IF the Sabres trade Jack and Sam...

[Ducky]

3 hours ago, Drag0nDan said:

2yr 7.3M in 2018.  Didn't try to extend and buyout the remaining RFA years.  So that left him with 2 years of control after the contract he signed with JB.  

That's a normal and fair bridge isn't it? He averaged 47 points a season on his ELC. The problem was not locking him up last year, not his bridge. I said so when he signed it and I stand by it.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Ducky

[Weave]

5 hours ago, Thorny said:

Hockey is supposed to be fun. You get one life. I want to enjoy being a fan of the Buffalo Sabres. 

Fans touting this "build to a contender with a 5 year plan" nonsense have lost the plot. Salary caps and "mortgaging the future (that doesn't evenactually exist until we make it)" and arm chair GMing...

It's entertainment,

Entertain me. I want to love my team. I don't need them to win the Cup to do that. If it happens, it happens. 

I look in the mirror these days and I think I see Thorny staring back.

[Curt]

5 hours ago, Drag0nDan said:

Doesn't reino have to have an appetite for a long-term deal?  JB's failure to bridge rein is really the mistake here.

Why TF would Reinhart want to sign a long term deal with the Buffalo Sabres?  In one year he can sign a long term deal wherever he wants to.

[Thorny]

8 minutes ago, Weave said:

I look in the mirror these days and I think I see Thorny staring back.

Lucky you! 

jk

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, Ducky said:

That's a normal and fair bridge isn't it? He averaged 47 points a season on his ELC. The problem was not locking him up last year, not his bridge. I said so when he signed it and I stand by it.

No, they should have locked him up at the same time the Jets locked up Ehlers - coming off his ELC. That's how the Jets got a good contract with him, and how we indisputably *would* have gotten one, with Sam. That's already been proven. How do you "stand by" the idea that he shouldn't have gotten locked up when we can see now that it would have been worth it?

Is this like how you stand by that Crosby is bad defensively even though we proved you wrong?

[Weave]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Lucky you! 

jk

I don't know you but I'm betting it's an improvement LOL

[jsb]

15 minutes ago, Weave said:

I look in the mirror these days and I think I see Thorny staring back.

    Wish for better @Weave

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

I don't know you but I'm betting it's an improvement LOL

I think it's my opinions shifting towards you so maybe the rest follows too 

[Ducky]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

No, they should have locked him up at the same time the Jets locked up Ehlers - coming off his ELC. That's how the Jets got a good contract with him, and how we indisputably *would* have gotten one, with Sam. That's already been proven. How do you "stand by" the idea that he shouldn't have gotten locked up when we can see now that it would have been worth it?

Is this like how you stand by that Crosby is bad defensively even though we proved you wrong?

Hindsight is 20/20. If you ask me, Ehlers has barely lived up to his deal until this year. Knowing what you know now you should have locked him up but you didn't know that then. Were you calling for him to be locked up after his ELC. If you weren't, you don't have a foot to stand on. If you were, what dollar amount were you suggesting.

Ehlers first three years were 38, 64 and60 points.

Rhino's were 42, 47 and 50 points.

Similar first years and then Ehlers pulled away from Rhino.

How mcuh would he have gotten locked up in a 6 year deal? 4.75m? 5m? Do you think he would have signed for that? I'll bet he would have taken 45m-48m over 7 years last year but we will never know.

The fact of the matter is he should have been locked up last year and he wasn't and Adams gave ALL the leverage to Rhino by giving him a one year deal. Horrible decision.

Now, if they don't lock him up and I would think they would have to seriously have to overpay him to get him to stay, Eichel is even one step closer to the door. Horrible decision.

[Ducky]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

No, they should have locked him up at the same time the Jets locked up Ehlers - coming off his ELC. That's how the Jets got a good contract with him, and how we indisputably *would* have gotten one, with Sam. That's already been proven. How do you "stand by" the idea that he shouldn't have gotten locked up when we can see now that it would have been worth it?

Is this like how you stand by that Crosby is bad defensively even though we proved you wrong?

Look what I found on this site on July 6, 2018. You wanted a 2 year bridge.

"I'm hoping for a 2 year bridge deal. I was tempted to say 3 years, but it might be better if Reinhart, Mittelstadt, and Dahlin aren't all up at once. They can sign Reino to a longer term deal after that, assuming it's warranted, or even after the first year if Botterill thinks Sam is primed for a breakout after watching him again this coming season."

