If you were GMKA, what is the most you would pay Reinhart to extend?

[Thorny]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Reinhart is very good. He's improved every year. Forget where he was drafted, it's irrelevant and focus on when he'll be in his prime (now). In his prime he's a 30g 35a player I think at his peak. I think Quinn can do that and I think Quinn has more talent than Sam did coming in (skating, shooting). We need Quinn to overtake Reinhart if we want to be cup contenders. 

It's not irrelevant because the only thing you are basing Quinn's projection on is junior. 

Regardless, Sam is a top line winger RIGHT NOW. I don't project that as an expectation for prospects. It's more likely Quinn doesn't surpass Reinhart, it's not above a 50% chance that Quinn is better than what's already arguably an above average top line winger. If the most likely resulting scenario is that Quinn is a BETTER than "very good", above average top line winger, we absolutely made the right selection with Quinn.

The bold - to say we NEED Quinn to overtake Reinhart to become cup contenders is a massive reach. There are so many ways to do it. Even if Quinn is more less AS good, that's a hell of a 1-2 RW combo

Quinn COULD surpass him, I don't think it's an unreasonable likelihood at all. I just don't think it's the most likely result at this time. That would be a hell of an expectation to saddle him with, IMO.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Thorny

[tom webster]

21 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Same. Dahlin will be a top 2/3 value contributing asset on this team at that time, I'd rather not mitigate any of it by making his job more difficult. If he can play RHD seamlessly, sure, but even though plenty of young D play on their off-side before the NHL, it's very uncommon in the NHL for the top pair/top guys to do that. 

I’m pretty sure he played right side almost exclusively before being drafted but not positive 

[LGR4GM]

Quinn might not be Reinhart good, but we need him to be. 

19 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It's not irrelevant because the only thing you are basing Quinn's projection on is junior. 

Regardless, Sam is a top line winger RIGHT NOW. I don't project that as an expectation for prospects. It's more likely Quinn doesn't surpass Reinhart, it's not above a 50% chance that Quinn is better than what's already arguably an above average top line winger. If the most likely resulting scenario is that Quinn is a BETTER than "very good", above average top line winger, we absolutely made the right selection with Quinn.

The bold - to say we NEED Quinn to overtake Reinhart to become cup contenders is a massive reach. There are so many ways to do it. Even if Quinn is more less AS good, that's a hell of a 1-2 RW combo

Quinn COULD surpass him, I don't think it's an unreasonable likelihood at all. I just don't think it's the most likely result at this time. That would be a hell of an expectation to saddle him with, IMO.

I don't think we're on the same page. 

[Thorny]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Quinn might not be Reinhart good, but we need him to be. 

It would be huge. 

Or Peterka. Or Guenther. A couple of them, hey, we are really talking now!

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Quinn might not be Reinhart good, but we need him to be. 

I don't think we're on the same page. 

On that Quinn needs to be better than Sam for us to be cup contenders? No. 

That we need "A" winger to be at least as good as Sam? I'd agree

[tom webster]

27 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I wouldn't switch Dahlin. I'd give him Borgen. 

But that defense is really good and your 2nd line in 3 years could be lethal. By then McCabe is probably the 7th defender.

It's definitely a playoff team. 

Notice also, this line up is missing 2 or 3 pieces that should be used to acquire other assets.

[LabattBlue]

40 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I have a question for you. Given what you think of our prospects, do you think this line up is a Cup contender in two years.

Skinner - Jack - Sam

JJ - Cozens - Quinn

Artu - Casey - TT

Zemgus - Asplund - Hyman

 

Ryan Johnson- Dahlin(switching to right)

Samuelsson - Joker

McCabe - Borgen

UPL

Portillo

Goaltending makes this a questionable playoff team let along a cup contender.  The rest of the lineup is promising.  

