Tyler Ennis Contract Thread

[Ruckus007]

If this is somewhere else and I missed it, please just merge with the appropriate thread.


Simple question: Tyler Ennis is RFA this offseason, what do you believe the Sabres should do with him.

Click to read more...

 

[Moskau]

3 years. Pad his stats and trade him next year or keep him as a luxury winger.

 

[LottoPlease]

If this is somewhere else and I missed it, please just merge with the appropriate thread.


Simple question: Tyler Ennis is RFA this offseason, what do you believe the Sabres should do with him.

If they sign him I expect they match or get close to hodgsons deal ($4.25m per for 6 years) with the cap situation next year, I also predict he'll grow as a player and become a deadly winger for the sabres going forward

Otherwise he's going to be a piece of a very nice trade

 

[Moskau]

If they sign him I expect they match or get close to hodgsons deal ($4.25m per for 6 years) with the cap situation next year, I also predict he'll grow as a player and become a deadly winger for the sabres going forward

Otherwise he's going to be a piece of a very nice trade

As Paul Hamilton said if Ennis' camp asks for anywhere near the 6 years Hodgson asked for he is as good as gone. He believes Buffalo will qualify him, his camp will ask for a deal similar to what Hodgson got, he will hold out and then be traded if they can't reach a 2-3 year deal. That's if Murray even wants him in the first place.

 

[Shoey]

1. Decide between him and Hodgson, trade one for a capable 2 way top 6 winger. If Ennis is the guy give him a maximum of 3 years.

2. Draft Reinhart

3. Keep Girgensons at center

This will create a much more balanced team in time and allow you to shelter players with defensive liabilities.

 

[TheMistyStranger]

I would like to see him moved this year.

 

[ZZamboni]

For what he brings and what he doesn't. For where the team is and where it isn't.

I would be comfortable with 2-3 years at 3.75 - 4.0 per. If he demands more years or more per ..... Bu-bye.

A nice, talented complimentary piece that can be replaced if he tries putting the screws to Murray.

 

[Myllz]

If they sign him I expect they match or get close to hodgsons deal ($4.25m per for 6 years) with the cap situation next year, I also predict he'll grow as a player and become a deadly winger for the sabres going forward

Otherwise he's going to be a piece of a very nice trade

That would be one awful start for Murray.

 

[LottoPlease]

Comparing them last few seasons the point production is about equal. Ennis should be most useful as a winger with his speed skill and physicality. With Hodgson we have a good productive but slower and defensively lapsing center. He's locked in for 6 but that doesn't make him immovable, we no doubt pick a center this draft and if all goes well after 2015 we have our franchise 1c/2c. Where does that leave hodgson? He will be moved to fill holes once we see the light at the end of the tunnel

 

[wunderpanda]

He should get at least what Hodgson did, but a deal that takes him to UFA status at 4.5 million per seems more reasonable.

 

[stokes84]

3 years $4 mil per. Gives us one additional UFA year, then we can see where we are. His ability to play anywhere in the line up is what makes him valuable to us as we are plugging holes.

 

[haseoke39]

3.75 x 5.

 

[ZZamboni]

He should get at least what Hodgson did, but a deal that takes him to UFA status at 4.5 million per seems more reasonable.

I might be confusing you with someone else, but weren't you (and one or two others) saying at the time of the Hodgson signing that the contract he got was overkill, not deserved, way overboard, not worth it, a huge mistake etc...?

If so, wouldn't giving Ennis that contract be an equally huge mistake? Therefore would be a very poor decision by Murray? Unless of course you view Ennis as miles ahead of Hodgson in all areas and therefore deserves that significant of a contract where Hodgson didn't and doesn't.

 

[stokes84]

I might be confusing you with someone else, but weren't you (and one or two others) saying at the time of the Hodgson signing that the contract he got was overkill, not deserved, way overboard, not worth it, a huge mistake etc...?