Seems you wanted a bridge deal, doesn't it???

[Kong]

There's an interesting take on what went down with Eichel by Michael Clifford on the dobberhockey.com site.

Quote

This level of vitriol coming from a player towards his team is almost never made public, and I can't remember any young superstar saying anything of this magnitude while still under contract for several years.

https://dobberhockey.com/2021/05/11/ramblings-sabres-and-rangers-end-the-season-letang-and-ty-smith-may-11/

[Thorny]

11 minutes ago, Ducky said:

Hindsight is 20/20. If you ask me, Ehlers has barely lived up to his deal until this year. Knowing what you know now you should have locked him up but you didn't know that then. Were you calling for him to be locked up after his ELC. If you weren't, you don't have a foot to stand on. If you were, what dollar amount were you suggesting.

Ehlers first three years were 38, 64 and60 points.

Rhino's were 42, 47 and 50 points.

Similar first years and then Ehlers pulled away from Rhino.

How mcuh would he have gotten locked up in a 6 year deal? 4.75m? 5m? Do you think he would have signed for that? I'll bet he would have taken 45m-48m over 7 years last year but we will never know.

The fact of the matter is he should have been locked up last year and he wasn't and Adams gave ALL the leverage to Rhino by giving him a one year deal. Horrible decision.

Now, if they don't lock him up and I would think they would have to seriously have to overpay him to get him to stay, Eichel is even one step closer to the door. Horrible decision.

I most certainly was, good sir. 

I had just written him off in early 2017 because he had a horrid start. And he proceeded to light it up in the second half starting with the winter classic, a lot of it without Jack IIRC, and I vowed to never doubt him again. I wanted him extended long term AT the time. 

[Ducky]

This was your comment the day of the signing...

"This is a great, value deal from Botterill (that we haven't been used to seeing a lot of) that I think says a lot about how he does business. 

It therefore says a lot about how Botterill must view Jack Eichel. To give him the deal he gave him, right off the hop."

Seems you were quite pleased with JBot as well...

Edited May 11, 2021 by Ducky

[Ducky]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I most certainly was, good sir. 

I had just written him off in early 2017 because he had a horrid start. And he proceeded to light it up in the second half starting with the winter classic, a lot of it without Jack IIRC, and I vowed to never doubt him again. I wanted him extended long term AT the time. 

Not what you said on July/18 or the day of his signing...good sir.

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, Ducky said:

This was your commnet the day of the signing...

"This is a great, value deal from Botterill (that we haven't been used to seeing a lot of) that I think says a lot about how he does business. 

It therefore says a lot about how Botterill must view Jack Eichel. To give him the deal he gave him, right off the hop."

Seems you were quite pleased with JBot as well...

I'm sure I advocated for him to be signed long term before that deal was signed. I'll have to look it up now. Good call on my acceptance of the bridge, though. 

I was also way wrong on Botterill, as apparently Pegula initiated the LT deal for Jack.

In fairness, there are probably hundreds of post since he got bridged where I've talked about hating it. 

Hindsight 20/20 indeed. 

2 minutes ago, Ducky said:

Not what you said on July/18 or the day of his signing...good sir.

do you have a link to that, actually?

quicker than searching 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorny]

On 5/30/2019 at 5:24 PM, Thorny said:

The return on investment would be much better moving a guy making 5 million for the next 6 years, than that same guy, now an RFA, looking for 7-8.

And 7+ is what he'll undoubtedly command with another season just equaling this one.

He goes up another 15 points to 80....

Botterill only "wins" that bridge if Sam regresses next year. 

Assuming no regression, the question isn't whether the bridge was the wrong move. It was then, objectively. (Is there anyone here that wouldn't swap the current contract situation Reinhart for one locked up at 5-6 mil for the next 7 years?) It's just a matter of how much accountability one attributes to Botterill for it, which is certainly debatable. Wanting to mitigate risk was certainly a valid concern at the time. 

I won't say unequivocally that Reinhart's bridge was a "bad" deal, my main argument is that it certainly isn't a "good" one. Skinner's contract isn't going to be a "good" one either. How many "good" contracts has Botterill signed in 2+ years? 