[DarthEbriate]

I don't think Reinhart should agree to an extension beyond 2 years because we can't (nor can anyone else with the flat cap) pay him what he'll be able to get as a UFA when the cap bumps back up. He's been underpaid for his production his entire career. He's only going to get one big contract and we can't afford to give him 8/9 this year. No one can. But --- the ESPN deal, the other US deal, the Canadian deal, fans coming back, and Seattle expansion influx, sports gambling getting legalized in more states, advertisements on helmets and more...  the cash is coming in 23-24. Sam will be 28. It won't be a long contract necessarily, but it will be his only chance to truly maximize.

There is a risk for him to not lock up now, as he could be injured, and he also has to compete with the Cozens of the world who'll be eating up that cash at the same time. But Reinhart stays healthy consistently and is savvy. Some great young talents are going to wash out or get injured along the way, and bad old contracts like Okposo's will disappear across the league. And then the cap will explode and someone will completely reset the market and the money will get stupid.

[tom webster]

24 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

Goaltending makes this a questionable playoff team let along a cup contender.  The rest of the lineup is promising.  

I don’t really think they go with those two. I was mostly making a point that this team had the pieces in place. I actually expect that they will add a veteran goalie and some jam to the forward ranks and maybe one veteran defenseman depending how fast the kids develop.

[Thorny]

27 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

I don't think Reinhart should agree to an extension beyond 2 years because we can't (nor can anyone else with the flat cap) pay him what he'll be able to get as a UFA when the cap bumps back up. He's been underpaid for his production his entire career. He's only going to get one big contract and we can't afford to give him 8/9 this year. No one can. But --- the ESPN deal, the other US deal, the Canadian deal, fans coming back, and Seattle expansion influx, sports gambling getting legalized in more states, advertisements on helmets and more...  the cash is coming in 23-24. Sam will be 28. It won't be a long contract necessarily, but it will be his only chance to truly maximize.

There is a risk for him to not lock up now, as he could be injured, and he also has to compete with the Cozens of the world who'll be eating up that cash at the same time. But Reinhart stays healthy consistently and is savvy. Some great young talents are going to wash out or get injured along the way, and bad old contracts like Okposo's will disappear across the league. And then the cap will explode and someone will completely reset the market and the money will get stupid.

If Reinhart is looking to get a big deal, I don't see why he wouldn't just sign for 1 year rather than 2, if he could get it. We don't know to a certainty at all that we won't get a nice big contract in '22. It's not like teams need to set aside 8 or 9 mil. 7 or so? I think someone would make room. Even if not, it doesn't hurt to have the option of seeing the market, and he can re-up with anyone at that stage for 1 year if he wants to bump it back. 

I don't think the Sabres give him that though, or 2 years. Their options to me come down to dealing him now while they still can for good value, or locking him up LT. 

Won't arbitration only give him 1 year?

That's probably how he gets the most cash this year, then he's free and clear. 

Edited April 25, 2021 by Thorny

[DarthEbriate]

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If Reinhart is looking to get a big deal, I don't see why he wouldn't just sign for 1 year rather than 2, if he could get it. We don't know to a certainty at all that we won't get a nice big contract in '22. It's not like teams need to set aside 8 or 9 mil. 7 or so? I think someone would make room. Even if not, it doesn't hurt to have the option of seeing the market, and he can re-up with anyone at that stage for 1 year if he wants to bump it back. 

I don't think the Sabres give him that though, or 2 years. Their options to me come down to dealing him now while they still can for good value, or locking him up LT. 

Won't arbitration only give him 1 year?

That's probably how he gets the most cash this year, then he's free and clear. 

Absolutely. He should go 1 year from us, get to UFA, and then look for one more 1-year deal at whatever he can get comparable. Something like a $7 this year, a $6-7 next as a mercenary... and then... look out!

