GoPuckYourself Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 We unloaded a terrible Greenway contract only to get an even worse Krebs deal. WTF are we doing here? 1 5 1 Quote
Flashsabre Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Krebs does a lot for this team. Can play anywhere in the lineup, brings the energy every night. He is a glue guy. With the cap rising the deal is fine. Wonder if this triggers anything now as they have too many forwards. 6 Quote
#freejame Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 3 minutes ago, Hoss said: I called this a gross overpay initially and then deleted to collect my thoughts more. Still don't like it. Like any contract, I would prefer it to be lower. With that said, we have a ton of under market contracts which make this contract at essentially market value look bad. Just now, GoPuckYourself said: We unloaded a terrible Greenway contract only to get an even worse Krebs deal. WTF are we doing here? There’s no world where Greenway is a better hockey player than Krebs. 2 Quote
GoPuckYourself Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Just now, #freejame said: Like any contract, I would prefer it to be lower. With that said, we have a ton of under market contracts which make this contract at essentially market value look bad. There’s no world where Greenway is a better hockey player than Krebs. Where did I say anywhere that Greenway is a better hockey player? Quote
thewookie1 Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 10 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said: damn, i knew krebs' game was limited but i had no idea things were this far gone. The contract is bad not his play Quote
#freejame Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Just now, GoPuckYourself said: Where did I say anywhere that Greenway is a better hockey player? It’s implied in what you wrote. You’re calling Greenways contract TERRIBLE at $4M and Krebs contact EVEN WORSE at $4.5M. What makes it even worse if not the caliber of player? Unless you think half a million dollars is that egregious. Quote
inkman Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 45 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: 4 x 3.5 according to Friedman. Great deal for the Sabres. 7 1 Quote
BullBuchanan Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 6 minutes ago, #freejame said: Players with fewer pts per 60 than Krebs: Kadri, Neighbors, Pinto, Boeser, Buchnevich, Greer, Copp, Lee, Crouse, Beniers, Byfield Forget what you think you knew about player value when the cap didn’t change for half a decade. Krebs brings plenty to the table and his deal is in line with where it should be. Maybe in line for where it should be, but not who it should be. This should be a contract the Jets, Flames, or 2015 Sabres deal out. This isn't the type of deal you want an ascending team tight against the cap to use. We should have been using this money, in concert with dumping contracts like Zucker & McLeod to land a premium asset, not add more medicore players. Reminds me of when the Bills bumped Tyler Matakevich from $2.5M to $3.5M for no reason, and then his next deal with the Steelers he was down to $600k. Same player the whole time, but smart franchises don't overvalue guys like that. I'm happy Krebs got paid, I just hate it's with us. 1 1 1 Quote
GoPuckYourself Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 (edited) 4 minutes ago, #freejame said: It’s implied in what you wrote. You’re calling Greenways contract TERRIBLE at $4M and Krebs contact EVEN WORSE at $4.5M. What makes it even worse if not the caliber of player? Unless you think half a million dollars is that egregious. Why is it implied? I thought 4M for Greenway was terrible so paying even more for Krebs who's stats were clearly inflated because he was playing on the top line for some weird reason is awful. If you are thinking that's a bargain, that's your opinion, I just think 3.5M max and I still would of hated that. He should have been upgraded for some time now but again that's just my opinion. Edited July 13 by GoPuckYourself Quote
#freejame Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Just now, GoPuckYourself said: Why is it implied? I thought 4M for Greenway was terrible so paying even more for Krebs who's stats were clearly inflated because he was playing on the top line for some weird reason is awful. If you are thinking that's a bargain, that's your opinion, I just think 3.5M max and I still would have hated that. He should have been upgraded for some time now but again that's just my opinion. In the very post you quoted I said it wasn’t a bargain and that it’s market value. Let me ask you this, if Krebs signed for the $4m that Greenway makes would it be an even worse contract than Greenways? 1 Quote
LGR4GM Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 3 minutes ago, GoPuckYourself said: Why is it implied? I thought 4M for Greenway was terrible so paying even more for Krebs who's stats were clearly inflated because he was playing on the top line for some weird reason is awful. If you are thinking that's a bargain, that's your opinion, I just think 3.5M max and I still would of hated that. He should have been upgraded for some time now but again that's just my opinion. 4yrs of Krebs bridges you safely to Helenius, Morozov. I am less worried with the 4.5 and more worried about that 4th year. 1 Quote
