Rabbit151 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Some moron like Clarke will go after McKee (actually, I heard the Pens want him badly) at 4 mil a year. Forsberg at 7 mil, what's Hatcher at? 3, 4 mil. That's close to one-third of the pay-roll on 3 guys. You think he's ever gonna get balanced lines like the Sabres with that kind of financing? What did the moron Leafs sign McCabe for? 5 million a year? Okay, so Sundin and McCabe eat up, what 11 million a year out of a 44 million cap. One-quarter of the salary cap gone on two guys. See you on the greens in April, Toronto!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Some moron like Clarke will go after McKee (actually, I heard the Pens want him badly) at 4 mil a year. Forsberg at 7 mil, what's Hatcher at? 3, 4 mil. That's close to one-third of the pay-roll on 3 guys. You think he's ever gonna get balanced lines like the Sabres with that kind of financing? What did the moron Leafs sign McCabe for? 5 million a year? Okay, so Sundin and McCabe eat up, what 11 million a year out of a 44 million cap. One-quarter of the salary cap gone on two guys. See you on the greens in April, Toronto!! Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Some moron like Clarke will go after McKee (actually, I heard the Pens want him badly) at 4 mil a year. Forsberg at 7 mil, what's Hatcher at? 3, 4 mil. That's close to one-third of the pay-roll on 3 guys. You think he's ever gonna get balanced lines like the Sabres with that kind of financing? What did the moron Leafs sign McCabe for? 5 million a year? Okay, so Sundin and McCabe eat up, what 11 million a year out of a 44 million cap. One-quarter of the salary cap gone on two guys. See you on the greens in April, Toronto!! I agree, but if they up the cap by 10% every year, we'll be in trouble come 2008! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 I agree, but if they up the cap by 10% every year, we'll be in trouble come 2008! I don't think the cap will go up that much every year. I think they just underestimated how strong the league would come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 This post is kind of a joke. We won't even come within 5 million of the salary cap limit, because we can't afford to. I'm not upset with Reigers frugalness, but in a salary cap league you should be at least be capable of affording the salary cap limit. Which ultimately gives you the capabilities of signing most of your FA's and a UFA or 3 to improve a team. The problem here is McKee is worth every penny. He plays with a major heart, and he bleeds Buffalo Blue and Gold. His winning, shot blocking attitude was very infectious and it spread throughout the team. Letting McKee walk for a lousy 4 million will only take the Sabres back a step, not improve them in 2006-2007. McKee has earned his payday, and the Sabres should be willing to step up some here IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit151 Posted June 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Did you check out McKee's comments in the Toronto Sun? He knew the Sabres philosophy, and that they wouldn't pay him as much as some other teams. He indicated the Leafs were his inspiration for becoming a hockey player. (How a team as lousy as the Leafs were when Jay was young could inspire anyone is beyond me...but OK). So, he'll leave and try to make it look like the Sabres are the bad guys so none of you will boo him next year. HE IS REPLACEABLE. As I said in another post, Regier's challenge is not in figuring out how to give everyone a huge raise, but how to find players who can seamlessly fit into the Sabres team. I'm a big fan of McKee, but he is replaceable. I can't blame Jay for getting the most cash he can, and I certainly can't blame Darcy for trying to keep a balanced team, monetarily and emotionally. I really think it would be bad for the rest of the team if one of the guys got a huge raise and most of the others got a marginal one. Paying McKee in the neighborhood of 4 mil a year would be a huge mistake. He's simply not worth that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerryg Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Yes, that's the model. To find players you can plug into the system. Guys get hurt, you bring up someone from Roch to fill in seamlessly. That's what the Devils have been doing for years. They have an enless supply of no-name guys they plug in to their system who can fit right in. When one gets too expensive and leaves they just bring up another from Albany. THey devils rarely overpay players. The sabres need superior scouting and development to keep a fresh supply of players in the pipeline. Also, with the up tempo style they play they'll always need young legs. Not too many guys over 30 have the wheels to skate like this team does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Letting McKee walk for a lousy 4 million will only take the Sabres back a step, not improve them in 2006-2007. McKee has earned his payday, and the Sabres should be willing to step up some here IMO. How do you know he's only going to go for $4 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Here's another crazy new deal: Wade Redden: 2 years, $13 million. