). Toronto's biggest coup wasn't winning the lottery for Matthews it was finding ways to get out from under all the bad contracts they had (Clarkson, Princess Phaneuf, Kessel, etc.).

Why does everybody think Bogo will be better under a different coach, but not Moulson?

 

Age mostly. Moulson is already way over the hill and Bogosian is still in/near his prime age as a defenseman.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Drunkard

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Why does everybody think Bogo will be better under a different coach, but not Moulson?

 

Moulson will be fine.

 

Bogo will be fine.

 

Our new GM will be fine and will bring in a cracker jack capologist, if he is, indeed, not one.

 

Ennis will be in Vegas, I believe.

[GoPuckYourself]

Best thing we could do is give Vegas draft picks to take Moulson/Gorges or Moulson/Bogo off our hands which they said they were interested in doing.

[dudacek]

Moulson is bad but showed he can still finish under the right circumstances.

A smarter coach would have played him in Sam's spot with Jack. He would have got 40 points.

Sam meanwhile, could have developed as a centre during this lost season.

[French Collection]

A buyout would be stupid because while it cuts the cap hit basically in half it extends the term out twice as long. So instead of having Gorges cost us $3.9 million against the cap this year and finally being done with him we'd essentially deal with half his hit this year and half his hit next year. Moulson's 2 years at $5 million essentially become 4 years at $2.5 million. We've got Eichel and Reinhart on ELC's and McCabe is on a sweetheart of a deal so it's best to absorb these bad contracts while we can rather than dragging them out into the time periods where we'll be paying those guys real money. Instead of buying these bums out we should be looking to unload them on teams that have the cap space (Arizone, Jersey, Vegas, etc.). Toronto's biggest coup wasn't winning the lottery for Matthews it was finding ways to get out from under all the bad contracts they had (Clarkson, Princess Phaneuf, Kessel, etc.).

 

 

Age mostly. Moulson is already way over the hill and Bogosian is still in/near his prime age as a defenseman.

I agree.

Moulson needs to go to Vegas, eliminating one problem.

I think Ennis still has value for a trade, find a taker.

Bogo will probably be staying so let's live with him.

Gorges can be a depth D for one year and he comes off the books in time for our big RFAs.

[pi2000]

I agree.

Moulson needs to go to Vegas, eliminating one problem.

I think Ennis still has value for a trade, find a taker.

Bogo will probably be staying so let's live with him.

Gorges can be a depth D for one year and he comes off the books in time for our big RFAs.

 

 

Bogo, IMO, is part of the culture problem.    I question his desire to win.

[thewookie1]

Bury Gorges this year and Moulson next year, problem solved.

[Weave]

Bogo, IMO, is part of the culture problem. I question his desire to win.

I hadn't considered this. Interesting thought.

 

With no real basis of course.

 

I'm inclined to not dismiss this outright.

[Samson's Flow]

Bogo, IMO, is part of the culture problem.    I question his desire to win.

He was one of the most emotionally involved when he got big minutes during the tank year under Nolan. I said before, I think you need to engage Bogo emotionally rather than tactically, and he responds better when he doesn't have a lot of system/direction and can play instinctively. I don't think he is a culture/desire issue at all, he was just so stuck in his head that he was ineffective.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Buying Gorges makes sense right now.

He is owed 3.9 for this next season. Buying him out costs us 1.3 this coming year and 1.3 the following year. We save 2.6 this year and open up a roster spot for young, cheaper, faster and almost certainly betted players. I'd execute the buyout on June 15 prior to the expansion draft.

 

As to Moulson, Bogo and Ennis, I'd leave all three exposed in expansion. We have Falk under contract and can protect him so that we can expose Bogo. I'd then sign Nilsson to an extension, trade Ullmark. This would leave our exposed players as DeLo, Ennis, Moulson and Bogo. They can have which they want.