Doohickie Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 46 minutes ago, Doohickie said: 55 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: 4 x 3.5 according to Friedman. Great deal for the Sabres. Perfect. Oh... it's really 4 x 4.5? Too high. Bleh. Quote
GoPuckYourself Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Just now, #freejame said: In the very post you quoted I said it wasn’t a bargain and that it’s market value. Let me ask you this, if Krebs signed for the $4m that Greenway makes would it be an even worse contract than Greenways? My bad I didn't see that you said that in your post about not being a bargain. I would say it was be as equally bad imo, I'm just not a fan of Krebs as i stated I think his stats are inflated and he's a good player who tries hard but he's not great at anything imo. Quote
That Aud Smell Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 37 minutes ago, thewookie1 said: 4x3.5mil was an awesome contract 4x4.5mil is nowhere near as good and arguably bad for his role as a bot 6 utility guy 26 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said: damn, i knew krebs' game was limited but i had no idea things were this far gone. 13 minutes ago, thewookie1 said: The contract is bad not his play sorry - i was just making a dumb joke about Krebs actually being a bot. Quote
Taro T Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 1 hour ago, Brawndo said: https://x.com/friedgehnic/status/2076680086795776146?s=46&t=h0yvSDHtOEJBIIBDkE7IaQ Guess he wants to stay a Sabre long term. 1 Quote
GoPuckYourself Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 1 minute ago, LGR4GM said: 4yrs of Krebs bridges you safely to Helenius, Morozov. I am less worried with the 4.5 and more worried about that 4th year. I don't see how Krebs has any sort of trajectory on Helenius maybe you could eleborate oon that some more? Morozov I can see but Helenius is going to be somewhere in lineup as early as this season or next so how is that the bridge? Quote
#freejame Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Peyton Krebs is a versatile forward who can play up and down the lineup who has improved on his point total and goal scoring every year the last three season while playing less than 14 minutes per night. He finished second on the Sabres in hits with 201 and fourth among forwards in blocked shots. His 12 ESG puts him at 6th for forwards. 4 2 1 4 Quote
Trettioåtta Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Krebs ability to play up the line up is ironically why people don't value him. They either call him a fourth line player, despite scoring as a second line player. Pr they say anyone could have got those points with Tuch and Thompson, despite the stats showing Tuch and Thompson played better when paired with Krebs. The cap is rising, a year or two ago this is a $3M contract. 1 3 Quote
Popular Post #freejame Posted July 13 Popular Post Report Posted July 13 Just now, Taro T said: Guess he wants to stay a Sabre long term. His kids and Beck’s kids go to my son’s swim school. The owner speaks very highly of both families and their appreciation for what they have here. 3 2 5 Quote
Taro T Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 30 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said: Can Krebs still be traded? Haven't seen the details of the contract, but for at least the next 2 years he won't have trade protection. Quote
That Aud Smell Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 1 minute ago, #freejame said: Peyton Krebs is a versatile forward who can play up and down the lineup who has improved on his point total and goal scoring every year the last three season while playing less than 14 minutes per night. He finished second on the Sabres in hits with 201 and fourth among forwards in blocked shots. His 12 ESG puts him at 6th for forwards. i'm gonna ask it again: has krebs ever killed penalties? any reason to think he'd be good at it, if not? Quote
GASabresIUFAN Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 (edited) This contract $ wise is exactly as predicted and only one year longer. I’m not sure what people expected? There is a chance he plays in our top 9 this year and almost certainly the year after. If they didn’t value his versatility and think he could be more than a 4th line player they wouldn’t have made the deal. Edited July 13 by GASabresIUFAN 4 Quote
LGR4GM Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 8 minutes ago, Doohickie said: Oh... it's really 4 x 4.5? Too high. Bleh. its almost exactly the same amount he was getting adjusted for the 2026 salary cap Quote
Taro T Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 20 minutes ago, thewookie1 said: The contract is bad not his play Depends on perspective. It's a smidge below league average salary with a 23 man roster and a $104MM cap. In the 4th year, it will be well below league average. It's that 4th year that got the AAV up to what it is (regardless of when the $'s actually go out the door). Will be interesting to see what kind of trade protection the deal comes with for the end of the deal. (None 1st 2 years at minimum) 1 Quote
LTS Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 Just now, LGR4GM said: its almost exactly the same amount he was getting adjusted for the 2026 salary cap Thanks for this. I was wondering. The cap is going up and what people think of lower end salaries are going to go up as well, not just the top end. I've not derived an opinion on this signing yet however. 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.