Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sweetlou

Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

Oh that definitely proves they walked away from significantly better trades just to not pay the bonus.  

Didn’t say it was definitive proof.  Call it strong supporting evidence if you will.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You are trying to claim that a player that played in 81 games the season he was traded, scored 61 points, lead the team in faceoff wins, was almost leading the team in TOI, was an assistant captain, held extra practices to help ppl, and was signed for multiple years at a nice salary wasn't invested because in one interview he spoke and noted his frustration with how his teams season went so he HAD to be traded... 

 

 

I think it is a bad practice to equate his play on the ice with his off-ice interactions with his teammates and the remainder of the Sabres organization. He was a professional on the ice, doing what he needed to do. 

As I have said in the past, the information provided to me by someone with intimate knowledge of his off-ice interactions definitely suggested there were issues large enough to not be overlooked.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shootica said:

Where was all of this reported?

The Montreal GM had an interview with The Athletic prior to the start of the 2017-18 Season about their interest in ROR. 
 

Also over the Summer a Montreal Insider detailed the of the exact trade on Twitter.

 

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

 

What he actually got was awful but this isn't exactly good either.

Danault would lessened the blow of losing ROR but otherwise it would been a complete waste as all we'd be doing is getting a downgrade at 2C, a mediocre winger prospect and a 2nd. Plus handing a divisional rival a 1C.

When it became evident that ROR was getting moved, you need to take the best deal that hurts your existing roster the least. 
Believing that Mitts, Sobotka or Berglund could step into the 2C at all is a Monumental Failure on the Sabres. Danault’s Metrics showed he was tracking to be an excellent 2C.  Poehling was a Center Prospect at the time, actually Montreal was more reluctant to give him up, who has been blocked by better center talent on the Montreal Roster. He would have slotted in behind Mitts as the second best center prospect on the Sabres behind Mitts at the time.  Plus there is the Salary Cap Space that would have been created. Danault was a RFA with one year left on his deal at 912k, that’s over 6.5 million in Space that would have been created for that season.  Plus His existing deal is only 3.0 Million AAV, which is 500k less than Sobotka was making. 
 

Trading ROR to a division rival is not ideal, but does ROR replicate the success he has had if he playing in Montreal on a weaker team? He does make them better, but a SC Champion? 

Another way to look at things is this. Do the Sabres make the RTP if their roster top three lines look like this

Olofsson-Eichel-Reinhart 

Skinner-Danault-Sheary/EROD/Kahun

Zemgus-Larsson-Okposo. 
 

Skinner probably doesn’t have as a significant Dropoff, Danault scores, which is something the 2C didn’t do last year. I believe they qualify. 
 

Looking at Players under Sabres Control which combo would you rather have?

Thompson/Ryan Johnson/Colin Miller or Danault/Ryan Poehling/Colin Miller. 
 

I would take the latter. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Curt said:

Coincidence that the trade was made hours before the bonus was due to be paid?

As you point out the Blues paid the bonus. It is obvious that the impending bonus payment was driving the timing of the trade. And it was reported that there was a Carolina deal that was being considered but the Sabres couldn't get them to pay the bonus. So the deal was not consummated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Curt said:

Didn’t say it was definitive proof.  Call it strong supporting evidence if you will.

No it isn't.  Could just as easily mean there wasn't a significantly better trade if we proposed to other teams, what would you give if we pay the bonus.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnC said:

As you point out the Blues paid the bonus. It is obvious that the impending bonus payment was driving the timing of the trade. And it was reported that there was a Carolina deal that was being considered but the Sabres couldn't get them to pay the bonus. So the deal was not consummated. 

It was reported. How many times do you hear that? Someone's reporting Jesus will return every year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Brawndo said:

The Montreal GM had an interview with The Athletic prior to the start of the 2017-18 Season about their interest in ROR. 
 

Also over the Summer a Montreal Insider detailed the of the exact trade on Twitter.

 

After Botterill, in combination with Pegula, decided they wanted to trade ROR, you need to take the best deal that hurts your existing roster the least. 
Believing that Mitts, Sobotka or Berglund could step into the 2C at all is a Monumental Failure on the Sabres. Danault’s Metrics showed he was tracking to be an excellent 2C.  Poehling was a Center Prospect at the time, actually Montreal was more reluctant to give him up, who has been blocked by better center talent on the Montreal Roster. He would have slotted in behind Mitts as the second best center prospect on the Sabres behind Mitts at the time.  Plus there is the Salary Cap Space that would have been created. Danault was a RFA with one year left on his deal at 912k, that’s over 6.5 million in Space that would have been created for that season.  Plus His existing deal is only 3.0 Million AAV, which is 500k less than Sobotka was making. 
 

Trading ROR to a division rival is not ideal, but does ROR replicate the success he has had if he playing in Montreal on a weaker team? He does make them better, but a SC Champion? 