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=170030&hubname=nhl Redden is a really good player, but I seem to remember him pulling up a chair, breaking out the popcorn and languidly watching Pominville take it to the rack in OT to eliminate the Sens. I have to believe someone is going to give McKee $3 million - $3.5 million per year. Oh well. I also think the Sens are entering a period of decline, while we are going to stay at or near the top of the conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 How do you know he's only going to go for $4 million? I don't, but the Sabres only offered him 2 million, and that's a __cking insult. He may get more, but in a salary cap league I think 3-5 mil is what he'll command. Why even bother having a pro franchise that can not even afford the salary cap. The salary cap will raise every single season, and the Sabres will fall further and further behind. Nothing has changed. We're still the poor small market team unable to build and maintain a consistent winner. Unable to sign true blue veterans to deserving contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 I don't, but the Sabres only offered him 2 million, and that's a __cking insult. He may get more, but in a salary cap league I think 3-5 mil is what he'll command. Why even bother having a pro franchise that can not even afford the salary cap. The salary cap will raise every single season, and the Sabres will fall further and further behind. Nothing has changed. We're still the poor small market team unable to build and maintain a consistent winner. Unable to sign true blue veterans to deserving contracts. There isn't much use arguing with them, Pa and I have been saying the same things and all we ever hear is that he should walk cause he can be replaced with a cheaper alternative or he is not worth more then the offer Buffalo gave him already I think most people here have just been trying hard to convince themselves that Jay sucks and that there are plaenty of good cheap defencemen out there to replace him. And that Darcy Regier is a hockey genius and will magically pull a kid up from Rochester, or steal someone away from another team to replace him. Losing a guy who is a team leader just because they don't want to spend some money to pay him isn't going to hurt this team and giving him a low ball offer isn't going to have an adverse effect on how other players view this team. Remember, only teams that don't spend money will win Cups, cause paying to the limit makes you a yearly loser. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 There isn't much use arguing with them, Pa and I have been saying the same things and all we ever hear is that he should walk cause he can be replaced with a cheaper alternative or he is not worth more then the offer Buffalo gave him already I think most people here have just been trying hard to convince themselves that Jay sucks and that there are plaenty of good cheap defencemen out there to replace him. And that Darcy Regier is a hockey genius and will magically pull a kid up from Rochester, or steal someone away from another team to replace him. Losing a guy who is a team leader just because they don't want to spend some money to pay him isn't going to hurt this team and giving him a low ball offer isn't going to have an adverse effect on how other players view this team. Remember, only teams that don't spend money will win Cups, cause paying to the limit makes you a yearly loser. :rolleyes: This is a rather exaggerated version of the "don't blow the budget" perspective. No one has been saying that Jay sucks. No one has said that he isn't a leader or that we shouldn't try to keep him, or that losing him wouldn't hurt. No one has said we should lowball him. All anyone has said is that (i) there is a limit to what we can pay for him, (ii) that limit is likely lower than what he's going to get in free agency, (iii) it would be a bad move for the team to go over its limit and (iv) if we lose him we will still be OK b/c of the overall strength of the organization. So, APus, I'm calling you out: instead of relying on vague generalities like "spend a few bucks more" or "don't be cheap about it" or "care about the budget more than winning", or salary ranges that are so broad as to be meaningless like "$3 million to $5 million" -- I'd like you to state for the record EXACTLY how much you'd be willing to pay to keep McKee, and for how many years. $3 million per year for 4 years? $3.5 million for 5 years? $4 million for 4 years? $5 million for 5 years? At what point exactly does he get too rich for your blood? For that matter, I'd also like you (and PAFan, too -- I know you're listening) to tell us EXACTLY how much you think the Sabres' payroll