That Aud Smell Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 he's a nice player. i'm glad they'll have him around. 1 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 He's good for a spare part. I thought people overrated his play a little bit last year. But... He's still decent 2 3 Quote
shrader Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 (edited) That’s a strange contract. He still has one year left on his current deal and then would have been a UFA. So now he gets a $50k raise to buy extra year. edit: I assume it’s one way, which will be a first for him. Edited September 4 by shrader 1 Quote
Taro T Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 13 minutes ago, shrader said: That’s a strange contract. He still has one year left on his current deal and then would have been a UFA. So now he gets a $50k raise to buy extra year. edit: I assume it’s one way, which will be a first for him. He knows he's a tweener. He seems to fit in well with the team given the constraints of his role. Should he ply his wares elsewhere, there's no guarantee he'd be as good of a fit and if he did get that 1 way deal rather than hope for one elsewhere, there is a certain security and peace of mind that come with that. Good for him. If it's a 2 way deal, not fully sure what's the point. If it's a 1 way deal, it makes it less likely somebody puts a waiver claim in on him should he get sent down this year as they'd have to keep him up next year or overpay him in the AHL and not sure anybody else would want to get locked into a tweener for more than just this coming season. 1 Quote
msw2112 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 He's undersized, but played well every time he was called upon. He can play in the NHL. He has leadership qualities, evidenced to him being named captain of his college team (which won a national championship) and the Amerks. He's earned an extension, and based on what I see above, he's getting a $50K raise, which he's also earned, by professional sports standards. The impact on the salary cap will be miniscule. The Sabres have several big defensemen on the roster (Dahlin, Samuelsson, Power, Crevier, Timmins), and in the pipeline (Mrkta, Kleber, Rudolph, Strbak), so it's OK to have a couple of smaller guys in the mix (Metsa, Zellweger) if they can play. Metsa can. 2 Quote
Scottysabres Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 1 hour ago, mjd1001 said: He's good for a spare part. I thought people overrated his play a little bit last year. But... He's still decent His play? Maybe, but there is no denying the teams success in the 5/6 D pairing when he was in the line up on the ice. Those stats didn’t materialize out of thin air. He was a surprisingly solid piece to that D squad in the 2nd half of the season. We shall see if it was a product of cultural atmosphere or if it is him coming of age asserting himself as a more permanent fixture. Quote
Turbo44 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 1 hour ago, mjd1001 said: He's good for a spare part. I thought people overrated his play a little bit last year. But... He's still decent How is a Rochester call up making 750k, or whatever he made, possibly overrated? Sabres were 31-7-5 with him in the lineup and he was +16 in those 43 games. Nothing to overrate there. Solid player who makes the correct decisions 1 1 Quote
transient Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 Zach Metsa... the Matt Ellis of signing announcements. 1 3 Quote
Turbo44 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 Just now, Scottysabres said: His play? Maybe, but there is no denying the teams success in the 5/6 D pairing when he was in the line up on the ice. Those stats didn’t materialize out of thin air. He was a surprisingly solid piece to that D squad in the 2nd half of the season. We shall see if it was a product of cultural atmosphere or if it is him coming of age asserting himself as a more permanent fixture. Exactly and all he’s ever done is win. Funny thing is I met his neighbor from Minnesota who loves the kid and is a huge Sabre Dane now cuz of Zach. Met his neighbor in Bonita, Florida 1 Quote
TageMVP Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 This is the deal of the offseason right here THANKS JARMO Build the statue of Jarmo immediately. The good thing is they'll save money on it because it wont need hair Guy looks like he shaves his entire body like that Phelps swimmer guy Quote
dudacek Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 (edited) Not because of this contract, but it just occurred to me the Sabres have 9 defencemen on one-way contracts. Metsa, Gilbert and Johnson will be getting NHL salaries regardless of where (or if) they play. Same for Sheary, Danforth, Kozak up front and Ellis in goal, who are all also expected to be extras. Edited September 4 by dudacek Quote
Weave Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 1 hour ago, mjd1001 said: He's good for a spare part. I thought people overrated his play a little bit last year. But... He's still decent I’d substitute adequate for good. Otherwise agree. 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 11 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: How is a Rochester call up making 750k, or whatever he made, possibly overrated? Sabres were 31-7-5 with him in the lineup and he was +16 in those 43 games. Nothing to overrate there. Solid player who makes the correct decisions He is overrated because of what people were saying about him once he got here. Go back and read this forum, he was not 'rated' by this forum as a "Rochester callup" just filling in the lineup. People wanted him to play more games, more minutes per game. THAT is how he was overrated. 1 1 1 Quote
LGR4GM Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 2 minutes ago, mjd1001 said: He is overrated because of what people were saying about him once he got here. Go back and read this forum, he was not 'rated' by this forum as a "Rochester callup" just filling in the lineup. People wanted him to play more games, more minutes per game. THAT is how he was overrated. Dude was better than Kesselring. That's why. 2 Quote
