Confirmed with Link: Jeff Skinner re-signs. 8 years, $9M AAV.

Jame

Registered User
Sep 4, 2002
52,673
9,037
Florida
So my statement was correct, you just want to frame it differently.

I respect that it was literally possible to sign that contract without the league nullifying it. It just would've had the exact consequences I stated originally.

Yes, planning on going over is a "thought process." It reflects a mental state. It is a consequence that GMs should continue to contemplate, and form mental ideas about, and decide what to prioritize based on its likelihood.

None of that is a factor in the Reinhart contract negotiation.

Continuing to revisit any of it in the context of Reinhart’s contract remains nonsense.

“Well, we didn’t do a long term deal because that would’ve required me to think about bonus payments and overages”

“I decided not to do a long term deal with Reinhart because I’d need to trade a bit of cap space”

:facepalm:

None of this shit matters when handling a contract with a core player... Botts didn’t do a long term deal because he wasn’t fully sold on a Reinhart... THATs his failure, not worrying about insignificant minutae like bonus overages.
 

joshjull

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
78,467
39,918
Hamburg,NY
Positive things I did in this model:
- Assume 6(!) players at $1M. That's baked in. Seriously, how many more of those do you think is fair?
- Assume no bad contracts the next two summers
- Assume no problems resigning the players we want. In fact, assume lower values than I've seen tossed around here for Reinhart and Dahlin.

Things I didn't do:
- Assume anything about anyone not in the system or on the roster. For better or worse. You want me to try and be negative, christ almighty, I can do much better than this.

Negative assumptions:
-- Which??

Things I didn't do but I probably would if I were trying to be honest and not just try to mollify homers: With his job potentially on the line based on the team improving next year, assume Botts signs multiple guys this summer to 3+ years, likely cutting into that space. Assume Risto won't be moved without bringing back a replacement, at not much cap savings. Assume neither side opts out of the CBA until it expires in 2022, or moreover question whether compliance buyouts will even be on the table if there aren't significant salary cuts demanded. Assume Buffalo will have to pay a higher premium to keep their talent on a bottom 5 team in a bottom 5 market in a high tax state.

About the pipeline: You're arguing something outside my argument entirely. My point isn't whether we can find quality players. My point is whether we can afford them. If they make the roster anytime over the next two years, they'll need to be resigned past their ELCs. You can list two of them or twenty, it doesn't really matter, there's only so many spots to pay for.

Boil it down even further: Assume Ristolainen goes away if that's what you wish. Assume Okpsoso goes away if that's what you wish. Assume the only contracts in the world are Dahlin's, Skinner's, Eichel's, and Reinhart's. That's ~$36.5/$88M. Or 41.5% of the cap for four players.

That will make us one of the most top heavy rosters, financially, in the league. I'm not running the numbers again without Okposo to try and remake that point.

So if the argument is that our core needs a lot deeper support cast, it will have to come unusually cheap. If you think we're set up especially well to do that, great, I'm not arguing with you.

And your snark is really unpleasant.

Your framing of the cost of depth is incorrect and greatly inflates the cost of the rest of your roster build. I’m referring to the “6 players for 6mil then it jumps to 3mil per” that you put forth.

689 players played 30gms or more last season (22.2 per team)

44% had cap hits of 2mil or less
36% had cap hits of 1mil or less
16% had cap hits of 800k or less

We had 22 players play 30gms or more

Four on ELCs -> Dahlin, Mitts, Tage and Pilut
Four on 2nd contract -> Ullmark, Nelson, Erod and McCabe
One on 3rd contract -> Girgs
One on a 4th contract -> Larsson

The total cap hit for these 10 players is 10.6mil. Throw in Wilson (didn’t play 30gms) and thats 11 players for roughly 1mil each. To state the obvious thats a lot more spots filled (11 to 6) for a lot less money than you were arguing. Which would greatly reduce the burden of filling out the roster that you present.


* To further make the point on the abundance of cheap depth around the league.

994 players played at least 1 game this year. Thats 32 players per team (We had 33 for comparison).

61% had cap hits of 2mil or less
52% had cap hits of 1mil or less
29% had cap hits of 880k or less

Of the 33 players who played at least a game for us this year. 18 had cap hits of 1.6mil or less and 15 had come hits of 1mil of less. Combined those 18 players had total cap hit of 17.3 mil. In other words we had 18 players with an average cap hit of around 1mil.


There is an abundance of inexpensive depth players around the league and they’re on a variety of different contracts. It doesn’t require a ton of ELCs. Players can be on their 2nd contract or beyond and still provide cheap depth.

That brings me back to the development pipeline. My point wasn’t about just finding talent. It was also about finding players to provide depth. As I‘ve shown, they don’t need to be on ELCs to provide cheap depth. The idea is to keep churning out options so we can manage the cap as we move forward


Btw I haven’t disagreed with the idea that we’d be top heavy. Maybe you‘re confusing me the other posters your debating.
 
Last edited:

haseoke39

Registered User
Mar 29, 2011
13,938
2,490
Your framing of the cost of depth is incorrect and greatly inflates the cost of the rest of your roster build. I’m referring to the “6 players for 6mil then it jumps to 3mil per” that you put forth.

689 players played 30gms or more last season (22.2 per team)

44% had cap hits of 2mil or less
36% had cap hits of 1mil or less
16% had cap hits of 800k or less

We had 22 players play 30gms or more

Four on ELCs -> Dahlin, Mitts, Tage and Pilut
Four on 2nd contract -> Ullmark, Nelson, Erod and McCabe
One on 3rd contract -> Girgs
One on a 4th contract -> Larsson

The total cap hit for these 10 players is 10.6mil. Throw in Wilson (didn’t play 30gms) and thats 11 players for roughly 1mil each. To state the obvious thats a lot more spots filled (11 to 6) for a lot less money than you were arguing. Which would greatly reduce the burden of filling out the roster that you present.


* To further make the point on the abundance of cheap depth around the league.

994 players played at least 1 game this year. Thats 32 players per team (We had 33 for comparison).

61% had cap hits of 2mil or less
52% had cap hits of 1mil or less
29% had cap hits of 880k or less

Of the 33 players who played at least a game for us this year. 18 had cap hits of 1.6mil or less and 15 had come hits of 1mil of less. Combined those 18 players had total cap hit of 17.3 mil. In other words we had 18 players with an average cap hit of around 1mil.


There is an abundance of inexpensive depth players around the league and they’re on a variety of different contracts. It doesn’t require a ton of ELCs. Players can be on their 2nd contract or beyond and still provide cheap depth.

That brings me back to the development pipeline. My point wasn’t about just finding talent. It was also about finding players to provide depth. As I‘ve shown, they don’t need to be on ELCs to provide cheap depth. The idea is to keep churning out options so we can manage the cap as we move forward


Btw I haven’t disagreed with the idea that we’d be top heavy. Maybe you‘re confusing me the other posters your debating.

This was enlightening, and took some effort speak my language. Thank you.
 

WeDislikeEich

Registered User
Jun 22, 2015
5,863
4,182
I saw the Skinner trade and his NMC brought up again (as a reason not to give botterill credit) in the roster speculation thread and I wanted to ask a question -


Do you think Botterill actually had that information leading up to the time of the trade?
That Buffalo was the only realistic trade destination on Skinner’s list?


Or is it more likely that Botterill only knew that Buffalo was one of the teams on Skinner’s trade list (not the only one)?


I’m not sure how readily available info like that (NTC/NMC list) is. It seems like something that only the team who has Skinner under contract is privy to, but I’m not really sure on that.
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
55,666
34,493
Rochester, NY
I saw the Skinner trade and his NMC brought up again (as a reason not to give botterill credit) in the roster speculation thread and I wanted to ask a question -

Do you think Botterill actually had that information leading up to the time of the trade?
That Buffalo was the only realistic trade destination on Skinner’s list?

Or is it more likely that Botterill only knew that Buffalo was one of the teams on Skinner’s trade list (not the only one)?

I’m not sure how readily available info like that (NTC/NMC list) is. It seems like something that only the team who has Skinner under contract is privy to, but I’m not really sure on that.

https://apnews.com/f554420f5014425a829bea7f2194c6ab

It was a trade four months in the making, after the Hurricanes began entertaining offers shortly after extending their playoff drought to a ninth season — the NHL’s longest active streak.

“You go back the last couple of months, this is the longest I’ve worked on a one-player deal, because we just never felt like we were getting value,” Waddell said. “Buffalo was a team that was always high on his list. We felt that the deal we could make with Buffalo is one we could accept and continue to move forward.”

Botterill had to know that there weren't too many teams that Skinner was willing to go to given how long things dragged on for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chainshot

WeDislikeEich

Registered User
Jun 22, 2015
5,863
4,182
https://apnews.com/f554420f5014425a829bea7f2194c6ab



Botterill had to know that there weren't too many teams that Skinner was willing to go to given how long things dragged on for.
I agree. He had to have some idea. But I doubt he knew that we were the only team, unless Waddell told him straight out (which seems unlikely).

I just feel like if Botterill didn’t know we were the only team, then it really shouldn’t be something that’s used to discredit what a good trade that was by him.
 

HogtownSabresfan

Registered User
Jan 13, 2010
6,624
1,697
I agree. He had to have some idea. But I doubt he knew that we were the only team, unless Waddell told him straight out (which seems unlikely).

I just feel like if Botterill didn’t know we were the only team, then it really shouldn’t be something that’s used to discredit what a good trade that was by him.

I’m pretty sure he knew he had most of the cards
 

TehDoak

Chili that wants to be here
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
31,255
8,154
Will fix everything
Now that some of the early comps are signed, namely Anders Lee, this contract is baaaaaaaaaaad. 2M over market with the 8th year included. We really should have let him go to the wooing period. No one was paying him 9M per, only us. 8x6.5 (52M) is 2-3M more total he would have gotten anywhere else (7x7).

Only worse contracts so far are Zucc, and Tanev and maybe Hayes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ralonzo

enthusiast

cybersabre his prophet
Oct 20, 2009
18,572
5,820
Now that some of the early comps are signed, namely Anders Lee, this contract is baaaaaaaaaaad. 2M over market with the 8th year included. We really should have let him go to the wooing period. No one was paying him 9M per, only us. 8x6.5 (52M) is 2-3M more total he would have gotten anywhere else (7x7).

Only worse contracts so far are Zucc, and Tanev and maybe Hayes.

Skinner's a better player than Anders Lee.
 

TehDoak

Chili that wants to be here
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
31,255
8,154
Will fix everything
Skinner's a better player than Anders Lee.

I also think he's more likely to age gracefully.

So let’s theoretically say a team was willing to do 8 a year x 7 years for skinner is 56M. 7.5x8 years is still 4M more than he could have gotten anywhere else. Botts went 16m more than any other team would have reasonably gave. While he was only negotiating against himself

It’s a desperate bad contract.
 

enthusiast

cybersabre his prophet
Oct 20, 2009
18,572
5,820
If we accept that 8*7 is the going rate on the open market, the extra million and year don't really mean much to me. It's not a real cap hindrance and if need be we could send him off in year 9 for garbage like everyone else does
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zman5778

TehDoak

Chili that wants to be here
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
31,255
8,154
Will fix everything
If we accept that 8*7 is the going rate on the open market, the extra million and year don't really mean much to me. It's not a real cap hindrance and if need be we could send him off in year 9 for garbage like everyone else does

Then why go the extra year


Teams go 8 years to lower the Aav

Going the extra year AND overpaying market is stupid season.
 

enthusiast

cybersabre his prophet
Oct 20, 2009
18,572
5,820
If we accept that it's overpayment, it's minor overpayment that doesn't really affect much. Like, the difference is a little bit mroe than one Curtis Lazar signing

Your stance that it's overpayment is valid but the scope isn't very large
 
  • Like
Reactions: tsujimoto74

Snippit

Registered User
Dec 5, 2012
16,585
9,910
Yes given the other deals on the market this year, this really makes this signing look kind of steep. The 8th year should have helped lower the AAV.
 

schpaff

Registered User
Sep 4, 2005
937
57
Now that some of the early comps are signed, namely Anders Lee, this contract is baaaaaaaaaaad. 2M over market with the 8th year included. We really should have let him go to the wooing period. No one was paying him 9M per, only us. 8x6.5 (52M) is 2-3M more total he would have gotten anywhere else (7x7).

Only worse contracts so far are Zucc, and Tanev and maybe Hayes.
Yawn.
 

Rasmus CacOlainen

The end of the Tank
Sep 24, 2015
7,226
1,137
Europe
If we accept that it's overpayment, it's minor overpayment that doesn't really affect much. Like, the difference is a little bit mroe than one Curtis Lazar signing

Your stance that it's overpayment is valid but the scope isn't very large
1 to 1.5 mil over 8 years is not what I call minor. He should have been 8x7.5, maaaax 8x8
 

tsujimoto74

Moderator
May 28, 2012
29,802
21,846
So we are just going to ignore the Panarin contract?

Right? Panarin>Skinner>Lee, and would you look at that, their contracts match up with how they rank as players (11.6>9>7...and that's with Panarin leaving ~$1M per on the table).

Plus Panarin and Skinner are closer in play style and age to each other than to Lee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dingo44

jc17

Registered User
Jun 14, 2013
11,015
7,733
If we accept that it's overpayment, it's minor overpayment that doesn't really affect much. Like, the difference is a little bit mroe than one Curtis Lazar signing

Your stance that it's overpayment is valid but the scope isn't very large
You're telling me we could have had room to sign another curtis lazar?!?!?!

Come on botts, we'd basically be in the playoffs already
 

Sabresfansince1980

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
10,835
5,194
from Wheatfield, NY
Buffalo is still paying Hodgson almost 800k for four more years, and he doesn't even play in the NHL anymore. I haven't seen any complaints about that lately. With that in mind, I think I'll still be able to sleep at night knowing that Skinner is overpaid by the same amount, while scoring 30-40 a season.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->