Another way to look at things is this. Do the Sabres make the RTP if their roster top three lines look like this

Olofsson-Eichel-Reinhart 

Skinner-Danault-Sheary/EROD/Kahun

Zemgus-Larsson-Okposo. 
 

Skinner probably doesn’t have as a significant Dropoff, Danault scores, which is something the 2C didn’t do last year. I believe they qualify. 
 

Looking at Players under Sabres Control which combo would you rather have?

Thompson/Ryan Johnson/Colin Miller or Danault/Ryan Poehling/Colin Miller. 
 

I would take the latter. 

Slight alteration in bold, agree with the rest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reino is great with junk goals in front of the net, something I never would have guessed would happen back when we drafted him. Still, can’t help but to feel like he’s been part of all of these soft teams. Like everyone else though, I have a lot invested in him.

It’s complicated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Reino is great with junk goals in front of the net, something I never would have guessed would happen back when we drafted him. Still, can’t help but to feel like he’s been part of all of these soft teams. Like everyone else though, I have a lot invested in him.

It’s complicated. 

I’ve been thinking that Reinhart does not really fit the type of game that Krueger wants to play, with a fast, aggressive forecheck.  I’m wondering if they may be looking to move him based on that.

On the other hand, Krueger gave him lots of ice time last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Curt said:

I’ve been thinking that Reinhart does not really fit the type of game that Krueger wants to play, with a fast, aggressive forecheck.  I’m wondering if they may be looking to move him based on that.

On the other hand, Krueger gave him lots of ice time last season.

I don’t think he fits either, we’ll see what happens with arbitration. He’s a quality guy player and all but personally I’d like to see us get bigger and faster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The team also needs smart players who are incredible passers and setup men. Who can also get 45-55 points a season. Reinhart has that in spades.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zamboni said:

The team also needs smart players who are incredible passers and setup men. Who can also get 45-55 points a season. Reinhart has that in spades.

Yep, but do they need to pay him $6.5-7 million a year for that? Or can they get that for cheaper, on a player who also is more aggressive on the forecheck & tougher to play against?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, In The Buff said:

Yep, but do they need to pay him $6.5-7 million a year for that? Or can they get that for cheaper, on a player who also is more aggressive on the forecheck & tougher to play against?

Great username lol, made me chuckle. 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 1:21 PM, LTS said:

I think it is a bad practice to equate his play on the ice with his off-ice interactions with his teammates and the remainder of the Sabres organization. He was a professional on the ice, doing what he needed to do. 

As I have said in the past, the information provided to me by someone with intimate knowledge of his off-ice interactions definitely suggested there were issues large enough to not be overlooked.

 

Could you be a little more revealing what was problematic with his off-ice interactions? Was it just that he was more aloof or more fractious with his teammates during his own time? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no player in recent memory that I go back and forth as much as I do with Reinhart.  One day I want him here for his career...the next day I think about it and hope he is gone for anything productive.

I just can't ignore either argument...he produces points..and goals (maybe not an elite level, but certainly at a level that is hard to replace).  On the other hand, he is useless on the PK (not used at all) and not all that great in transition...which makes him a slightly above average point producer and not much else.  So what is that worth?  I really have NO idea. 

What I do know is right now..that Skinner contract looks like you can make a case it is the worst contract in the league..and I can't take a chance of having another big dollar contract like that (or even close to it) for someone unless I know they are going to be a star and keep improving.  Does the Skinner contract mean you have to let Reinhart leave?  No, you don't make a bad decision on one player because of a bad one on another..it just means you have to be very careful with Big dollars going out in the next couple of years.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Curt said:

I’ve been thinking that Reinhart does not really fit the type of game that Krueger wants to play, with a fast, aggressive forecheck.  I’m wondering if they may be looking to move him based on that.

On the other hand, Krueger gave him lots of ice time last season.

You are right that if the Krueger is trying to change the profile of players he wants to a faster and more aggressive in forechecking style of play he doesn't fit it. But w he is probably our best set up player with the exceptional vision on the team. He may not be the fastest skater but he makes quick reads and anticipates the play so that the speed issue is not much of a problem. 

He also provides net presence on offense for a team that mostly shies away from the tough area. I'm very much am a Rienhart fan. He's not a scintillating player but he is a player who has been very consistent in production. For me he is a keeper. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

There is no player in recent memory that I go back and forth as much as I do with Reinhart.  One day I want him here for his career...the next day I think about it and hope he is gone for anything productive.

I just can't ignore either argument...he produces points..and goals (maybe not an elite level, but certainly at a level that is hard to replace).  On the other hand, he is useless on the PK (not used at all) and not all that great in transition...which makes him a slightly above average point producer and not much else.  So what is that worth?  I really have NO idea. 