should be this year. Last year it was about $30 million, and the team made about $4 million after having gotten to game 7 of the ECF. Should we go up to $33 million? $35 million? $38 million? $42 million? How much of TG's money do you think it's fair for us to expect him to spend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 I don't, but the Sabres only offered him 2 million, and that's a __cking insult. He may get more, but in a salary cap league I think 3-5 mil is what he'll command. Why even bother having a pro franchise that can not even afford the salary cap. The salary cap will raise every single season, and the Sabres will fall further and further behind. Nothing has changed. We're still the poor small market team unable to build and maintain a consistent winner. Unable to sign true blue veterans to deserving contracts. Why will the salary cap automatically rise every season? What revenue stream(s) will increase for the league every season? I agree that in most seasons the salary cap will rise marginally, but except in a year when the total league revenue hits a threshold (going over $2.2B, $2.4B, or $2.7B) the salary cap bump will not be anywhere nearly as spectacular as it was this season. Next season's cap is based on projections of next season's revenues. The league appears to be projecting total revenues of about $2B for next season, which is where the $44MM cap is derived from. (($44MM-$8MM(approximate range around 54% of the average team's revenue)*30 teams/0.54 (players' share of total revenues)). I would exect actual revenues to come in slightly higher than that as the NHLPA tends to want revenue estimates slightly on the low side so that the players don't owe any of their escrowed salaries back to management (and actually would be due a "bonus payment" if revenues and salaries are such that the players don't get 54% of actual revenues). I don't expect revenues to be $200-300MM above projections, like they were this season. If revenues end up projected to be $2.1B for '07-'08, the salary cap will go up by $1.8MM per team, not the $5MM it went up this year. If projections remain at $2B, the salary cap will remain at $44MM. We don't see another huge bump in the salary cap unless revenues are projected to be above $2.2B, at which point the salary cap would be $48.33MM. I don't see where league revenues hit $2.2B next year. Heck, it may be tough for them to reach a full $2.1B next year. Leaguewide attendance is at ~92%. I don't see attendance exceeding 95% in any circumstance. My guess is that attendance will still be at ~92% next season. I'd expect overall ticket prices to be up slightly, raising gate receipts slightly, but not enough to provide the league a 10% increase in revenue. I also don't expect TV revenues to increase substantially through the NBC / OLN contracts although I do expect NBC revenues to be up very slightly next year as advertisers will know more accurately what they will get for their $'s. I don't see merchandising $'s up substantially next season as AFAIK Buffalo and Anaheim are the only 2 teams changing primary unis / logos (IIRC Dallas is changing their 3rds). Maybe player likeness licensing will be up a bit next year as I had a heck of a time finding any stores carrying hockey cards this past season and I'd expect the "demand" for stuff like that to get back in line with where it was prior to the lockout. As for the Sabres falling further behind, I actually expect them to catch up some (perhaps not all the way, but some). They will have more fannies in the seats this season as their STH base is up significantly. Ticket prices will probably go up slightly in '07-'08 and as long as the team is competitive this season, ticket sales will be level or up that season. When the contract with MSG expires, they will likely get higher fees from someone as the MSG contract is the old Adelphia contract which appeared to be skewed towards making Adelphia's #'s look good, not the Sabres #'s. Also, the league will probably get more $'s when the NBC contract expires after this season as HDTV will make the sport more attractive. The best thing that could happen to the Sabres is the national TV contract becoming an actual source of income. I doubt it will be a huge bump in this next one, but the following one could actually help level the playing field between the teams. If that ever happens (not saying it will, but if it does) then the Sabres will be on even footing with the rest of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 So, APus, I'm calling you out: instead of relying on vague generalities like "spend a few bucks more" or "don't be cheap about it" or "care about the budget more than winning", or salary ranges that are so broad as to be meaningless like "$3 million to $5 million" -- I'd like you to state for the record EXACTLY how much you'd be willing to pay to keep McKee, and for how many years. $3 million per year for 4 years? $3.5 million for 5 years? $4 million for 4 