Rasmus close to extension at $10M per

[Thorny]

25 minutes ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

Expect Angry NS to show up if they sign Power to a 2 year bridge deal.  Huge mistake there, IMO.  They should lock him up for 8.  That means 9 more years of our top 2 D.

Agree. There’ll be a number that gets it settled, below what the number’ll be should we wait and sign him later, as I kinda expect him to off for Dahlin-esque value, probably slightly less. You’ll have to pay, though, as you need to make it worthwhile to Power to forgo a purely “bet on yourself” approach. I highly doubt he’d be hard-line on that, ie “pay me 10 now, or I’ll wait”, ie they can probably find LT number below that, but we’d have to pay a reasonably significant premium on top of what a bridge would cost, under the idea that it’s worth it because Power is going to earn an even larger deal going forward.

That’s the risk, paying more now than we strictly could get away with, but if you believe in Owen it’s totally worth it.

Imagine if we had Dahlin on a Thompson like contract. Dahlin’s will be a good and fair deal, but it’ll be full value rather than the bargain it could have been 

Edited June 17, 2023 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

To be honest between 2x4mil and 6x7mil I'd be unsure.

In my opinion you get an 8 year contract or a bridge; nothing in-between. 6 years doesn't help the Sabres in the slightest and walks him into UFA at 26/27 years old.

 

I would much prefer the 8 year deal even if its 7to8mil a year. If he wants to bet on himself, you give 2 years at 4mil per and then eat a bullet in 2 years with an 8x10mil contract. At very least we have him 10 years + 1 instead of 6 years + 1 

[Thorny]

7 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

To be honest between 2x4mil and 6x7mil I'd be unsure.

In my opinion you get an 8 year contract or a bridge; nothing in-between. 6 years doesn't help the Sabres in the slightest and walks him into UFA at 26/27 years old.

 

I would much prefer the 8 year deal even if its 7to8mil a year. If he wants to bet on himself, you give 2 years at 4mil per and then eat a bullet in 2 years with an 8x10mil contract. At very least we have him 10 years + 1 instead of 6 years + 1 

6 years 7 million would be better than 2 years 4 million, followed by 8x10. We need to stop prioritizing a time frame *7 years away* over the nearer, 5 year term. Window is now. 

We’d be spending an extra 3 million per year over the next 2 years, then saving 3 million per over the crucial next following 4 years. A savings of 6 million over the next 6 seasons, and 12 million over the last 4, relative to the bridge and then 8 year 10 million dollar deal course of action. That deal prioritizes the savings over the time period 7 years from now. Is this just a reluctance to declare the window open? I care about the next 6 years way more. That’s a lifetime in the NHL. 

[kas23]

40 minutes ago, K-9 said:

That’s really up to Power and what he prefers to do. Might be smarter for him to take a bridge in favor of a monster deal later on when the cap is higher as well. 

He could, but it depends on his risk tolerance. And his agent’s. We would all like to think Power will be a better player in a few years. That’s not guaranteed, but the contract he would sign today would be. I think most agents would frame it this way as well. A bird in the hand…

[dudacek]

If I’m Power I’m betting on myself.

If the Sabres want 8 years, it better be for around 8 per.

[Thorny]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

If I’m Power I’m betting on myself.

If the Sabres want 8 years, it better be for around 8 per.

That’s exactly what I think it would cost. And the Sabres should do it. 64 mil over the next 8, as opposed to bridge and then LT which using Chewy’s numbers would come in at 68 over the next 8 years, plus the savings of that course would come in the next 2 years, when we need it the least (8 mil savings, 4 mil per) as opposed to saving 2 mil per and 12 million over the final 6 years where we’ll need it way more 

It’s cheaper overall, the savings are at a way more opportune time, I care much less about the 2 years of extra control, 7 and 8 years from now, when the next 6 years is window-city. It’s barely a risk. How much would Power come in below 8 mil, in 2 years, even if he doesn’t develop as planned?

Edited June 17, 2023 by Thorny

[Thorny]

I feel like a bridge is by far the worst outcome. Maybe because I don’t doubt Power at all, but what’s the big point in raking up savings the next 2 seasons, if it’s not about doubting his likely development curve? Would we even *use* that cap space? Weren’t we way under it this year? We won’t maximize it just because it’s there.

Id take 6, 7, 8 year deals before kicking the can down the road.

Also can’t minimize the benefit the cost certainty would provide, as Adams plans the structure of the much more difficult to manage, convoluted seasons on the way. A bridge just leaves KA unsure what his cap looks like in 3 years and perhaps less able to make moves 

Edited June 17, 2023 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

6 years 7 million would be better than 2 years 4 million, followed by 8x10. We need to stop prioritizing a time frame *7 years away* over the nearer, 5 year term. Window is now. 

