ponokasabre Posted 22 hours ago Report Posted 22 hours ago Mcdavid has just singed his extension, no word yet on AAV, years or total money Quote
mjd1001 Posted 22 hours ago Report Posted 22 hours ago 18 minutes ago, ponokasabre said: Mcdavid has just singed his extension, no word yet on AAV, years or total money 2 years at $12.5 m per year for McDavid is what is floating out there. Quote
ponokasabre Posted 21 hours ago Report Posted 21 hours ago 11 minutes ago, mjd1001 said: 2 years at $12.5 m per year for McDavid is what is floating out there. This helps us in the Tuch negotiations in my honest opionon Quote
DarthEbriate Posted 21 hours ago Report Posted 21 hours ago With McDavid and Kaprizov off the market, anyone who does want to wait until next summer as UFA will have that much more money available to them. Quote
JP51 Posted 20 hours ago Report Posted 20 hours ago 1 hour ago, ponokasabre said: This helps us in the Tuch negotiations in my honest opionon Does it help, maybe in setting a number range... but does it really with Kaprizov and McD off the market does this make him one of the if not the Premium FA out there in 2026.... I think he tests the market... just my guess... Quote
Thorny Posted 19 hours ago Report Posted 19 hours ago I can’t see the McDavid deal used in any way to artificially lower the value of every new deal now for the foreseeable future. I don’t think people will pretend it’s anything but an anomaly - otherwise he effed over the nhlpa lol 2 Quote
Jorcus Posted 1 hour ago Report Posted 1 hour ago On 9/30/2025 at 10:02 AM, Jorcus said: I know your looking at it from the Sabres point of view as to playing a wait and see how things go with Tuch before the contract extension or trade. If I were Tuch I would probably wait and see how things are going before being tied down to the Sabres. Thing thing about the Sabres you pretty much know what is going to happen by mid January if not sooner. If it's the same old wait till next year I think he would want out even if it ment less money overall. I think I am less concerned about Tuch's decline than you might be. He is a very dedicated player who plays all aspects of the game. Good to great players seem to last longer than the middle of the road types. Of players in his birth year class he has played fewer games than many of them at 536. Not sure if that matters but I think I would expect a player of his level to get 900 to 1000 games. That fact he can play any situation would seem to shelter issues as age catches up. Then there is Florida. Age seems to be of no concern to Bill Zito. I know different team in a different place but it's interesting to look. Player age years left AAV Barkove 30 5 10M Tkachuck 30 5 9.5M Reinhart 29 7 8.6M Bennet 29 8 8M Verhaeghe 30 8 7M Marchand 37 5 5.25M Jones 30 5 7M Ekblad 30 5 6.1 M Mikkola 29 8 5M Maybe the writings on the wall with this group, Barkove is out. Tkachuk is out out and to be honest it's pretty much his physical game that makes him a good player because he is not a fast skater. The Verhaghe and Marchand contracts don't look that great on paper. The point is that they have 7 aging contracts and we have none, well one if you count Skinner. An aging Tuch contract should not break us. I suspect it gets done in a bit less than the 9M dollar range. AFP has it at 7x8.5M. We will see. I just added Mikkola to Florida's list as he signed an 5x8 at 29 years old. They are up to 9 long term contracts for players well into the 30's. Time will tell if this does not blow up in Zito's face. Quote
nucci Posted 1 hour ago Report Posted 1 hour ago 5 minutes ago, Jorcus said: I just added Mikkola to Florida's list as he signed an 5x8 at 29 years old. They are up to 9 long term contracts for players well into the 30's. Time will tell if this does not blow up in Zito's face. They've won 2 Cups in a row. 1 Quote
LGR4GM Posted 1 hour ago Report Posted 1 hour ago 17 hours ago, Thorny said: I can’t see the McDavid deal used in any way to artificially lower the value of every new deal now for the foreseeable future. I don’t think people will pretend it’s anything but an anomaly - otherwise he effed over the nhlpa lol Teams will spend too the cap. McDavid deal doesn't change that. Quote
Jorcus Posted 1 hour ago Report Posted 1 hour ago 9 minutes ago, nucci said: They've won 2 Cups in a row. True but there is an discussion in this thread about extending players beyond their early thirties. Florida now has 9 contracts that go beyond that. He did not have to make that many of those deals. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Just pointing it out because we have zero contracts like that except the Skinner buyout. Quote