If so, wouldn't giving Ennis that contract be an equally huge mistake? Therefore would be a very poor decision by Murray? Unless of course you view Ennis as miles ahead of Hodgson in all areas and therefore deserves that significant of a contract where Hodgson didn't and doesn't.

I think most people thought that contract was a joke.

 

[ZZamboni]

I think most people thought that contract was a joke.

If that's even true (and I don't think it is), then it would be a very poor decision to gift Ennis that contract too.

Your numbers were pretty reasonable I thought. 3 yr./4 per. It's not breaking the bank. It's not low. It's not long term.

 

[B U F F A L O]

He should get at least what Hodgson did, but a deal that takes him to UFA status at 4.5 million per seems more reasonable.

Agreed

 

[Sabre the Win]

1. Decide between him and Hodgson, trade one for a capable 2 way top 6 winger. If Ennis is the guy give him a maximum of 3 years.

2. Draft Reinhart

3. Keep Girgensons at center

This will create a much more balanced team in time and allow you to shelter players with defensive liabilities.

I will tell you why Hodgson will win this decision hands in down every single debate on why he will be kept over Ennis.

Stats. Product. Size. Ennis does not fit in the get Bigger Up front mold that Pagula wants to emulate (ie. Boston).

 

[Jame]

As Paul Hamilton said if Ennis' camp asks for anywhere near the 6 years Hodgson asked for he is as good as gone. He believes Buffalo will qualify him, his camp will ask for a deal similar to what Hodgson got, he will hold out and then be traded if they can't reach a 2-3 year deal. That's if Murray even wants him in the first place.

I agree with this framing of the situation...

However, with Buffalo needing to reach the cap floor... they could afford to overpay short term to get Ennis to agree to 2-3 years.

I agree, no way they touch a long term deal.

Would Ennis turn down a 2 year / 9-10 million deal?
3 years / 14-15 million?

No way I touch anything over 3 years

 

[Jame]

I think most people thought that contract was a joke.

It was thought of as a steal by anyone with even the most remote foresight.

 

[Team Cozens]

1 year.... 10 million... Reach cap floor.

 

[Paxon]

I think most people thought that contract was a joke.

That was definitely not the case

 

[Zman5778]

I agree with this framing of the situation...

However, with Buffalo needing to reach the cap floor... they could afford to overpay short term to get Ennis to agree to 2-3 years.

I agree, no way they touch a long term deal.

Would Ennis turn down a 2 year / 9-10 million deal?
3 years / 14-15 million?

No way I touch anything over 3 years

Pretty much this. No way I do anything over 3 years for Ennis.


Somehow I think both sides angle for a 2 year deal, taking him to UFA.

 

[Zman5778]

I think most people thought that contract was a joke.

Only those that have an irrational distaste for Hodgson thought that.

Most saw it as on the pricey side now, but at the end could be one of the better bargains in the NHL.

Basically the Derek Roy deal v2.0

 

[wunderpanda]

I might be confusing you with someone else, but weren't you (and one or two others) saying at the time of the Hodgson signing that the contract he got was overkill, not deserved, way overboard, not worth it, a huge mistake etc...?

If so, wouldn't giving Ennis that contract be an equally huge mistake? Therefore would be a very poor decision by Murray? Unless of course you view Ennis as miles ahead of Hodgson in all areas and therefore deserves that significant of a contract where Hodgson didn't and doesn't.

I don't like Hodgsons deal, but he and Ennis are comparable players, close in age and production. Just seems fair to extend a similar deal to Ennis.

*edit* I have rational distaste for Hodgson*

 

[Myllz]

I don't like Hodgsons deal, but he and Ennis are comparable players, close in age and production. Just seems fair to extend a similar deal to Ennis.

*edit* I have rational distaste for Hodgson*

So you don't like the deal a player got, yet you want to extend the same deal to (in your eyes) a similar player?

How does that make ANY sense? "Well we've made bad decisions in the past, might as well continue to make them just to be consistent!"