Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

deluca67

Moves?

Recommended Posts

Does anyone think the Sabres will look outside the organIzation for help?

 

Take a quick look at the schedule. The longer this spell continues the harder they will fall. Having a schedule that is heavy in Division (and Conference) games gives you very little breathing room for prolonged losing streaks.

 

Waiting too long to pull the trigger leaves you no time for corrections if the gun (or fax machine) jams ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they will make trades this season, but I doubt that any of us will be happy with the timing of the trades.

 

I'd be shocked to see the Sabres make any trades in '05 and will be mildly surprised to see any in January as well.

 

As frustrating as most of the Sabres losses have been, they are pretty much where they should be record-wise at this juncture. Based on the way they played at home against Moe-ray-aal and Carolina, you would hope to get some points out of those games; but the only game they lost that I look at on the schedule and say "absolutely, the Sabres are the better team" was the Washington game.

 

Because they are within 4 points of where they need to be at this point in the season (and possibly right where they need to be), I don't see Darcy pushing the panic button (rightly or wrongly).

 

DeLuca, I would love to see the trade deadline deal(s) happen at Thanksgiving but agree with you that it / they won't happen until much later. While it is pull-your-hair-out frustrating, it is impossible for us to say whether it is or isn't a good thing, because we have no way of knowing what deals are on the table now vs. what will be available in March. If the deals at the deadline are the equivalent of Gratton for Briere and right now they are Brown for Jillson (or worse), then, frustrating as it is, it is worth waiting for that better deal. However, if the deals are Barnaby for Barnes currently and will grow to Gratton for Briere at the deadline, then the trigger should be pulled now. The PR effect on the bottom line will have a much more substantial impact on the team than the difference in ability of a Briere vs a Barnes plus an improvement in personnel at the present time may translate into enough W's to guarantee that 7th or 8th spot. (Maybe not the best analogies, but I expect people get my drift.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they will make trades this season, but I doubt that any of us will be happy with the timing of the trades.

 

I'd be shocked to see the Sabres make any trades in '05 and will be mildly surprised to see any in January as well.

 

As frustrating as most of the Sabres losses have been, they are pretty much where they should be record-wise at this juncture. Based on the way they played at home against Moe-ray-aal and Carolina, you would hope to get some points out of those games; but the only game they lost that I look at on the schedule and say "absolutely, the Sabres are the better team" was the Washington game.

 

Because they are within 4 points of where they need to be at this point in the season (and possibly right where they need to be), I don't see Darcy pushing the panic button (rightly or wrongly).

 

DeLuca, I would love to see the trade deadline deal(s) happen at Thanksgiving but agree with you that it / they won't happen until much later. While it is pull-your-hair-out frustrating, it is impossible for us to say whether it is or isn't a good thing, because we have no way of knowing what deals are on the table now vs. what will be available in March. If the deals at the deadline are the equivalent of Gratton for Briere and right now they are Brown for Jillson (or worse), then, frustrating as it is, it is worth waiting for that better deal. However, if the deals are Barnaby for Barnes currently and will grow to Gratton for Briere at the deadline, then the trigger should be pulled now. The PR effect on the bottom line will have a much more substantial impact on the team than the difference in ability of a Briere vs a Barnes plus an improvement in personnel at the present time may translate into enough W's to guarantee that 7th or 8th spot. (Maybe not the best analogies, but I expect people get my drift.)

Why can't the Sabres be the team to put the "deal on the table"? Sometimes you have to be agressive. Go to a team who is not thinking about tradeing a blueliner and make them think about it.

 

It's not always about getting the better guy. It's about getting the guy who makes your team better.

 

'Too Late' is coming upon this team fast. I really have to wonder if the Sabres front office even cares. Revenue sharing can do that to a team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why can't the Sabres be the team to put the "deal on the table"? Sometimes you have to be agressive. Go to a team who is not thinking about tradeing a blueliner and make them think about it.

 

It's not always about getting the better guy. It's about getting the guy who makes your team better.

 

'Too Late' is coming upon this team fast.  I really have to wonder if the Sabres front office even cares. Revenue sharing can do that to a team.

Without being privy to the GM phone calls, we have no way of knowing if it is Darcy or the other GM(s) that are lowballing. That being said, I will admit it is frustrating to wait for the team to make moves. As I've posted before, we have no way of knowing if any reasonable offers are currently on the table.

 

I agree with you that the point of a trade should be to make the team better.

 

I completely disagree with the premise that the people running the team don't care if the team does well or not. Darcy has always been slow in consumating deals, it isn't something that started in August. Golisano is competitive but also a businessman. I'm certain that he is trying to get the people that work for him to walk that fine line of staying competitive without losing his shirt. (No, they are not competitive with Ottawa, they have been very competitive against everyone else they have played.) In '04 I had the very good fortune to sit in the box next to Golisano's for one game. He'd mingle with his guests during the intermission, but he was sitting glued to the game during the periods. This guy does not want to be the owner of a loser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one thing he should keep in mind is spending a little extra money on a big name player may fill some of the seats in the arena. Sometimes you gotta spend money to make money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think one thing he should keep in mind is spending a little extra money on a big name player may fill some of the seats in the arena.  Sometimes you gotta spend money to make money.

Until the Bills are officially eliminated from the playoff race, I don't think the Sabres can really do much of anything to significantly increase attendance.

 

It is an interesting question though. How much would signing a "star" player increase team revenues? Let's say for the sake of argument that Buffalo had signed Bondra, or better since D is the Sabres weak spot, let's say that Zhitnik accepted an offer at $3.5MM and they had signed Aucoin at $4.0MM. Had they done that, they would not have signed Numminen at $2.0MM and one other D would not be on the roster, I'll pick Campbell for this exercise just because he is the bubble D (although it more likely would have been Lydman) saving another $460k. The Sabres in that scenario would have their payroll increase by roughly $5.0MM.

 

The Sabres are selling about 13,500 seats for most games (leaving about 5,000 tickets available) and are selling out some games such as Moe-ray-aal and TO. Let's assume that the current roster would sell out 11 games (8 against those 2 plus 3 other random games - this is a very conservative estimate). That leaves up to 150,000 seats that a "name" signing might bring into the Mmarena. If the average ticket price of the available seats is $50, that would put $7.5MM in ticket revenue available. Jeremy Jacobs gets most of the concession revenues, so I will not include those in this analysis. I'd say on average, a fan will spend $10 for non-concession souveniers. Putting an additional $1.5MM in play.

 

Those extra 150,000 fans would increase rink expenses as well, as additional workers will be required at the rink and utilities will also increase. I will estimate these increased expenses at ~$1.0MM. So there is a possible $8.0MM available max, IF the team now sells out all its games by bringing in Z and Aucoin.

 

Would Z and Aucoin make the Sabres sell out? I honestly doubt it. They might translate into more sellouts at the end of the season, but I doubt they would add more than 1,000 fans on average per game during the 1st half of the season. This puts the potential increase in revenue due to them at about $5.4MM and the increase in expenses at $700k, netting $4.7MM into the Sabres coffers. Considering the increase of $4.7MM cost $5.0MM, the net result is a loss of $300k.

 

I actually expect that the increase in revenues due to more name players would be more negligible than this analysis indicates, as I think my estimate of 11 sellouts under the current conditions is low. Attendance historically picks up after the 1st of the year and I believe that will be the case this year as well.

 

I did not factor playoffs into the analysis as goaltending seems to be the biggest determinant in whether teams win in the playoffs. I did not have a good estimate of the probability to use to estimate the Sabres chances of getting additional games by signing Z and Aucoin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Until the Bills are officially eliminated from the playoff race, I don't think the Sabres can really do much of anything to significantly increase attendance.

 

It is an interesting question though. How much would signing a "star" player increase team revenues? Let's say for the sake of argument that Buffalo had signed Bondra, or better since D is the Sabres weak spot, let's say that Zhitnik accepted an offer at $3.5MM and they had signed Aucoin at $4.0MM. Had they done that, they would not have signed Numminen at $2.0MM and one other D would not be on the roster, I'll pick Campbell for this exercise just because he is the bubble D (although it more likely would have been Lydman) saving another $460k. The Sabres in that scenario would have their payroll increase by roughly $5.0MM.

 

The Sabres are selling about 13,500 seats for most games (leaving about 5,000 tickets available) and are selling out some games such as Moe-ray-aal and TO. Let's assume that the current roster would sell out 11 games (8 against those 2 plus 3 other random games - this is a very conservative estimate). That leaves up to 150,000 seats that a "name" signing might bring into the Mmarena. If the average ticket price of the available seats is $50, that would put $7.5MM in ticket revenue available. Jeremy Jacobs gets most of the concession revenues, so I will not include those in this analysis. I'd say on average, a fan will spend $10 for non-concession souveniers. Putting an additional $1.5MM in play.

 

Those extra 150,000 fans would increase rink expenses as well, as additional workers will be required at the rink and utilities will also increase. I will estimate these increased expenses at ~$1.0MM. So there is a possible $8.0MM available max, IF the team now sells out all its games by bringing in Z and Aucoin.

 

Would Z and Aucoin make the Sabres sell out? I honestly doubt it. They might translate into more sellouts at the end of the season, but I doubt they would add more than 1,000 fans on average per game during the 1st half of the season. This puts the potential increase in revenue due to them at about $5.4MM and the increase in expenses at $700k, netting $4.7MM into the Sabres coffers. Considering the increase of $4.7MM cost $5.0MM, the net result is a loss of $300k.

 

I actually expect that the increase in revenues due to more name players would be more negligible than this analysis indicates, as I think my estimate of 11 sellouts under the current conditions is low. Attendance historically picks up after the 1st of the year and I believe that will be the case this year as well.

 

I did not factor playoffs into the analysis as goaltending seems to be the biggest determinant in whether teams win in the playoffs. I did not have a good estimate of the probability to use to estimate the Sabres chances of getting additional games by signing Z and Aucoin.

How about Palfy?

 

Anyway it doesn't matter. If the Sabres increased their revenue they would indanger their part of the revenue sharing. That's just a fact of life. The Sabres are happy at 13,500 a game. They collect some money at the gate and get a big 'Loser bonus' at the end of the year.

 

The Sabres are the exact reason why some bigger teams are against revenue sharing. The Sabres will collect that check and not put back into the team. Regier has already saifd so on WGR earlier this year. The Sabres are happy winning or not.

 

And if Golisano hates too lose so much. Why does he continue to spend $60 million to gain less then 3% of the vote every four years. He's a nice guy. He is 'King of the Smoozers'. What he is not is a "hockey guy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i don't think golisano is really running anything... its larry quinn i would think... i mean its the same corrupt situation we had with Rigas its just that its covered up by Golisano's massive bank of money... Golisano probably has a whole other different agenda and does not have time for the Sabres... im pretty sure he's just handed it over to Quinn to run... thats why we suck..... again....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Sabres are the exact reason why some bigger teams are against revenue sharing. The Sabres will collect that check and not put back into the team. Regier has already saifd so on WGR earlier this year. The Sabres are happy winning or not.

According to THN, there are 7 teams with payrolls below $30.0MM. Those teams are a combined 59-50-11. A low payroll does not guarantee a bad team. The Sabres have been in all the games they've played except for those against Ottawa. Including 3 thrashings at the hands of the Otters, Buffalo is exactly 1 game under .500.

 

Let's wait and see how they do over this next little stretch before we throw in the towel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are a good/average team, but our early run got people believeing the Sabes were better than they are.

 

We are second tier (6-8 seed) playoff team.

 

But based on someone blowing up - like Vanek going on a scoring streak, or Drury adding some offense to season totals in the 25 goal range, we could be a 4th seed, or, based on injuries, like Miller's, we could be an 8th seed.

 

Either way, there is a huge disparity between us and the top teams in the East.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about Palfy?

 

That would be awsome. I think we need to address the defense first and see how Miller is when he returns before getting a guy like Ziggy Palffy though. If the defense gets help, and Miller is same old Miller, then in mid-dec/jan getting a vet like Ziggy Palffy to add to scoring and his veteran leadership would really be great with guys like Roy, Dumont and Vanek i think.

 

Before we start to deal for a winger to help with scoring, i think Jason Pominville deserves a chance.

 

 

But in my opinion, fix the defense and then let's see if we even need that extra winger for the playoff push.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I donno what thread this would be best in so i put it here, i didn't feel like starting a thread for a non-reliable story. lol

 

According to a guy on another forum i post on, "Leafs Lunch" in Toronto reports San Jose is trying to deal Brad Stuart and Scott Hannan.

 

And i'm thinking, we could definetly use one of those guys. I think both are very good. I donno what San Jose would want from us, obviously not a goalie since they have Naby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 of our 3 key bargaining chips are on the shelf (Miller and Noronen) -- until Miller gets healthy, Darcy really can't do anything -- he needs Biron and Mika as insurance. We're doing well with the status quo, despite all the injuries..unless we take a nosedive and lose 6 straight, I don't expect any trades until after the Olympics, where hopefully Miller will prove himself to be a top flight goalie again, and we can deal Marty for a bona fide blueliner...the play of Connolly, Roy and Pominville will force some difficult choices as well..perhaps we can finally dump Pyatt and some other dead weight..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...