years? $5 million for 5 years? At what point exactly does he get too rich for your blood? A reasonable amount for Mckee that the Sbares should offer would be anywhere between 2.5-3 million for 3-4 years. anymore then that and I can understand him leaving and Buffalo not being able to match it. For that matter, I'd also like you (and PAFan, too -- I know you're listening) to tell us EXACTLY how much you think the Sabres' payroll should be this year. Last year it was about $30 million, and the team made about $4 million after having gotten to game 7 of the ECF. Should we go up to $33 million? $35 million? $38 million? $42 million? How much of TG's money do you think it's fair for us to expect him to spend? Well, the league salary cap went up 4 million and the Sabres claimed they made only 4 million in Profits last year plus the fact that they are only a few players away from a Cup so they should be willing to put a couple extra bucks into the team to make sure they get everyone back and add that one or 2 players to put them over the top. They also have to factor in that since they decided to play the waiting game on long term contracts with almost every player last season to see how well they would adjust to the new game, they will now have to pay up to stay competitive. So if they had a budget last year of 30 million and adding in the factors I stated above, to put a competitive team on the ice next year, I would expect the budget to be set at a minimum of 36 million for next year. Just because we had a team last year in the ECF on a showstring budget, doesn't mean it is going to be possible ever again because now that the rest of the league has seen what it takes to win, those players we signed so cheaply last year are going to be going for alot more on the market from now on and will not come cheap anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerryg Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Here's a simple solution to everyone wanting the Sabres to raise payroll and start throwing $ around. Raise ticket prices....how about that one? All the folks who think we need to sign some high prifced talent or destroy the teams salary structure by signing McKee to a $3M or so deal can ante up at the box office when the taam can no longer hold the line on ticket prices to cover more spending. And BTW signing McKee for $3M a year will destroy this team. If he's worth $3M what does Drury get? What does Briere get? What does Miller get? All of a suden you've got 1/3 of your payroll tied up in 4 players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Jerry, I agree. Ticket prices should go up. Build it and they will come. If they don't, move the team. Two things have to happen for the Sabres to flourish in Buffalo: 1. The Sabres have to become an elite team that is a perennial contender and 2. Support for the team has to increase dramatically (much higher ticket prices, much stronger corporate support etc.). 1. has to start to happen before 2. does. I think we're just about there. The chances of both happening? Not good. But if the Sabres take a step back now after making so much progress, there's no chance. Shy of it happening, though, I'd just as soon see the end of something I have loved more than almost anything else in my whole life. And here's a news flash, Jerry. Not everyone on the team can make the same amount of money! Eventually you have to pay your best players best player money. There has to be a pecking order. Chris Pronger did not destroy the Oilers salary structure -- nor were the Oilers "destroyed" because of his presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Here's a simple solution to everyone wanting the Sabres to raise payroll and start throwing $ around. Raise ticket prices....how about that one? All the folks who think we need to sign some high prifced talent or destroy the teams salary structure by signing McKee to a $3M or so deal can ante up at the box office when the taam can no longer hold the line on ticket prices to cover more spending. And BTW signing McKee for $3M a year will destroy this team. If he's worth $3M what does Drury get? What does Briere get? What does Miller get? All of a suden you've got 1/3 of your payroll tied up in 4 players. I'm sure they're planning on raising ticket prices (hopefully modestly) next season. They may also raise window prices this year (I haven't seen what window price will be this year, so they may be the same price as last year or not). The decision to not raise ST prices was made back during the 1st round before the full Sabres fever took hold. I'm certain they decided in part to keep ST prices the same as last year to try to boost ST sales. They've increased ST sales by about 30% with 3 more months to go before the season starts. That's pretty darn good. They used this season's playoff run to increase the ST base for next year. Had they announced the ticket prices were going up, they would not have gotten as many STH's. With fewer