It is currently Thu May 28, 2026 5:08 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:52 am 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
Nuthatch wrote:
Isn't Timmy's problem the skating-with-his-head-down thing? I've been told that that's why/how he got his clock cleaned. If he can't dangle without keeping his head down, then he can't dangle (and survive it).

I'm curious to hear what people think.


He still tries to dangle, but he's not nearly as fast or focused as he used to be.

To be honest, Timmy looks unhealthy. He plays like his head is in the clouds. He doesn't often show much fire. He hasn't been known to put in additional time or effort at practice or training camp.

It's almost like he doesn't care.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:58 am 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
He doesn't always fiddle around with his head down, but he does do it enough that I notice it.

He's just too fancy with the puck. He got away with it in one playoff series before he got smoked, that's it. His highest career point total? Last year with 65. He's missed basically two entire seasons because of concussions, he's a career -43, and he has (reportedly) one of the worst work ethics on the team.

Get him the eff out of here. Worst contract extension in Sabres history.


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:00 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
I don't blame Darcy for that one. Seemed like a good contract to offer at the time.

Thankfully, he only extended him 2 years.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:11 pm 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
I don't blame Darcy for that one. Seemed like a good contract to offer at the time.

Thankfully, he only extended him 2 years.


Can't say I agree. At the time of the extension, he paid a guy $4.5M per who hadn't played in more than 63 games since 2 years before the lockout. Since his 80 game, 25 point, -25 performance in 02-03, he missed two full seasons, and had on good 8 game stretch in the playoffs. That's it.

It was not worth $4.5M per at the time it was signed, not even close.


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:27 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
Squanto wrote:
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
I don't blame Darcy for that one. Seemed like a good contract to offer at the time.

Thankfully, he only extended him 2 years.


Can't say I agree. At the time of the extension, he paid a guy $4.5M per who hadn't played in more than 63 games since 2 years before the lockout. Since his 80 game, 25 point, -25 performance in 02-03, he missed two full seasons, and had on good 8 game stretch in the playoffs. That's it.

It was not worth $4.5M per at the time it was signed, not even close.


Yeah, I see what you're saying. But when you look at the other 2009 FA centers (click here) there weren't any available that had the potential to give us the kind of performances Tim had given us.

The fear was the fact that he is injury prone, not that he didn't have the skill. Injuries screw with numbers, and while he had yet to put up something substantial, there was general consensus that if he could stay healthy he'd be a nasty player.

It's easy to call it a bad signing in hindsight and point to career stats as a reason why. But that doesn't take into consideration the flashes of dominance that Timmy had shown.

Lets also not forget that it was Tim's 20 something consecutive game scoring streak that carried the Sabres on that winning streak from December through January last season.

He was terrible come playoff time, but he was fresh off an injury.

Darcy rolled the dice and gave him 2 years. It didn't work out. Shit happens.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:43 pm 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
I never had a problem with the two year deal to see if he could stay healthy and produce. I had a problem with the amount of money he was given.

He did not deserve that kind of a raise based on a 20 game stretch and one good playoff run. He was given too much money no matter which way you look at it, production or potential.


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:52 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
Squanto wrote:
I never had a problem with the two year deal to see if he could stay healthy and produce. I had a problem with the amount of money he was given.

He did not deserve that kind of a raise based on a 20 game stretch and one good playoff run. He was given too much money no matter which way you look at it, production or potential.


Doesn't really matter. What would an extra 1 or 2 million of cap space had done for us over the past 2 years? We don't even spend to the cap.

Besides, contracts with shorter terms typically end up costing a little bit more because players are less willing to sign short term without money being on the table.

Yeah, Darcy has a tendency to reward potential. I'll give you that. But rewarding potential isn't dangerous for a 2 year contract.

It is for a 4 year, 5 year, or a 7 year contract, though.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
BlueandYellow
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:02 pm 
Offline
Hart Winner
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:42 pm
Posts: 9770
Location: Buffalo, NY
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
Squanto wrote:
I never had a problem with the two year deal to see if he could stay healthy and produce. I had a problem with the amount of money he was given.

He did not deserve that kind of a raise based on a 20 game stretch and one good playoff run. He was given too much money no matter which way you look at it, production or potential.