What I do know is right now..that Skinner contract looks like you can make a case it is the worst contract in the league..and I can't take a chance of having another big dollar contract like that (or even close to it) for someone unless I know they are going to be a star and keep improving.  Does the Skinner contract mean you have to let Reinhart leave?  No, you don't make a bad decision on one player because of a bad one on another..it just means you have to be very careful with Big dollars going out in the next couple of years.

No question the Skinner contract is not a value laden contract. However, if he returns to his 30 plus goal production on a line with an enhancing center then the money issue is not as troublesome. If he is not on the Jack line yet is still able to get back to his sniper form then his contract although not a best practice contract is at least more acceptable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Curt said:

I’ve been thinking that Reinhart does not really fit the type of game that Krueger wants to play, with a fast, aggressive forecheck.  I’m wondering if they may be looking to move him based on that.

On the other hand, Krueger gave him lots of ice time last season.

And he locked him on a line with the franchise's best player.

Because of the way Skinner was used last season, we know what it looks like when Krueger doesn't believe a player fits his type of game.  Reinhart does not belong in that category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

There is no player in recent memory that I go back and forth as much as I do with Reinhart.  One day I want him here for his career...the next day I think about it and hope he is gone for anything productive.

I just can't ignore either argument...he produces points..and goals (maybe not an elite level, but certainly at a level that is hard to replace).  On the other hand, he is useless on the PK (not used at all) and not all that great in transition...which makes him a slightly above average point producer and not much else.  So what is that worth?  I really have NO idea. 

What I do know is right now..that Skinner contract looks like you can make a case it is the worst contract in the league..and I can't take a chance of having another big dollar contract like that (or even close to it) for someone unless I know they are going to be a star and keep improving.  Does the Skinner contract mean you have to let Reinhart leave?  No, you don't make a bad decision on one player because of a bad one on another..it just means you have to be very careful with Big dollars going out in the next couple of years.

I assume you are talking about carrying the puck here, because he is very good in moving the puck through the neutral zone.

Too lazy to look it up, but I seem to remember Sam as among the team leaders, or leading outright, in zone exits, zone entries and dump-in puck retrievals.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, I-90 W said:

I don’t think he fits either, we’ll see what happens with arbitration. He’s a quality guy player and all but personally I’d like to see us get bigger and faster. 

How big is Reinhart and what player would be an example of someone you would like to get to replace him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I assume you are talking about carrying the puck here, because he is very good in moving the puck through the neutral zone.

Too lazy to look it up, but I seem to remember Sam as among the team leaders, or leading outright, in zone exits, zone entries and dump-in puck retrievals.

Maybe its unfair to compare him to Eichel...but I think of all the games I watched where the Sabres were outplayed..and what I remember of Sam watching him directly is he was no better at moving the puck from the Sabres own zone through the neutral zone and seting up something in the O-zone.  And I mean that by either carrying it or hitting a winger in a good position passing.

Again, unfair to compare him to Eichel, but when the Sabres were being drastically outplayed by another (better) team, I rarely, if ever, saw Sam make a great exit pass or carry the puck through the zone to take the heat of the Sabres in their own zone or set up something in the offensive zone.  I'm not saying he is awful...just average in this area...and if I'm going to give out a big contract I want someone who is above average in a few areas/situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Could you be a little more revealing what was problematic with his off-ice interactions? Was it just that he was more aloof or more fractious with his teammates during his own time? 

All I was told was that he didn't gel well with some people and that led to some issues.  I asked and didn't get more. I can only surmise that by him being moved someone felt it was significant enough to remove him from the locker room.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JohnC said:

You are right that if the Krueger is trying to change the profile of players he wants to a faster and more aggressive in forechecking style of play he doesn't fit it. But w he is probably our best set up player with the exceptional vision on the team. He may not be the fastest skater but he makes quick reads and anticipates the play so that the speed issue is not much of a problem. 

He also provides net presence on offense for a team that mostly shies away from the tough area. I'm very much am a Rienhart fan. He's not a scintillating player but he is a player who has been very consistent in production. For me he is a keeper. 

At forward, aside from Eichel, but I agree with the sentiment - he's a player I'd like to keep. Even if I also disagree with the way you spell his name. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

How big is Reinhart and what player would be an example of someone you would like to get to replace him?

He’s 6-1 and 180lb which is fine (durable too) but my point is he’s a softer player. I’d like to see some power forwards on our team. Guys who can clear the crease; remember how much we got bullied by Philly in 2011?

Granted that was before his time but in the playoffs we need forwards who can push people around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

He’s 6-1 and 180lb which is fine (durable too) but my point is he’s a softer player. I’d like to see some power forwards on our team. Guys who can clear the crease; remember how much we got bullied by Philly in 2011?

Granted that was before his time but in the playoffs we need forwards who can push people around. 

Isn't a player who's so resistant to the physicality of the other team a physical player? Sure he's not cleaning out guys in front of our own net, but he's one of our only guys who'll stand in front of the opponent's net, take a beating, and still redirect shots for goals. 

All while finding the time to adjust his helmet during live play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...