STH's there will be 60% full buildings in October, just like every single other season in the R&B era. Now they are looking at 75-80% filled buildings in October, with potentially even better attendance being possible by having more value games in October and especially if the Sabres come out of the gate well and the Bills do poorly. You don't raise prices when you are trying to build your customer base. That is where the Sabres are now. They need to increase the # of paying customers before they start increasing the prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 You don't raise prices when you are trying to build your customer base. That is where the Sabres are now. They need to increase the # of paying customers before they start increasing the prices. You also can't raise ticket prices when the customers don't like the product on the ice. If the sabres don't make the playoffs next year, how many ST holders are going to renew their tickets? How many people only bought the tickets because they could get playoff tickets cheap and before anyone else? As for McKee, Paying him 3 million is going to ruin the salary structure and doom the team????????? Briere deserves atleas what Drury is getting, McKee, a locker room leader with the 'A' on his jersey, would then be making slightly less. Miller deserves a raise from 500,000, but no where near the 3 million mark. If he signs a long term deal it should start low and then go up as the years go on, he only played one full season, you don't give tons of money to a guy with one one full season under his belt. Thats how you get in trouble financially. When Miller is a proven NHL starter, thats when he brings in the big bucks. Same with everybody else on the team. They are all RFA's and alot only have one or 2 years experience, they will get a raise due to their play last season, but they won't get anything huge until they are proven NHL vets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 You also can't raise ticket prices when the customers don't like the product on the ice. If the sabres don't make the playoffs next year, how many ST holders are going to renew their tickets? How many people only bought the tickets because they could get playoff tickets cheap and before anyone else? As for McKee, Paying him 3 million is going to ruin the salary structure and doom the team????????? Briere deserves atleas what Drury is getting, McKee, a locker room leader with the 'A' on his jersey, would then be making slightly less. Miller deserves a raise from 500,000, but no where near the 3 million mark. If he signs a long term deal it should start low and then go up as the years go on, he only played one full season, you don't give tons of money to a guy with one one full season under his belt. Thats how you get in trouble financially. When Miller is a proven NHL starter, thats when he brings in the big bucks. Same with everybody else on the team. They are all RFA's and alot only have one or 2 years experience, they will get a raise due to their play last season, but they won't get anything huge until they are proven NHL vets. I think you're off here. Briere's numbers are far supieror to McKee's, as are Drury's, and they're Co-captains. Both Drury and McKee are at least $1 million/year better than McKee . Their agents will make that case. The Sabres offer to McKee was $1 million less than what Drury currently makes, which is probably not a coincidence. Tallinder has better numbers than McKee over the last three seasons, and is an RFA. If McKee gets $3 million a year, why wouldn't his agent start negotiations at $3.8 to $4 million a year? So signing McKee to $3 million a year would make negotiations with other, better players much more difficult. Huet is even more inexperienced than Miller, and Miller performed better in the playoffs, so no doubt Miller's agent will use Huet's new contract as the jumping-off point for negotiations, which is a bit below $3 milllion. That's roughly half of what Luongo signed for, and Luongo has never won a playoff game, so the neighborhood of $3 million seems right for Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 You also can't raise ticket prices when the customers don't like the product on the ice. If the sabres don't make the playoffs next year, how many ST holders are going to renew their tickets? How many people only bought the tickets because they could get playoff tickets cheap and before anyone else? As for McKee, Paying him 3 million is going to ruin the salary structure and doom the team????????? Briere deserves atleas what Drury is getting, McKee, a locker room leader with the 'A' on his jersey, would then be making slightly less. Miller deserves a raise from 500,000, but no where near the 3 million mark. If he signs a long term deal it should start low and then go up as the years go on, he only played one full season, you don't give tons of money to a guy with one one full season under his belt. Thats how you get in trouble