Mark Scheifele is signed to a good contract. There's risk, but that's how you get those bargain deals, take a chance on that 5-6 mil deal on a player you believe in. If they had bridged him, he'd be making 10 mil now. 

I actually mention Scheifele here, too coincidentally 

[Ducky]

Not sure if this works but it is page 23 for the day of the signing.

The other comment was July 6th, 2018 of the same thread.

Also, complaining about it after the fact is hindsight and anyone's vision should be 20/20 with hindsight.

I was wrong about JBot as well as I thought he was going to do very well. I did agree with the extension to Rhino at the time as well. For a player taken as high as he did and putting up the numbers he did, I would never sign a player long term for big bucks.

[Thorny]

Oh and Skinner

[Ducky]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I actually mention Scheifele here, too coincidentally 

Hindsight, that comment was a season AFTER Rhino signed the bridge.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Ducky

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, Ducky said:

Not sure if this works but it is page 23 for the day of the signing.

The other comment was July 6th, 2018 of the same thread.

Also, complaining about it after the fact is hindsight and anyone's vision should be 20/20 with hindsight.

I was wrong about JBot as well as I thought he was going to do very well. I did agree with the extension to Rhino at the time as well. For a player taken as high as he did and putting up the numbers he did, I would never sign a player long term for big bucks.

Ya. I mean, it quickly revealed itself to be a bad decision. Like I always say, it's about results. I was wrong at the time, so what. I even said in my follow up that I quoted that it "seemed reasonable at the time" so I didn't know how much blame we could attribute. A move can be the wrong move objectively and there still be mitigating factors. It's not always black or white. Like I said there, it was a pattern with Botterill that he didn't get any value deals: it wasn't a one-off. That became an issue. 

3 minutes ago, Ducky said:

Hindsight, that comment was a season AFTER he signed the bridge.

Right. You got me, I was wrong at the time. I'm glad I wasn't being paid to make the decisions. Chevy would have signed him. 

[Ducky]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Ya. I mean, it quickly revealed itself to be a bad decision. Like I always say, it's about results. I was wrong at the time, so what. I even said in my follow up that I quoted that it "seemed reasonable at the time" so I didn't know how much blame we could attribute. A move can be the wrong move objectively and there still be mitigating factors. It's not always black or white. Like I said there, it was a pattern with Botterill that he didn't get any value deals: it wasn't a one-off. That became an issue. 

I'm not arguing that. I am pointing that you said you called for a long term deal when, in fact, you were calling for and then liked the bridge...big difference.

[Thorny]

22 minutes ago, Ducky said:

Look what I found on this site on July 6, 2018. You wanted a 2 year bridge.

"I'm hoping for a 2 year bridge deal. I was tempted to say 3 years, but it might be better if Reinhart, Mittelstadt, and Dahlin aren't all up at once. They can sign Reino to a longer term deal after that, assuming it's warranted, or even after the first year if Botterill thinks Sam is primed for a breakout after watching him again this coming season."

Seems you wanted a bridge deal, doesn't it???

Also I said they should have re-upped Sam after one year - which they should have done. 

[Curt]

I’m glad that I’ve never been wrong on here.  😉

[Ducky]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Ya. I mean, it quickly revealed itself to be a bad decision. Like I always say, it's about results. I was wrong at the time, so what. I even said in my follow up that I quoted that it "seemed reasonable at the time" so I didn't know how much blame we could attribute. A move can be the wrong move objectively and there still be mitigating factors. It's not always black or white. Like I said there, it was a pattern with Botterill that he didn't get any value deals: it wasn't a one-off. That became an issue. 

Right. You got me, I was wrong at the time. I'm glad I wasn't being paid to make the decisions. Chevy would have signed him. 

Chevy is a pretty good GM but I have problems with his loyalty. Wheeler 5 x 8.25m...Perreault 4.125m x 4.

He does get some good contracts signed though. It'll be interesting to see what PLD does next year and what he signs him for.

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, Ducky said:

I'm not arguing that. I am pointing that you said you called for a long term deal when, in fact, you were calling for and then liked the bridge...big difference.

I'm confused as to what you want me to say I already said I was wrong. Stupid, even, It was a total blunder. It's not the first egg nor the most recent to today nor the last I'll have on my face. I must be misremembering when I got full behind him - looks like I waited until he put it together for a full year to proclaim him a lock. 

Like I said, should have re-upped him after the first year of the bridge.