GASabresIUFAN Posted May 27, 2018 Report Share Posted May 27, 2018 The cost to the Sabres is negligible either way. It’s what’s best for the player, resonates with agents, and frees up a contract. Not seeing the dumbness. EDIT: for those who didn’t click the link, the Boston Globe is reporting Moulson will be bought out in June A buyout saves us $1,333,333 in cap in 2018/19 season, but costs us $666,667 in cap in 2019/20, It also costs us $1,333,333 in real $ a savings of $666,667 in real $ vs sending him to the minors. Sending him down saves us $1,025,000 in cap in 2018/19 and has no cost in 2019/20. It does however cost us $2,000,000 in real $ to have him play in another organization. One other benefit of the buyout is that it removes the contract from our 50 contract limit. I also don't think the cap hit in 2019/20 will be a problem. The buyout also gives Moulson a chance to be in the NHL again next season (although I doubt anyone would want him). Frankly, I was initially against buying out Moulson. I didn't think the $300K cap savings this season justified the cap hit in 2019/20. However any business is interested in saving real $, adding an extra contract slot, saving cap this season, getting Moulson completely out of the organization and giving a well liked player an opportunity elsewhere may justify the cap hit in 2019/20. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 27, 2018 Report Share Posted May 27, 2018 Why hurt your team for the next couple of years to help out a player who can't play? I don't see the point in rewarding sub par play. You don't play well, you get buried in bus league hell. We ain't paying ya any longer than we absolutely have to. Players that want to sign here contingent on what happens to them once they can't play the game anymore when they still have 3 years left on their contract are the exact players that I really don't want. Holy run on sentence, Batman.It's the Sabres, they love rewarding sub par play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted May 28, 2018 Report Share Posted May 28, 2018 I would do ROR for Ehlers and M....orrissey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted May 29, 2018 Report Share Posted May 29, 2018 When they exiled Moulson instead of sending him to Rochester it was a clear message that he was a bad influence and wasn't going to be anywhere near anybody on the team. To me, this is just a nail in that coffin. Just another small step in cleaning out the house while they rebuild the foundation. Don't care on the dollar values, it'll simply be good to have him gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted May 29, 2018 Report Share Posted May 29, 2018 When they exiled Moulson instead of sending him to Rochester it was a clear message that he was a bad influence and wasn't going to be anywhere near anybody on the team. To me, this is just a nail in that coffin. Just another small step in cleaning out the house while they rebuild the foundation. Don't care on the dollar values, it'll simply be good to have him gone. IIRC, that was actually done as a favor to him. He could be closer to home and his wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted May 29, 2018 Report Share Posted May 29, 2018 IIRC, that was actually done as a favor to him. He could be closer to home and his wife. was it? or are they just better at image control? I mean we tanked this year and nobody noticed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted May 29, 2018 Report Share Posted May 29, 2018 was it? or are they just better at image control? I mean we tanked this year and nobody noticed. The evidence suggests that was the case. It's more convincing than "image control." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted May 29, 2018 Report Share Posted May 29, 2018 was it? or are they just better at image control? I mean we tanked this year and nobody noticed. Agree on the tank part. It was a subtle tank. It was a tank with none of the gearlube and gunpowder aroma. Smelled like . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted May 29, 2018 Report Share Posted May 29, 2018 Why hurt your team for the next couple of years to help out a player who can't play? I don't see the point in rewarding sub par play. You don't play well, you get buried in bus league hell. We ain't paying ya any longer than we absolutely have to. Players that want to sign here contingent on what happens to them once they can't play the game anymore when they still have 3 years left on their contract are the exact players that I really don't want. Holy run on sentence, Batman. They are only hurting the team next season & by less $'s than an ELC costs. If the buyout happens in June, it could be as an enticer to get Moulson to say good things about the organization to his good friend John Tavares. (Yeah, in all likelihood, it isn't; but that still leaves open the slight possibility that it could. ;)) Personally, would rather just waive him again and be done w/ him in April, but can see reasons for them to