financially. When Miller is a proven NHL starter, thats when he brings in the big bucks. Same with everybody else on the team. They are all RFA's and alot only have one or 2 years experience, they will get a raise due to their play last season, but they won't get anything huge until they are proven NHL vets. Are you honestly trying to convince me that the Sabres won't make the playoffs next season? With or without McKee in the lineup, they will make the playoffs. Yes, long term paying McKee $3MM "is going to ruin the salary structure" of the team and it will probably "doom the team" long term although that is not a given. You can't honestly believe that every guy that wears an "A" deserves $3MM. If longevity and wearing an "A" were the only criteria, then Rob Ray would have made a heck of a lot more than he did. Jay McKee should command a salary similar to that of Frankie Kaberle. Kaberle got $8.8MM over 4 years and has much better stats than Jay has. Jay brings a lot of intangibles to the table, so I think he is worth something similar. Will someone else go crazy and open up the vaults for him? Perhaps, but if they do, good for Jay. The Sabres will have to move on. If someone gives Jay a reasonable offer and he doesn't allow the Sabres to match, then he was full of bunk in his comments that he wanted to remain a Sabre. Where he ends up, is totally up to him. The Sabres made him an offer of a 25%+ raise for next season. To me, that implies they are serious about keeping him. I truly doubt that that will be the Sabres final offer. If he signs elsewhere for $6.75MM over 3 years, then shame on Darcy and I will agree with you that the Sabres should have gotten something done. That hasn't happened yet, so I for one am willing to wait before claiming all is doom and gloom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 You can't honestly believe that every guy that wears an "A" deserves $3MM. If longevity and wearing an "A" were the only criteria, then Rob Ray would have made a heck of a lot more than he did. Jay McKee should command a salary similar to that of Frankie Kaberle. Kaberle got $8.8MM over 4 years and has much better stats than Jay has. Jay brings a lot of intangibles to the table, so I think he is worth something similar. Will someone else go crazy and open up the vaults for him? Perhaps, but if they do, good for Jay. The Sabres will have to move on. Maybe the problem is that most of you are going off of McKees stats to see what he's worth to the team while I am including the veteran leadership he provides to them. Yes statistically he does not deserve 3 mil, but if you add in the fact he is also a leader off the ice and is part of the core of the team, I think it ups his value. Players look up to him, they aren't going to look up to a rookie or some kid whos played a couple years in the league. Was Rob Ray worth alot, yes he was a leader in the locker room for some of the younger guys, but his purpose was an enforcer (like Peters) so his value is low to start and he probably made alot more then he would have if he was not a leader in the locker room I would say that what Kaberle received should atleast be the base for negotiations between Buffalo and McKee, the problem is that I believe that it is also the cap the sabres put on negotiations with him and I doubt they are willin to budge on it. I am not dooming hte team and saying there is no chance they will make the playoffs, but I don't see them contending for the division title next year or having a year comparable to last season. Heck, even keeping everybody the same on this team next year I still don't see them reaching 110 points again because I think the competition in the league is going to start leveling out as teams now have seen the new NHL and start building teams that will compete in it. I guess my problem lies with seeing management let players go who were a key part to this team just because their salary was going to increase. Especially after the season they had where they should only be making minor adjustments to improve on what they already had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Maybe the problem is that most of you are going off of McKees stats to see what he's worth to the team while I am including the veteran leadership he provides to them. Yes statistically he does not deserve 3 mil, but if you add in the fact he is also a leader off the ice and is part of the core of the team, I think it ups his value. Players look up to him, they aren't going to look up to a rookie or some kid whos played a couple years in the league. Was Rob Ray worth alot, yes he was a leader in the locker room for some of the younger guys, but his purpose was an enforcer (like Peters) so his value is low to start and he probably made alot more then he would have if he was not a leader in the locker room I would say that what Kaberle received should atleast be the base for negotiations between Buffalo and McKee, the problem is that I believe that it