We’d be spending an extra 3 million per year over the next 2 years, then saving 3 million per over the crucial next following 4 years. A savings of 6 million over the next 6 seasons, and 12 million over the last 4, relative to the bridge and then 8 year 10 million dollar deal course of action. That deal prioritizes the savings over the time period 7 years from now. Is this just a reluctance to declare the window open? I care about the next 6 years way more. That’s a lifetime in the NHL. 

It has nothing to do with the window to me, it’s all about player control. If he refuses to sign a reasonable deal akin to 8x8mil I’d take the bridge just to increase our hold on him. What I don’t want is a 6 year deal where he can walk to UFA and sign with the highest bidder.

[inkman]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

That’s exactly what I think it would cost. And the Sabres should do it. 64 mil over the next 8, as opposed to bridge and then LT which using Chewy’s numbers would come in at 68 over the next 8 years, plus the savings of that course would come in the next 2 years, when we need it the least (8 mil savings, 4 mil per) as opposed to saving 2 mil per and 12 million over the final 6 years where we’ll need it way more 

It’s cheaper overall, the savings are at a way more opportune time, I care much less about the 2 years of extra control, 7 and 8 years from now, when the next 6 years is window-city. It’s barely a risk. How much would Power come in below 8 mil, in 2 years, even if he doesn’t develop as planned?

Did you call the Wookiee, Chewy? 🥰

[Andrew Amerk]

Haven’t been following much hockey since the Amerks got eliminated. 
 

Ras @ 10 x 8 is fantastic news. 

[Brawndo]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

If I’m Power I’m betting on myself.

If the Sabres want 8 years, it better be for around 8 per.

They should come in at 8-8.5

 

Power is a 10.2 RFA after next season. He doesn’t have arbitration rights and cannot be signed to an offer sheet. 
 

The biggest risk to the Sabres is having his AAV go higher than 8 Million with a dominant season. Power’s biggest risk is if he suffers the Sophomore slump that many players go through but even then he could sign a bridge deal.

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

That’s exactly what I think it would cost. And the Sabres should do it. 64 mil over the next 8, as opposed to bridge and then LT which using Chewy’s numbers would come in at 68 over the next 8 years, plus the savings of that course would come in the next 2 years, when we need it the least (8 mil savings, 4 mil per) as opposed to saving 2 mil per and 12 million over the final 6 years where we’ll need it way more 

It’s cheaper overall, the savings are at a way more opportune time, I care much less about the 2 years of extra control, 7 and 8 years from now, when the next 6 years is window-city. It’s barely a risk. How much would Power come in below 8 mil, in 2 years, even if he doesn’t develop as planned?

 

I agree on the outline of six year deal as Thorny said. Eight is preferable, but six years is not the worse case scenario. That would put him on same contract timeline as Tage and Cozens in terms of team control. It’s up to the  organization to make sure that players want to re-sign with the team. 


Submitted for no particular reason.

 

 

[nfreeman]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

If I’m Power I’m betting on myself.

If the Sabres want 8 years, it better be for around 8 per.

 

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

That’s exactly what I think it would cost. And the Sabres should do it. 64 mil over the next 8, as opposed to bridge and then LT which using Chewy’s numbers would come in at 68 over the next 8 years, plus the savings of that course would come in the next 2 years, when we need it the least (8 mil savings, 4 mil per) as opposed to saving 2 mil per and 12 million over the final 6 years where we’ll need it way more 

It’s cheaper overall, the savings are at a way more opportune time, I care much less about the 2 years of extra control, 7 and 8 years from now, when the next 6 years is window-city. It’s barely a risk. How much would Power come in below 8 mil, in 2 years, even if he doesn’t develop as planned?

I think it will cost about this too, and I agree that they should do it.

However, I think we all need to remember there is a real risk in giving him this type of contract.

 

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

I feel like a bridge is by far the worst outcome. Maybe because I don’t doubt Power at all, but what’s the big point in raking up savings the next 2 seasons, if it’s not about doubting his likely development curve? Would we even *use* that cap space? Weren’t we way under it this year? We won’t maximize it just because it’s there.

Id take 6, 7, 8 year deals before kicking the can down the road.

Also can’t minimize the benefit the cost certainty would provide, as Adams plans the structure of the much more difficult to manage, convoluted seasons on the way. A bridge just leaves KA unsure what his cap looks like in 3 years and perhaps less able to make moves 

I think the worst outcome is giving him $8.5MM x 8 years and, like Tyler Myers, he never improves and in fact gets a bit worse each year as the league figures him out and he doesn't figure anything out.

But I agree with taking the risk and giving him 6-8 years. 

 

3 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

It has nothing to do with the window to me, it’s all about player control. If he refuses to sign a reasonable deal akin to 8x8mil I’d take the bridge just to increase our hold on him. What I don’t want is a 6 year deal where he can walk to UFA and sign with the highest bidder.

 

30 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

They should come in at 8-8.5

Power is a 10.2 RFA after next season. He doesn’t have arbitration rights and cannot be signed to an offer sheet. 

The biggest risk to the Sabres is having his AAV go higher than 8 Million with a dominant season. Power’s biggest risk is if he suffers the Sophomore slump that many players go through but even then he could sign a bridge deal.

I agree on the outline of six year deal as Thorny said. Eight is preferable, but six years is not the worse case scenario. That would put him on same contract timeline as Tage and Cozens in terms of team control. It’s up to the  organization to make sure that players want to re-sign with the team. 

Submitted for no particular reason.

 

 

 

Brawndo is right -- it's not optimal to get zero of his UFA years, but you would still be locking up, for six freaking seasons in which you think you have a team on the rise, a guy you think is a great young player at a contract you can live with.

A six-year deal is a no-brainer IMHO if he won't go any longer.

More good stuff in here, Brawndo.

[Hank]

3 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

 

I think it will cost about this too, and I agree that they should do it.

However, I think we all need to remember there is a real risk in giving him this type of contract.

 

I think the worst outcome is giving him $8.5MM x 8 years and, like Tyler Myers, he never improves and in fact gets a bit worse each year as the league figures him out and he doesn't figure anything out.

But I agree with taking the risk and giving him 6-8 years. 

 

 

 

Brawndo is right -- it's not optimal to get zero of his UFA years, but you would still be locking up, for six freaking seasons in which you think you have a team on the rise, a guy you think is a great young player at a contract you can live with.

A six-year deal is a no-brainer IMHO if he won't go any longer.

More good stuff in here, Brawndo.

I think walking him to UFA is the worst possible outcome. I'm surprised to see people advocating for this. 

[nfreeman]

Just now, Hank said:

I think walking him to UFA is the worst possible outcome. I'm surprised to see people advocating for this. 

I'm not advocating to walk him to UFA.  I'm simply saying that if the choices are a 4-year deal or a 6-year deal, I'd prefer the 6-year deal.

[Hank]

It's possible for him to walk after six years, I think signing him to that is crazy. If those are my two options I'm choosing four, than signing him for eight after that. 

[Thorny]

11 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

 

I think it will cost about this too, and I agree that they should do it.

However, I think we all need to remember there is a real risk in giving him this type of contract.

 

I think the worst outcome is giving him $8.5MM x 8 years and, like Tyler Myers, he never improves and in fact gets a bit worse each year as the league figures him out and he doesn't figure anything out.

But I agree with taking the risk and giving him 6-8 years. 

 

 

 

Brawndo is right -- it's not optimal to get zero of his UFA years, but you would still be locking up, for six freaking seasons in which you think you have a team on the rise, a guy you think is a great young player at a contract you can live with.

A six-year deal is a no-brainer IMHO if he won't go any longer.

More good stuff in here, Brawndo.

I just don’t see a Myers like trajectory for a first OA pick but you are correct of course that there’s some risk 

[Carmel Corn]

14 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I'm not advocating to walk him to UFA.  I'm simply saying that if the choices are a 4-year deal or a 6-year deal, I'd prefer the 6-year deal.

Question....is he still an RFA after the 4 year deal?

[nfreeman]

32 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I just don’t see a Myers like trajectory for a first OA pick but you are correct of course that there’s some risk 

#1OA picks since 2010 have included:

2010 - Taylor Hall

2011 - Ryan Nugent Hopkins

2012 - Nail Yakupov

2020 - Alex Lafreniere

2022 - Juraj Slafkovsky

Obviously it's too soon to tell about Juraj, but if we disregard him, that's 4 guys out of 12 that I probably wouldn't want to have given the type of contract we're talking about for Power (or, to be fair, one out of the last 10 -- but if Juraj is a disappointment, it's 2 out of the last 3). 

I think Power will be at least as good as Ekblad, but that's just a guess and the risk is real IMHO.

 

24 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

Question....is he still an RFA after the 4 year deal?

I assume so based on what others have said upthread.  I agree that it's a relevant fact.

[Brawndo]

28 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

Question....is he still an RFA after the 4 year deal?