want to do it this way, none of which fall under the heading of rewarding mediocre play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted May 30, 2018 Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 They are only hurting the team next season & by less $'s than an ELC costs. If the buyout happens in June, it could be as an enticer to get Moulson to say good things about the organization to his good friend John Tavares. (Yeah, in all likelihood, it isn't; but that still leaves open the slight possibility that it could. ;)) Personally, would rather just waive him again and be done w/ him in April, but can see reasons for them to want to do it this way, none of which fall under the heading of rewarding mediocre play. They better not buy him out. The whole narrative about treating players right to attract free agents is absolute bunk. What attracts players is winning. And winning only happens if you're willing to do everything possible for the benefit of the team... not individual players. Glen Sather was as cutthroat as they come. He believed in cutting 15-20% of the roster every season, keep trimming the fat no matter how many Cups you win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erickompositör72 Posted May 30, 2018 Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 The whole narrative about treating players right to attract free agents is absolute bunk. What attracts players is winning. They're not mutually exclusive And we don't have an opportunity to do any "winning" between now and June, and I'm sure we'd like a better image for free agents this off-season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 30, 2018 Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 Glen Sather was as cutthroat as they come. He believed in cutting 15-20% of the roster every season, keep trimming the fat no matter how many Cups you win. Any approach is going to look so much better when you're starting off with that Edmonton roster. It didn't look quite so well without those guys in his later days with the Oilers and then the entire Ranger run. There's plenty of decent years there, but it's far removed from his starting days with a team full of hall of famers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted May 30, 2018 Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 Unless they feel like they need the roster spot, a moulson buy out really doesn't make much sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted May 30, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 Unless they feel like they need the roster spot, a moulson buy out really doesn't make much sense to me. He wants the number 26 and did not feel comfortable taking it from a player still on the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 30, 2018 Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 He wants the number 26 and did not feel comfortable taking it from a player still on the roster. Let's be honest... Moulson isn't on the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted May 30, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2018 Let's be honest... Moulson isn't on the roster. Liger it was a poor attempt at humor by me. From A. Basu from the Athletic Montreal So, O’Reilly is good. That much is clear, and the Sabres obviously know that as well. They don’t have to trade O’Reilly, but with Casey Mittelstadt coming as a potential No. 2 behind Jack Eichel, O’Reilly seems like a luxury the Sabres can use to fill other holes in their lineup or acquire players in their early 20s to grow with Eichel, Mittelstadt and Rasmus Dahlin. McKenzie compared the Sabres trading O’Reilly to the Philadelphia Flyers trading Mike Richards to the L.A. Kings in 2011, receiving Wayne Simmonds, Brayden Schenn and a second round pick in that year’s draft. It’s not a bad comparison. Richards had nine years left on his contract at age 26, one year younger than O’Reilly is now, so there was a significant financial commitment the Kings were taking on in that case as well. If the Canadiens agree to take on O’Reilly’s signing bonus on July 1 and don’t ask the Sabres to retain any of his remaining salary, what would it then cost to get him? It could somewhat reduce the price paid in that Richards comparable, and the Canadiens are stacked with all those second round picks and have young forwards they could package, though the Sabres biggest need is probably on defence. The question here is if they would have to include Galchenyuk (maybe) and whether O’Reilly is worth it, all things considered (probably). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 Habs fans and observers must under the mistaken impression O’Reillys bonus matter to the Pegula’s. And they have a young Brayden Schenn and Wayne Simmonds on the roster to trade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetlou Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 Another ROR option- If the Sabres move him, I believe it will be out West. ROR, Nylander and Bogo to Vancouver for Brandon Sutter, Brendan Leipsic, and Derek Pouliot. Sabres get a solid #3 center, young winger and defenseman while shedding the contract of Bogo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 I think the only think that would tempt me for O’Reilly from Montreal is Carey Price and something that kills his cap pain. I know Price is overpaid, but he would be such an upgrade in goal and to the team psyche. O’Reilly Lehner, Pominville and Okposo for Price, Gallagher, Lekhonen and a second? Another ROR option- If the Sabres move him, I believe it will be out West. ROR, Nylander and Bogo to Vancouver for Brandon Sutter, Brendan Leipsic, and Derek Pouliot. Sabres get a solid #3 center, young winger and defenseman while shedding the contract of Bogo. This would put me in a rage that would put a young Liger to shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted May 31, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 Habs fans and observers must under the mistaken impression O’Reillys bonus matter to the Pegula’s. And they have a young Brayden Schenn and Wayne Simmonds on the roster to trade The article also forgot the you will need to overpay if The Sabres are trading him in the division as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 This would put me in a rage that would put a young Liger to shame.Hahaha, I almost want to witness this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 Another ROR option- If the Sabres move him, I believe it will be out West. ROR, Nylander and Bogo to Vancouver for Brandon Sutter, Brendan Leipsic, and Derek Pouliot. Sabres get a solid #3 center, young winger and defenseman while shedding the contract of Bogo. Usually you pair one of these with a Reinhart-for-Matthews type trade that makes the overall thing balance out. Did you forget it this time? :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetlou Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 (edited) Usually you pair one of these with a Reinhart-for-Matthews type trade that makes the overall thing balance out. Did you forget it this time? :P Trying to under compensate a trade since everyone thinks I over value the Sabres players. Main purpose of any trade this off season would be to trade older good assets ( ROR, Okposo, or Bogo) with higher cap hits to gain younger players with potential who may not be as highly ranked right now. Edited May 31, 2018 by sweetlou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marions Piazza Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 Trying to under compensate a trade since everyone thinks I over value the Sabres players. Main purpose of any trade this off season would be to trade older good assets ( ROR, Okposo, or Bogo) with higher cap hits to gain younger players with potential who may not be as highly ranked right now. Problem is, teams see Okposo and his anchor of a contract vs lack of production AND recent injury issue, highly doubt any team takes Okposo in a trade, especially if they give up a young player with potential on an ELC. Same for Bogo, he has almost no value in a trade, again, you aren't getting a young cost controlled prospect/player with potential for Bogo. Okposo and Bogo are Sabres until their contract runs out or they're bought out. The only possible way i see the Sabres unloading Okposo is in the next expansion draft and they give Seattle a draft pick to bribe them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 (edited) I read a couple of articles discussing TB's cap situation and whether or not they are going to keep JT MIller and Tyler Johnson. The need to move these guys is not a cap problem next season, but the fact that Kucherov, Point and Gourde's contract all expire after next season as do 4 of their D. They speculated that Stevie Y has to move Johnson before July 1 or his NTC kicks in and TB is "stuck" with him for at least the next 3 at least while the full NTC is in effect. Johnson is 27, had 50 pts this past season, plays center and has 6 years left on his deal at $5 mill per season. They also speculated the Miller may also be traded because of his lousy playoff performance. Miller is 25, an RFA and can play any forward position. Miller has had 56 and 58 pts in his last 2 seasons, 3 straight 20+ goal seasons, but only 3 goals in 57 career playoff games (has was 2g, 6a in 17 playoff games with the Bolts). They also mentioned that former 10th overall pick, Slater Koekkoek, may be available. I'm interested in both Koekkoek and Miller, but have no interest in Johnson. Miller can be placed immediately in our top 6 at either wing and fill in at center in case of injury. I'd love to see him skate with Eichel. I also like that he has some size. Granted I doubt TB would trade him in the division, but maybe a deal for a cheap forward (Girgensons?) and the SJ 1st or our 32nd pick would do the trick. TB's first pick in 2018 is 60th and they lack a 2nd rd pick in 2019. Edited May 31, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN 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.