Because the GMs and agents and players all are going to see the writing on the wall. It's like Crosby signed his massive 8.7M deal. Next thing you know, he's not even the highest paid on his team and is a bargain leaguewide. Well... in 2023-24, McDavid is going to be on a contract comparable to Crosby's. Eichel is going to be a bargain. (Skinner's contract will still be garbage, but Okposo-level garbage.)

 

Edited April 25, 2021 by DarthEbriate

[Radar]

11 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Which is why you need to be ready to move players before you get yourself into that position. You're right, it's different from football.  It's much more like baseball.  And in baseball, just like in hockey, most of the huge money deals with massive term that go to age 26+ players don't work out for the team at all.  They get a year or two of top productivity and are then looking for a way out.  In baseball the concept of "team control" is valued massively and teams trade players they either can't afford or don't value as highly as the market will all the time.

I'm not saying you don't spend, you just change how you are doing it. Pay for the pre 30 years. You just cannot give massive deals with massive term to players over 26 years old anymore.  The only exceptions are people like Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid. Reinhart isn't in that class of player just like Skinner wasn't. You can pay the cash, you just can't do the term. You end up eating so many dead years that take up so much of your cap for a player that essentially becomes a negative asset. I already proposed paying Reinhart more in AAV over a shorter term to avoid the bad years at the end of the contract.  I'm not giving him 7 or 8 years under any circumstances.  I'll pay him the equivalent amount of money to take 4 or 5 years instead. If someone wants to give him 9.5 or 10 over 7 years that's their problem. If that's what he's looking for in terms of contract (which I'm not saying he is) he needs to be traded for a package including younger players under team control.

Sam is 25  almost 26 I believe. I'm saying he's given 6 or 7 years. How does 7/6.75 sit with you? I think that's as good as you get. Not sure they would accept that though.

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, DarthEbriate said:

Absolutely. He should go 1 year from us, get to UFA, and then look for one more 1-year deal at whatever he can get comparable. Something like a $7 this year, a $6-7 next as a mercenary... and then... look out!

Because the GMs and agents and players all are going to see the writing on the wall. It's like Crosby signed his massive 8.7M deal. Next thing you know, he's not even the highest paid on his team and is a bargain leaguewide. Well... in 2023-24, McDavid is going to be on a contract comparable to Crosby's. Eichel is going to be a bargain. (Skinner's contract will still be garbage, but Okposo-level garbage.)

 

I'm not sure Eichel's deal will ever be a "bargain". He'd need to significantly outplay a 10 mil per deal for it to be a bargain. A good contract? Already headed that way. 

[Thorny]

12 minutes ago, Radar said:

Sam is 25  almost 26 I believe. I'm saying he's given 6 or 7 years. How does 7/6.75 sit with you? I think that's as good as you get. Not sure they would accept that though.

You have to selectively pick your risk. There's always going to be a risk locking up your good players, because you need to go "term" to do it. But you need to bet one SOMEONE. Reinhart has been the model of consistency and health. He's a guy I go for term on when he'd still be low-30s when his deal ends. 

[dudacek]

47 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Fun fact, Matthew Barnaby scored 45 goals with 63 assists in 65 games in his last year in juniors. Quinn is talented, but junior stats are junior stats.

In Matt Barnaby's first eligible draft year, he scored 9 goals and didn't get picked, compared to Quinn's 52.

Also, when Matt scored 45 he finished 15th in Q scoring. Quinn's 52 was 2nd in the tougher OHL.

Also Matt Barnaby played more than 800 NHL games and put up more than 300 NHL points.

Junior stats with context aren't irrelevant.

Edited April 25, 2021 by dudacek

[DarthEbriate]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I'm not sure Eichel's deal will ever be a "bargain". He'd need to significantly outplay a 10 mil per deal for it to be a bargain. A good contract? Already headed that way. 

My argument is not about 10M/year. It's the total cap. Eichel's currently at 12% of the cap, but once the cap starts going up, it's going to go way up. My guess is Eichel's contract is going to be in the 10% range by 2024-25, and likely even further when we get to 2025-26. We're headed for a very high cap (and still only 50 contracts, and very low AHL/ECHL contracts by comparison to what the top players are going to get).