mjd1001 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 14 minutes ago, Scottysabres said: His play? Maybe, but there is no denying the teams success in the 5/6 D pairing when he was in the line up on the ice. Those stats didn’t materialize out of thin air. He was a surprisingly solid piece to that D squad in the 2nd half of the season. We shall see if it was a product of cultural atmosphere or if it is him coming of age asserting himself as a more permanent fixture. When I watched him play he seemed like 'an extra'. Now, his plus-minus was really good, you can't ignore that. He was on the ice for many more goals for than allowed. He was 3rd among D-men in plus-minus. But dig into things a bit more and that looks like a mirage. Out of 9 D-men that played more than 200 minutes during the regular season: -He was 7th (3rd worst) in terms of being on the ice for high danger chances for vs against. -He was worst in terms of scoring chances for vs against ratio. -He was worst in terms of expected goals for vs against. So how was his plus-minus so good? The team had the BEST shooting percentage when he was on the ice of all the D-men. I don't think he was setting up guys with pinpoint passes (I KNOW he wasn't from watching the games), its just he was fortunate enough to have that happen to him. On the other side, the Goalies had the BEST save percentage of any D-man when he was on the ice. Again, the team was allowing just as many shots, from just as good of locations, as anyone else, just the goalies behind him made the saves more often. I'm not saying he is bad, but the only 'stats' that were really good for him were goal differential/plus minus (as a result of shooting percentage/save percentage, not his direct play). The rest were, honestly, pretty bad. Quote
Stads Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 How do we think Hellebuyck feels about this? 2 Quote
Scottysabres Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 18 minutes ago, Stads said: How do we think Hellebuyck feels about this? This is a Helle thread question. I think we can eke out an additional 15 pages on this, come on Stads, kick us off to 200 before training camp. I say we can do it. 2 Quote
TageMVP Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 47 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: Dude was better than Kesselring. That's why. Kesselring got dog-housed by Ruff too soon. Was Kesselring good in those games? Not really and he did take some stupid penalties, but he was coming back from multiple injuries and trying to adjust to a brand new team. He deserved more leniency. I think ultimately Ruff ruined his confidence hence the play not improving plus the above mentioned I still remember in that legendary Lightning game, he took on Cernak (Not a scrub fighter) and technically won with a beautiful takedown that forced that scum Cernak to the locker room. (I've watched highlights of that game a million times) Wouldn't be surprised if Kesselring gets his injuries under control and becomes a solid regular defenseman. He has all the tools Don't care about Metsa at all 1 Quote
CTJoe Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 1 hour ago, mjd1001 said: When I watched him play he seemed like 'an extra'. Now, his plus-minus was really good, you can't ignore that. He was on the ice for many more goals for than allowed. He was 3rd among D-men in plus-minus. But dig into things a bit more and that looks like a mirage. Out of 9 D-men that played more than 200 minutes during the regular season: -He was 7th (3rd worst) in terms of being on the ice for high danger chances for vs against. -He was worst in terms of scoring chances for vs against ratio. -He was worst in terms of expected goals for vs against. So how was his plus-minus so good? The team had the BEST shooting percentage when he was on the ice of all the D-men. I don't think he was setting up guys with pinpoint passes (I KNOW he wasn't from watching the games), its just he was fortunate enough to have that happen to him. On the other side, the Goalies had the BEST save percentage of any D-man when he was on the ice. Again, the team was allowing just as many shots, from just as good of locations, as anyone else, just the goalies behind him made the saves more often. I'm not saying he is bad, but the only 'stats' that were really good for him were goal differential/plus minus (as a result of shooting percentage/save percentage, not his direct play). The rest were, honestly, pretty bad. so obviously he breeds confidence in teammates when's he's on the ice so that they outperform. A great player makes players around him better. They shoot better, they make better saves....you're "digging" is very telling 55 minutes ago, Stads said: How do we think Hellebuyck feels about this? a sign that a helly trade is about to happen? The extensions of metsa was requested by Helly? Quote
Night Train Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 3 hours ago, That Aud Smell said: he's a nice player. i'm glad they'll have him around. Precisely. Making just above the min. #6 or 7 on D. Yes, yes...we know that. I thought he played better than Kesselring, Timmins, Schenn, Stanley.. Made some great passes on offense. I get the size thing. 1 Quote
mjd1001 Posted September 4 Report Posted September 4 49 minutes ago, CTJoe said: so obviously he breeds confidence in teammates when's he's on the ice so that they outperform. A great player makes players around him better. They shoot better, they make better saves....you're "digging" is very telling a sign that a helly trade is about to happen? The extensions of metsa was requested by Helly? Not at all. Whenever I have an idea or thought or opinion on a player that is brought up, I do pretty much the same amount of 'digging'. Nothing telling about it at all. Quote
Stads Posted September 5 Report Posted September 5 2 hours ago, Scottysabres said: This is a Helle thread question. I think we can eke out an additional 15 pages on this, come on Stads, kick us off to 200 before training camp. I say we can do it. 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.