Yes, but he would be one year away from UFA and arbitration eligible. 
 

He would have completed six seasons at that point 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

 

I think it will cost about this too, and I agree that they should do it.

However, I think we all need to remember there is a real risk in giving him this type of contract.

 

I think the worst outcome is giving him $8.5MM x 8 years and, like Tyler Myers, he never improves and in fact gets a bit worse each year as the league figures him out and he doesn't figure anything out.

But I agree with taking the risk and giving him 6-8 years. 

 

 

 

Brawndo is right -- it's not optimal to get zero of his UFA years, but you would still be locking up, for six freaking seasons in which you think you have a team on the rise, a guy you think is a great young player at a contract you can live with.

A six-year deal is a no-brainer IMHO if he won't go any longer.

More good stuff in here, Brawndo.

Your "worst outcome" ISN'T happening.  This kid has gone from 3rd pairing to top pair within the 1st year (1st couple of games in tournaments) at EVERY level he's been at w/ the exception of the NHL and that's because he has a Norris candidate ahead of him and very little quality outside those 2 and the team had significantly worse outcomes when those 2 were played together rather than each playing on separatre pairings.

There is no ####ing way he has peaked.

Totally get wanting to stay cautious but waiting until he's played another season (or x seasons) will just make that next deal all that much more expensive.  Ideally get him for 7 or 8 years.  If that is a no go from Power's perspective, sign him to a 4 year deal.  It'll max out the time they have him on the "cheap" bridge deal without putting significant leverage into his agent's pocket.

[nfreeman]

10 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Your "worst outcome" ISN'T happening.  This kid has gone from 3rd pairing to top pair within the 1st year (1st couple of games in tournaments) at EVERY level he's been at w/ the exception of the NHL and that's because he has a Norris candidate ahead of him and very little quality outside those 2 and the team had significantly worse outcomes when those 2 were played together rather than each playing on separatre pairings.

There is no ####ing way he has peaked.

Totally get wanting to stay cautious but waiting until he's played another season (or x seasons) will just make that next deal all that much more expensive.  Ideally get him for 7 or 8 years.  If that is a no go from Power's perspective, sign him to a 4 year deal.  It'll max out the time they have him on the "cheap" bridge deal without putting significant leverage into his agent's pocket.

I love the confidence about Power, and I'm on board with an 8-year deal.

But a 4-year deal takes him, as stated upthread, to one year away from UFA and, critically, he'll have arbitration rights.  The Sabres would have very little leverage out of their RFA rights -- certainly not enough to coerce him into signing a long-term deal if he wants to test UFA at that point.

A 6-year deal, if he's the guy you think he is, gives the Sabres six freaking shots at a deep playoff run, and they have a long time to sell him on the organization and make him never want to leave.

I think reasonable minds can disagree on this one in any case.

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I love the confidence about Power, and I'm on board with an 8-year deal.

But a 4-year deal takes him, as stated upthread, to one year away from UFA and, critically, he'll have arbitration rights.  The Sabres would have very little leverage out of their RFA rights -- certainly not enough to coerce him into signing a long-term deal if he wants to test UFA at that point.

A 6-year deal, if he's the guy you think he is, gives the Sabres six freaking shots at a deep playoff run, and they have a long time to sell him on the organization and make him never want to leave.

I think reasonable minds can disagree on this one in any case.

A 6 year deal gives them 7 shots at it (he's under contract this coming year still).  But a 4 year deal or a 3 year deal still has him having arbitration rights.  Arbitration isn't as big of a concern (IMHO) as him being eligible to receive an offer sheet which happens anytime after a 1 year deal is signed.  And neither is really all that big of a threat if the team is doing right by the player.  They can negotiate a follow-up deal a year before any other team can talk to him and if he's being treated right (he will be) there's a really good chance that he'll sign that 3rd contract at the same point in his career as Dahlin is on the verge of doing (1 year before the end of his bridge deal).

Just IMHO, thought a 5 year deal is the worst outcome, a 6 year deal is the next worse.  And yes, we can agree to disagree.

[tom webster]

How many really good players have walked in free agency?

[LGR4GM]

Owen Power is from Mississauga, I'm not sure he'll be too interested in ufa. He basically got drafted by the 2nd closest team to his home. I think it means a lot that family can easily visit and watch games. 

Still, lots of time to work out a deal. I think he's going to get better too, which should be fun. 

 

[Cascade Youth]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

How many really good players have walked in free agency?

If you count the players who have made it clear in their walk year that they weren’t going to re-sign and were then traded at the deadline, I think lots.