Doesn't really matter. What would an extra 1 or 2 million of cap space had done for us over the past 2 years? We don't even spend to the cap.

Besides, contracts with shorter terms typically end up costing a little bit more because players are less willing to sign short term without money being on the table.

Yeah, Darcy has a tendency to reward potential. I'll give you that. But rewarding potential isn't dangerous for a 2 year contract.

It is for a 4 year, 5 year, or a 7 year contract, though.


Connolly didn't really even help either.

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:08 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
BlueandYellow wrote:
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
Squanto wrote:
I never had a problem with the two year deal to see if he could stay healthy and produce. I had a problem with the amount of money he was given.

He did not deserve that kind of a raise based on a 20 game stretch and one good playoff run. He was given too much money no matter which way you look at it, production or potential.


Doesn't really matter. What would an extra 1 or 2 million of cap space had done for us over the past 2 years? We don't even spend to the cap.

Besides, contracts with shorter terms typically end up costing a little bit more because players are less willing to sign short term without money being on the table.

Yeah, Darcy has a tendency to reward potential. I'll give you that. But rewarding potential isn't dangerous for a 2 year contract.

It is for a 4 year, 5 year, or a 7 year contract, though.


Connolly didn't really even help either.


Great point. Just fantastic.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:21 pm 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
Doesn't really matter. What would an extra 1 or 2 million of cap space had done for us over the past 2 years? We don't even spend to the cap.


I think more about the larger long term picture. If you give Tim Connolly that contract, what happens when some young talent comes up through the system and points to that deal in arbitration? What about other players that use that deal as the benchmark for what they should get? Now, you have the chance to lose out on other players down the road because their salary demands for mediocre performance have a comparable contract to work from.


Top
 Profile  
 
OldTimeHockey
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:19 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:13 pm
Posts: 1661
Squanto wrote:
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
Doesn't really matter. What would an extra 1 or 2 million of cap space had done for us over the past 2 years? We don't even spend to the cap.


I think more about the larger long term picture. If you give Tim Connolly that contract, what happens when some young talent comes up through the system and points to that deal in arbitration? What about other players that use that deal as the benchmark for what they should get? Now, you have the chance to lose out on other players down the road because their salary demands for mediocre performance have a comparable contract to work from.


That's a perfect point, especially how more often hockey arbitration awards are extrapolated out to the highest potential a player may achieve. Actually, do they ever come out lower than a team expects?

Hopefully new ownership and front office will cut out any of that mediocre play/large salary demand mentality if it exists within this franchise.

Or if not on center, we could have used that money on a winger as Kotalik, Afinogenov, Satan, and Pyatt were available.

_________________
If your having goal problems, I feel bad for ya son....we got 99 problems but Vanek ain't one!


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:25 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
One signing isn't going to have a huge effect on arbitration hearings. And the great thing about arbitration is the ability to decline the contract.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:30 pm 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
One signing isn't going to have a huge effect on arbitration hearings. And the great thing about arbitration is the ability to decline the contract.


One signing absolutely affects arbitration. Every player of a similar age to TC with similar numbers to TC is going to use that contract as evidence in their case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:38 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
Squanto wrote:
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
One signing isn't going to have a huge effect on arbitration hearings. And the great thing about arbitration is the ability to decline the contract.


One signing absolutely affects arbitration. Every player of a similar age to TC with similar numbers to TC is going to use that contract as evidence in their case.


That's fine. Because Tim's case is an anomaly.

For every contract like Tim's, there's another 10 contracts signed at fair market value.

Which is going to hold up in an arbitration hearing?

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:41 pm 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
For every contract like Tim's, there's another 10 contracts signed at fair market value.


Have some evidence to back that up, or just speculating?


Top
 Profile  
 
Skyline_BNR34
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:46 pm 
Offline
Cup Winner
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 9:34 pm
Posts: 13019
Location: North Carolina
Squanto wrote:
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
One signing isn't going to have a huge effect on arbitration hearings. And the great thing about arbitration is the ability to decline the contract.


One signing absolutely affects arbitration. Every player of a similar age to TC with similar numbers to TC is going to use that contract as evidence in their case.