is also the cap the sabres put on negotiations with him and I doubt they are willin to budge on it. I am not dooming hte team and saying there is no chance they will make the playoffs, but I don't see them contending for the division title next year or having a year comparable to last season. Heck, even keeping everybody the same on this team next year I still don't see them reaching 110 points again because I think the competition in the league is going to start leveling out as teams now have seen the new NHL and start building teams that will compete in it. I guess my problem lies with seeing management let players go who were a key part to this team just because their salary was going to increase. Especially after the season they had where they should only be making minor adjustments to improve on what they already had. I have already stated that I think Jay is worth more than his stats imply. We differ though in how much those intangibles are worth. I think he is worth $2.25-$2.5MM/year and could see circumstances where I would be willing to go to $2.75MM. You seem to have his value closer to $3MM. We also seem to differ in our belief of how much value the Sabres place on Jay. You have stated that you believe it caps out at $2.2MM and I think they'd go up to $2.5MM for him. Time will likely show us who is correct. Also, I do believe that a 100pt+ season is a very real possibility next season. Ryan now has a year of NHL experience under his belt and that should make him a much stronger goalie. Most of the rest of the team are at ages where they are entering the prime of their careers. Players at that age become better players naturally with an additional year of maturity, training, and experience. Throw in the playoff experience they gained last year, and this team now knows what it takes to win hockey games. The team will necessarily have minor adjustments made to the roster; even the Habs, Isles, and Eulers glory teams didn't stand pat year to year. I am certain that I will not like all of the moves on paper, but after last season I am willing to give management a bit of leeway. Should McKee leave for an offer of $3.2MM/year over 4 years, I won't begrudge him or the Sabres at all. Should he leave for an offer of $2.25/year over 3 years, and I will be just as unhappy/ticked as you are now. I'm just not going to assume that the team will lose Jay for what I consider a "low sum" prior to it actually happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 I still don't see them reaching 110 points again because I think the competition in the league is going to start leveling out as teams now have seen the new NHL and start building teams that will compete in it. I guess my problem lies with seeing management let players go who were a key part to this team just because their salary was going to increase. Especially after the season they had where they should only be making minor adjustments to improve on what they already had. I disagree that the competition is going to get better. We're already seeing teams spend too much on a few big name players at the expense of depth. Sure Elias is a great player, and say the Rangers sign him. They will have a ton tied up on him and Jagr. In fact, you could probably put 2 pretty good lines together for the same amout of money, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Apus, you are fighting the good fight my friend. But I am bruised and battered and tired now. I don't know how much longer I can go on. Just... just... leave me here. Put a bullet in that gun and you take the horse to Cheyenne. My leg is killing me. It was fine last night, but this morning it woke me up -- all swollen and red. Can't be another snake-bite. Thanks for sucking out the venom, buddy. I'll never understand how that rattler got me up THERE. Maybe it was all the shots and barbs I've blocked in the past weeks from our fellow posters. That cut never did heal right. Anyway, you go on. Go on and fight the good fight. When you look at that moon tonight, and hear the Yotes a-hollerin, know I'm with you. -Ennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 Apus, you are fighting the good fight my friend. But I am bruised and battered and tired now. I don't know how much longer I can go on. Just... just... leave me here. Put a bullet in that gun and you take the horse to Cheyenne. My leg is killing me. It was fine last night, but this morning it woke me up -- all swollen and red. Can't be another snake-bite. Thanks for sucking out the venom, buddy. I'll never understand how that rattler got me up THERE. Maybe it was all the shots and barbs I've blocked in the past weeks from our fellow posters. That cut never did heal right. Anyway, you go on. Go on and fight the good fight. When you look at that moon tonight, and hear the Yotes a-hollerin, know I'm with you. -Ennis Ok, but I never sucked no venom out of anything, that must have been someone else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.