Edited May 9, 2017 by GASabresFan

[TrueBlueGED]

He was one of the most emotionally involved when he got big minutes during the tank year under Nolan. I said before, I think you need to engage Bogo emotionally rather than tactically, and he responds better when he doesn't have a lot of system/direction and can play instinctively. I don't think he is a culture/desire issue at all, he was just so stuck in his head that he was ineffective.

I think the issues with Bogosian's work ethic are off-ice related. Frankly, I think that's the sort of thing Eichel was talking about to close the year: guys who don't dedicate themselves to improvement away from games and mandatory practices. I think there's a good chance Bogo falls into this group, and wouldn't be surprised a-tall if Kane did as well. Of course, Kane is also much more effective on the ice than Bogosian.

[pi2000]

He was one of the most emotionally involved when he got big minutes during the tank year under Nolan. I said before, I think you need to engage Bogo emotionally rather than tactically, and he responds better when he doesn't have a lot of system/direction and can play instinctively. I don't think he is a culture/desire issue at all, he was just so stuck in his head that he was ineffective.

 

I hope you're right, because I don't think he's going anywhere soon.    That contract is toxic.

 

You'd like to see him more responsible with the puck in his own end.     He has speed but he's not quick enough and that gets him in trouble... which is a system agnostic concern.    

His body language, demeanor on the bench etc. after getting scored on just doesn't reflect a guy who has a strong desire to win at all costs.     He seems to be OK with losing, which you could say about quite a few guys on the roster, but for the amount he's getting paid you expect much much more, both on the ice and in the locker room.     For that amount of money he should be part of the solution, not a question mark. 

[Samson's Flow]

I hope you're right, because I don't think he's going anywhere soon.    That contract is toxic.

 

You'd like to see him more responsible with the puck in his own end.     He has speed but he's not quick enough and that gets him in trouble... which is a system agnostic concern.    

His body language, demeanor on the bench etc. after getting scored on just doesn't reflect a guy who has a strong desire to win at all costs.     He seems to be OK with losing, which you could say about quite a few guys on the roster, but for the amount he's getting paid you expect much much more, both on the ice and in the locker room.     For that amount of money he should be part of the solution, not a question mark. 

Unfortunately paying an unmotivated employee doesn't suddenly make them care. It doesn't work like that. What you get paid is totally separate from how many you give.

 

You either care or you don't.

[Randall Flagg]

I thought Bogosian was an absolute gym freak? He has off-ice preparation problems, maybe? Can they manifest themselves in a different way?

 

[TrueBlueGED]

I thought Bogosian was an absolute gym freak? He has off-ice preparation problems, maybe? Can they manifest themselves in a different way?

 

 

I was thinking video work and skills work. Eichel spending last summer on his shot. Stuff like that.

[pi2000]

I thought Bogosian was an absolute gym freak? He has off-ice preparation problems, maybe? Can they manifest themselves in a different way?

 

 

 

Being a gym freak means very little if you don't have a burning desire to win at all costs, refusing to lose, not accepting failure from yourself or teammates, etc.. 

 

I'm not sure how to explain it.    From my own playing experiences I would put guys into 3 buckets.....

 

1 - guys who absolutely love the sport, can't get enough of it, go above and beyond whatever expectations are placed on them (weight training, conditioning, diet, video, skills dev, etc..).   They practice at game tempo, very very high compete levels, hate losing, constantly trying to improve their game in any way possible.

 

2 - guys who "like" the sport, do what they need to do to play, enjoy the lifestyle, maintain their pecking order on the team.    go hard in practice when called out, but don't have an instinctively high compete level day in and day out.    do enough to maintain their skills and conditioning, but have no real desire to improve any area of their game.

 

3 - guys who view hockey as a fun job, don't have that love for the game, but are physically gifted enough they can play at a high level without doing all the extra work most other guys do.   treat practice, off-ice like a necessary chore, can raise their compete level when the spotlight is on them, but don't bring it consistently.   don't put much time into the game off the ice.

Edited May 9, 2017 by pi2000

[Randall Flagg]

Being a gym freak means very little if you don't have a burning desire to win at all costs, refusing to lose, not accepting failure from yourself or teammates, etc.. 

And in pi's world where there has been peer-reviewed, published proof of multiple universes, how does a lack of those things manifest themselves during the off-ice preparation of a player who already spends long hours in the gym working on his fitness?

[LGR4GM]

Buying Gorges makes sense right now.

He is owed 3.9 for this next season. Buying him out costs us 1.3 this coming year and 1.3 the following year. We save 2.6 this year and open up a roster spot for young, cheaper, faster and almost certainly betted players. I'd execute the buyout on June 15 prior to the expansion draft.

 

Or we can not do that and be done with him after this season. Buying him out makes no sense when we don't have 6 nhl defenders on the roster as is.

[dudacek]

I only consider buying Gorges out if his contract is what is standing in the way of acquiring a good defenceman.

If he is not a good fit at 6/7 for us this year, then bury him in the minors.

 

I also think Gorges is an underrated Vegas choice.

His contract is better for them than Moulson and Ennis, he can kill penalties, lead cheers and might garner a pick for playoff depth as a UFA to be at the deadline. (Hey, Mike Weber was traded for a third.)

[pi2000]

And in pi's world where there has been peer-reviewed, published proof of multiple universes, how does a lack of those things manifest themselves during the off-ice preparation of a player who already spends long hours in the gym working on his fitness?

 

The amount of time a guy spends in the gym has little to do how much he hates to lose.

[Randall Flagg]

The amount of time a guy spends in the gym has little to do how much he hates to lose.

But you responded to my question of what his off-ice preparation is lacking with "Being a gym freak means very little if you don't have a burning desire to win at all costs, refusing to lose, not accepting failure from yourself or teammates, etc.. "

 

So I'm looking for an explanation of where that stuff comes up off the ice, because an obvious guess would be that he's not putting in the effort at the gym, but I believe that to be the opposite of the case.

[pi2000]

But you responded to my question of what his off-ice preparation is lacking with "Being a gym freak means very little if you don't have a burning desire to win at all costs, refusing to lose, not accepting failure from yourself or teammates, etc.. "

 

So I'm looking for an explanation of where that stuff comes up off the ice, because an obvious guess would be that he's not putting in the effort at the gym, but I believe that to be the opposite of the case.

 

I never said his off-ice preparation is lacking... maybe it is, maybe it isn't.... but just because he's in the gym all the time doesn't mean he's a good character guy in the locker room or that he hates losing.      

 

Do you know exactly what motivates him to go to the gym?   What does he do in the gym while he's there?   Is he going 110% pushing himself to his limits every single rep?  Or just going through the motions or some pre-defined routine that keeps his body in shape to play at the NHL level?

 

My point is that unless you know what's driving him.... you can't just assume he's good for the culture of the team because of how much time he spends in the gym.    What matters more is what's drving him to do those things.    Is it money?  Prestige?   dreams of winning a Cup?   his next contract?   (which are the same things I question about what's motivating Auston Matthews for example)

Edited May 9, 2017 by pi2000

[Randall Flagg]

I never said his off-ice preparation is lacking... maybe it is, maybe it isn't.... but just because he's in the gym all the time doesn't mean he's a good character guy in the locker room or that he hates losing.      

 

Do you know exactly what motivates him to go to the gym?   What does he do in the gym while he's there?   Is he going 110% pushing himself to his limits every single rep?  Or just going through the motions or some pre-defined routine that keeps his body in shape to play at the NHL level?

 

My point is that unless you know what's driving him.... you can't just assume he's good for the culture of the team because of how much time he spends in the gym.    What matters more is what's drving him to do those things.    Is it money?  Prestige?   dreams of winning a Cup?   his next contract?   (which are the same things I question about what's motivating Auston Matthews for example)

Then why did you post what you did in response to an explicit question about what could be lacking in his off-ice preparation?