No they won't, players of a similar age will be UFAs. And by that time I'm sure the player would not care to go to arbitration. Plus it normally is only used by a RFA since it's for bargaining power and a UFA has unlimited bargaining power.


And this also:
Evidence that is not admissible:
# The salary and performance of a "comparable" player who signed a contract as an unrestricted free agent.

I'm not sure if it means extensions also or not, but regardless, Connolly would have become an UFA when he resigned with Buffalo anyways.

_________________
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
No need for violence, just tell her she's got a game misconduct and show her the door.

Rud wrote:
As I said in the GDT, the call on Rivet was horseshit. The Bruins player was holding onto Rivet's stick like it was the last fucking raft on the Titanic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:58 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
Squanto wrote:
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
For every contract like Tim's, there's another 10 contracts signed at fair market value.


Have some evidence to back that up, or just speculating?


Speculating. I think it's a fair assumption. But we've got one of two solutions here.

1. I'm right, and Connolly's contract doesn't have a huge effect on arbitration.

2. I'm wrong, and all kinds of players are being overpaid, so Darcy's move wasn't that questionable after all.

Either way, one single signing isn't going to have a huge effect on arbitration awards. It takes a few.

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
OldTimeHockey
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:06 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:13 pm
Posts: 1661
PuckSniperPensel wrote:
Squanto wrote:
I never had a problem with the two year deal to see if he could stay healthy and produce. I had a problem with the amount of money he was given.

He did not deserve that kind of a raise based on a 20 game stretch and one good playoff run. He was given too much money no matter which way you look at it, production or potential.


Doesn't really matter. What would an extra 1 or 2 million of cap space had done for us over the past 2 years? We don't even spend to the cap.

Besides, contracts with shorter terms typically end up costing a little bit more because players are less willing to sign short term without money being on the table.

Yeah, Darcy has a tendency to reward potential. I'll give you that. But rewarding potential isn't dangerous for a 2 year contract.

It is for a 4 year, 5 year, or a 7 year contract, though.


I preface this on how I'm mad at Darcy...

Although the 2009 C UFA market was wafer thin...Connolly wouldn't have taken the same money or a little less than the $3.5M he was making? If he didn't...so what? Go get a $4M winger as we could have used one of those as well.

As soon as that deal was announced a Bruins fan friend of mine said to me...so Darcy's paying for Timmy's retirement? Thankfully, Patrice Bergeron was making more than Timmy coming off an 39 point season.

But add up that "premium potential" that has been wasted and that adds up to the salary of a pretty good player for at least a good chunk of their contract. Why not use that money for a good player and fill in the roster spots with all the farm club kids he's so enamored with?

I mean he's the General Manager...isn't he supposed to have a grasp on what makes a good hockey player and who's exhibiting those traits? Then again this is Buffalo sports and who knows what anyone in either front office actually has within their job description.

Its just sucks when your GM will tinker with a 2 year deal for a player who's potential is fading fast while another GM will throw out $3.9M, 11 season deals to resign Johan Franzen. Add up the "potential waste" and subtract that from the $43M Detroit sprinkled over that deal. If Darcy wastes $1 to 2 to 3M a year and he's been here how many years....sure Franzen likely won't play up to the $3.9M when he's 36, but which equally price or higher priced player on the Sabres won't play up to their contract in the present or short term?

Sorry if this is a bit off in fantasy hockey land, but I just can't stand the dumb money that Darcy loves to waste no matter how short the term on players he likes. At least John Butler hit on a few more players doing the same thing.

_________________
If your having goal problems, I feel bad for ya son....we got 99 problems but Vanek ain't one!


Top
 Profile  
 
PuckSniperPensel
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:50 pm 
Offline
Page Side
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 6537
All that is fine and well... but who do you think he should have gone after that summer to replace Connolly?

_________________
Wheelhouse


Top
 Profile  
 
Skyline_BNR34
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:48 pm 
Offline
Cup Winner
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 9:34 pm
Posts: 13019
Location: North Carolina
Connolly was the reason we went to OT tonight.

I would guarantee it, what a disgrace.

_________________
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
No need for violence, just tell her she's got a game misconduct and show her the door.

Rud wrote:
As I said in the GDT, the call on Rivet was horseshit. The Bruins player was holding onto Rivet's stick like it was the last fucking raft on the Titanic.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: