Taro T Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 3 minutes ago, bg17 said: Alert the Wild and Michael McCarron. 6 years/3.3 aav. Pretty sure that factored heavily into how Kekalainen and Malenstyn's agent came up with this contract. Also, pretty sure that Carrick is going to enjoy the $4MM he'll get offered for his next deal. 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 (edited) On the surface I think this is way too long. But on the other hand, that is balanced with the fact that in the rising cap world, by the end of his deal, its really only going to be a blip on the cap at this low of a dollar amount. I'm good with it. Edited June 29 by mjd1001 1 Quote
French Collection Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 Term is a bit long but I am happy to have him back. I like his game for the 4th line. Speed, hits hard, blocks shots and scores a few goals. He will be a key PK guy for years. 1 Quote
triumph_communes Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 (edited) Good deal for a good teammate. By multiple accounts he is the reason in the locker room for the attitude turnaround. You keep that around at all costs until he is a liability, which he hasn’t been. some things go beyond stats Edited June 29 by triumph_communes 3 1 Quote
French Collection Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 2 minutes ago, triumph_communes said: Good deal for a good teammate. By multiple accounts he is the reason in the locker room for the attitude turnaround. You keep that around at all costs until he is a liability, which he hasn’t been. some things go beyond stats Would he get get Tuch’s A? Quote
Taro T Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 14 minutes ago, French Collection said: Would he get get Tuch’s A? Hopefully, noone gets it. You don't need a letter to be a leader and you only have 3 guys wearing one on any given night. But was also wondering if that would be the case. Rob Ray used to wear an A, at least for the games he dressed. 1 1 Quote
Taro T Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 4 minutes ago, Brawndo said: Sheesh, Friedman was WAAAAY off. That's a good nearly 3% savings over what was originally reported. 3 Quote
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 I guess Jarmo and Ruff really like Beck. 1 1 Quote
caseydean Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 6 hours ago, ... said: Assuming the term is correct, I agree it's a bit long for a fourth line guy. Malenstyn is a locker room guy, though. I was a bit surprised to recognize that during the, I think, post-season interview. But he is a machine in his role and perhaps the coaches think he has more to give. In the later years, the cap will make his contract look like peanuts. At 28, we get all his prime years as well. Great deal for both sides!! 1 Quote
That Aud Smell Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 4 hours ago, dudacek said: Love the player, hate the contract, even with the rising cap. i've seen this sentiment all over Sabres Twitter and now here. and i mean, the chorus is unanimous on Twitter that this contract is a hockey personnel infamia. i don't get it. odd. 1 hour ago, Taro T said: Not sure how much sense it makes to lock up 4th liners until they're 34. But, if they expect his play to not tail off too far when he's in his 30's, am ok with the price tag because of how long the deal is and how much the cap is going up. if the deal were to become a problem in its back half, wouldn't the increasingly meager amount of salary allow the team to waive the player without serious consequence? Quote
caseydean Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said: i've seen this sentiment all over Sabres Twitter and now here. and i mean, the chorus is unanimous on Twitter that this contract is a hockey personnel infamia. i don't get it. odd. if the deal were to become a problem in its back half, wouldn't the increasingly meager amount of salary allow the team to waive the player without serious consequence? People don't understand free markets very well. Look at the McCarron deal, it is what it is. Tuch's new contract seems ridiculous, but that's the market. People want a one-sided team friendly deal based on their view of the intrinsic value of the player. It don't work that way. 2 1 Quote
Pimlach Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 8 hours ago, PerreaultForever said: This one still screams Sabres having to overpay to retain players. I liked Beck's game last year but he's just a 4th line player and I think I would have tried to find a cheaper option with less term. They like what he brings. The cap is going up. Yada yada yada 1 1 Quote
Cascade Youth Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 Assuming they think his speed will remain elite through the term. He brings combination that is super rare - elite speed AND physical play. Usually it’s one or the other. Quote