[Thorny]

48 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

My argument is not about 10M/year. It's the total cap. Eichel's currently at 12% of the cap, but once the cap starts going up, it's going to go way up. My guess is Eichel's contract is going to be in the 10% range by 2024-25, and likely even further when we get to 2025-26. We're headed for a very high cap (and still only 50 contracts, and very low AHL/ECHL contracts by comparison to what the top players are going to get).

It doesn’t matter what he makes relative to the cap what matters is what he makes relative to other players. He has the 8th highest forward contract in the league right now. Until that changes, significantly, it’s not a bargain. 

Right now we’d need to put a fair bit of spin on it to classify it as even “good”, never mind “bargain”. 

Scheifele is on a bargain contract. 

[pi2000]

classic Reinhart from last game... sick edge work lol

[nfreeman]

2 hours ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

I'm not giving a 26 year old player 7 years, not even 6.  5 at the most and I'd rather 4.

Are you prepared to be forced into trading Reino this summer in the very likely event he refuses to sign a 5-year deal?  Because that is very likely the result of drawing the line at 5 years.

[Weave]

2 hours ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

I'm not giving a 26 year old player 7 years, not even 6.  5 at the most and I'd rather 4.

Giving 26 yr old players 7 year contracts is the price you have to pay to have very good 26 year old players.  You will likely trade off every good player you have at 26-27 if you aren't willing to give out those contracts.  There really isn't any getting around it for a player at Sam's level and above.

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Weave said:

Giving 26 yr old players 7 year contracts is the price you have to pay to have very good 26 year old players.  You will likely trade off every good player you have at 26-27 if you aren't willing to give out those contracts.  There really isn't any getting around it for a player at Sam's level and above.

He should have gotten that 7 year deal 2 years ago

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Then that's what you need to do.  If you do your job of drafting and developing properly and make good hockey trades with those players to rebuild with younger team controlled assets you will be fine.  You can break the rule for great, keystone of your franchise, players. Anyone else? Nope.

How many players do you think it’s ok to lock up to LT deals? Do any current teams follow that model? 

[Weave]

1 minute ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Then that's what you need to do.  If you do your job of drafting and developing properly and make good hockey trades with those players to rebuild with younger team controlled assets you will be fine.  You can break the rule for great, keystone of your franchise, players. Anyone else? Nope.

Show me one team that has successfully managed doing what you propose.

[Thorny]

3 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Which would have fit into the time frame I am proposing and is absolutely what you should do with your good young players.  I'm not saying not to give out 7 years deals.  I'm saying you don't give out 7 year deals to 26 year olds.  If you have a 24 year old you want to lock up then by all means, do it.

Colorado?

Colorado is a good one 

[Weave]

4 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

It depends on your team and the AAV you can get them to agree to. You have to be somewhat discerning in who gets them and, ideally, you reserve them for those cornerstone players and you have those players sign them at 24 or sooner.  There has to be some built in roster churn and that means you will move good players out to bring in different, good, younger players.  It means you will bring in older vets on short term deals realizing you may not want to keep them past that 1 or 2 year deal no matter how good they are for you. Basically it means you need to be a well run organization that can identify talent.

The Sabres will probably give Reinhart 7 years because they aren't well run and they will be afraid of the hole in the roster and the backlash they will get.

Let's flip the question around. Someone tell me a long term deal the Sabres have handed to a player 26 or older that has worked out well.  

The 7 yr deal seems to be a result of the last players union contract. Buffalo hadn’t had a good signing since then, but Buffalo has done most things wrong since then.

[LGR4GM]

At this point anything over 5 years is too long for Sam. I hate to say it but we've been burned too often by the Skinner or Okposo level deals. Just think if Skinner only had 3 years left instead of 6, we would all feel much better.