French Collection Posted 1 hour ago Report Posted 1 hour ago Just now, Jorcus said: I just added Mikkola to Florida's list as he signed an 5x8 at 29 years old. They are up to 9 long term contracts for players well into the 30's. Time will tell if this does not blow up in Zito's face. I think a lot of this is rewarding people who have been part of the Cup runs and an attempt to extend their window of opportunity by a few years. They could just gradually fade away like Pittsburgh. I prefer this more than the cutthroat approach Vegas took. Pittsburgh should have moved on from their old core before now though but I like that the “wiz” GM Kyle Dubas continues to flounder. I better watch what I say, TP could hire him down the road. 1 Quote
JohnC Posted 1 hour ago Report Posted 1 hour ago 18 hours ago, Thorny said: I can’t see the McDavid deal used in any way to artificially lower the value of every new deal now for the foreseeable future. I don’t think people will pretend it’s anything but an anomaly - otherwise he effed over the nhlpa lol As you point out, the McDavid deal is a contract that specifically deals to his situation. It made a lot of sense for him to get a bridge deal that will get him to the next NHL elevated financial agreement. The player and his representatives made a deal that they believed was in his best interest. How does this contract affect Tuch? I don't think it does. Tuch is in a much different situation. He's now in his prime and in a few years he will probably be on a downslide. So maybe he would rather lock in a longer-term deal now. What's also interesting is how does the Sabre organization view the Tuch contract scenario. Would they rather give him a bulked up short-term deal or give him a longer deal that will carry them over into the new NHL higher cost landscape? What makes the situation more complicated for all parties is that next year the financial landscape will change and everyone will have to adjust to that richer reality. The players who will be the most affected are players such as Dahlin and Tage who already have signed long-term contracts and will soon have undervalued contracts. Quote
Jorcus Posted 47 minutes ago Report Posted 47 minutes ago 14 minutes ago, JohnC said: As you point out, the McDavid deal is a contract that specifically deals to his situation. It made a lot of sense for him to get a bridge deal that will get him to the next NHL elevated financial agreement. The player and his representatives made a deal that they believed was in his best interest. How does this contract affect Tuch? I don't think it does. Tuch is in a much different situation. He's now in his prime and in a few years he will probably be on a downslide. So maybe he would rather lock in a longer-term deal now. What's also interesting is how does the Sabre organization view the Tuch contract scenario. Would they rather give him a bulked up short-term deal or give him a longer deal that will carry them over into the new NHL higher cost landscape? What makes the situation more complicated for all parties is that next year the financial landscape will change and everyone will have to adjust to that richer reality. The players who will be the most affected are players such as Dahlin and Tage who already have signed long-term contracts and will soon have undervalued contracts. I think the Sabres would like to go less for longer or have a back loaded deal. They have to get over the bad Skinner year, and if they sign Tuch to a shorter 10M plus deal it leaves little room for the RFA's. They would have to dump contracts if everything else stays equal. Still a lot of possibilities but longer for less is the easier path for the Sabres right now. Quote
nucci Posted 32 minutes ago Report Posted 32 minutes ago 58 minutes ago, Jorcus said: True but there is an discussion in this thread about extending players beyond their early thirties. Florida now has 9 contracts that go beyond that. He did not have to make that many of those deals. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Just pointing it out because we have zero contracts like that except the Skinner buyout. ok but maybe they are rewarding players for winning. I don't know but they win and we don't. Hard to compare them to us Quote
dudacek Posted 12 minutes ago Author Report Posted 12 minutes ago Wasn't going to spend any time worrying about a Tuch deal until the even of the regular season. (Checks calendar) Quote
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.