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 So the length of the contract doesn’t matter with Tuch, but does matter with Beck? This contract is under 3% of the current cap. What % will it be 5 years from now? 2% ? The money, in hockey terms, is meaningless. However the length indicates his value to the Sabres and adds further stability to our roster. I have zero issue with the $ or term. Now Beck just needs to give us each season what he gave us last year. 2 Quote
triumph_communes Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: So the length of the contract doesn’t matter with Tuch, but does matter with Beck? This contract is under 3% of the current cap. What % will it be 5 years from now? 2% ? The money, in hockey terms, is meaningless. However the length indicates his value to the Sabres and adds further stability to our roster. I have zero issue with the $ or term. Now Beck just needs to give us each season what he gave us last year. He’s 34 when it ends. Yeah maybe a year too long but that’s why you get him under 4 Quote
That Aud Smell Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 15 minutes ago, caseydean said: People don't understand free markets very well. Look at the McCarron deal, it is what it is. Tuch's new contract seems ridiculous, but that's the market. People want a one-sided team friendly deal based on their view of the intrinsic value of the player. It don't work that way. I dunno. The people/accounts offering that opinion are plenty smart. It's the near unanimity that gets me. Anyway, I'm fine with the deal. Malenstyn is a limited player. But what he does, he does well and at full speed. There's also the presumed vacuum of veteran leadership created by Tuch's departure. I'd guess that Malenstyn will get/sometimes wear a letter. 1 Quote
PromoTheRobot Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 8 hours ago, RPop said: Sabres 4th line was outstanding and Beck was a big part of that. With a healthy Carrick this is great news 👍 Why do people undervalue pluggers? 2 Quote
Hoss Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 1 hour ago, French Collection said: Would he get get Tuch’s A? He was already splitting it with Tage. I imagine they just let Tage keep it full-time. 1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said: Why do people undervalue pluggers? Because the Stanley cup champion just did it with a fourth line earning pennies (and all three of them were Sabres castoffs). I don’t mind this deal, but I also could’ve lived without it. Quote
Taro T Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 24 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said: i've seen this sentiment all over Sabres Twitter and now here. and i mean, the chorus is unanimous on Twitter that this contract is a hockey personnel infamia. i don't get it. odd. if the deal were to become a problem in its back half, wouldn't the increasingly meager amount of salary allow the team to waive the player without serious consequence? If they do have to buy him out at the end because they couldn't find a team with excess cap room and a use for a 5th round pick, presuming there's no signing bonuses and the contract is the same each year (either of which may not be the case), each year bought out would result in just under $1MM in lost cap space for 2 years. So, it wouldn't even quite be a full league minimum contract added to the team salary each of those years. So, yes, it likely is without serious consequence if they have to buy him out. 1 Quote
caseydean Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 4 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said: I dunno. The people/accounts offering that opinion are plenty smart. It's the near unanimity that gets me. Anyway, I'm fine with the deal. Malenstyn is a limited player. But what he does, he does well and at full speed. There's also the presumed vacuum of veteran leadership created by Tuch's departure. I'd guess that Malenstyn will get/sometimes wear a letter. Curious, who are they and what exactly don't they like. Quote
Archie Lee Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 I wonder if Jarmo does this if he was able to extend Tuch and/or Byram? Obviously not the same level of players. This does seem though, like a bit of a “stop the bleeding” move. All indications are that Tuch, Byram, and Malenstyn were important locker room players. It might be a slight overpay for vibes. I maintain Malenstyn was getting a Barclay Goodrow-type deal if he hit UFA, and this isn’t too far off. I’m fine with this. Carrick, Malenstyn, Danforth, Kozak, maybe Dunne still, make for a solid 4th line, and Krebs may find himself there to start the year. 1 Quote
Apollo Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 40 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: I guess Jarmo and Ruff really like Beck. They each have a turntable and one microphone. That is where it's at. 1 2 1 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.