HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Darcy Regier seriously calling out the rest of the NHL

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-05-2005, 03:15 AM
  #76
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,936
vCash: 1390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler

The teams that are going to do well in this cap are those who can build momentum and ice a quality product and be perceived as attractive. I am skeptical that all of a sudden there won't be any money to throw around at one point. There will ALWAYS be a team to outbid you. There are 30 teams in this league. If people are waiting for a bigass crop of players to be available for Regier, I don't think it will happen. Next years other contracts will end, someone else will step up and "overpay" if they want the player. There isn't going to be a magical point where suddenly you've got all these options to sign. I don't expect a "supply overflow" and a low demand anytime soon.
Lowering the age of free agency to 29 in 2006 will more than double the number of UFA's. The law of supply and demand is well established. The deals given to UFA's in this offseason will limit the number of teams that can overpay in 2006. Those are the facts. There's no magic involved.

Buffaloed is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 03:20 AM
  #77
rudethedude66
Registered User
 
rudethedude66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MONTREAL/LONDON
Country: Canada
Posts: 724
vCash: 500
the only ones having problems are the ones who are BAD managers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rudethedude66 is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 03:28 AM
  #78
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffaloed
Lowering the age of free agency to 29 in 2006 will more than double the number of UFA's. The law of supply and demand is well established. The deals given to UFA's in this offseason will limit the number of teams that can overpay in 2006. Those are the facts. There's no magic involved.
The principle you speak of is correct. The wide speculation that "genious" GMs will benefit from this simply by staying put is the magic I speak of.

It's simply not going to happen, IMO.

Other contracts will end, trades will happen. Teams which, at this point, have the better situation as far as finances and competitiveness may benefit a little.

That's assuming we don't see more players forfeiting their FA status until then.

Just because you secured two guys this years to 3-4 years contracts doesn't mean much, really. It's a reach to try to predict how it will go.

Really, I'm surprised in all the faith and far-reaching schemes that are coming up here. We've had this cap for only a few days and Bobby Clarke just circumvented it by dumping Roenick. This stuff is going to happen again.

This doesn't mean I believe teams right now should get the biggest contracts possible to the oldest guys and not care. But I think it's a real, tangible positive move to try and position your team well under this system, and that doing so will not hurt you too much. Trying to put faith in what will happen in two years is just too far of a reach. It's not a sound strategy IMO.

The only proven thing I know that I have always seen is that success tends to breed success and that although the rules of the games have changed, I expect this trend to continue somewhat. If you wanna attract good UFAs, the best thing to do is try to be the best team possible not only financially but competitively.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 03:38 AM
  #79
ciflyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Real
www.sabres.com

Listen to his press conference from this afternoon. Among the things mentioned were....


- Could not believe the money being thrown at free agents. Believes that the teams would have been better to sign players before the lock out and take advantage of the 24% roll back.

- Was astonished that teams were signing these players to 4 and 5 year deals. The length of these contracts is going to seriously hurt the league's new policy of making all teams competitive. Went on to say that these teams are throwing money at the players the way they did before the draft.

- Also, was active in making offers to free agents but had to drop out because of the height of the salaries offered.


Really sounded like he was taking his shot at the Bobby Clarkes' of the world. I agree with alot of what he said and would tell any hockey fan to listen to the press conference. This in no way lessens my aggrivation with the Sabres, but atleast from a fan's standpoint I have a bit more understanding.
I just sounds like he jealous that some of the small market teams are gettin players and yes they might be overpaying, but that is how they are going to get good players to come to those teams.
The small market teams might make mistake but they are trying to get their fans pumped and to buy some tickets.
And it just goes to show why the nhlpa had to have a minumun cap.
the Owners were the ones to make the 39mil cap, did he want it at 20mil.
And its a shame that teams that make money have to give it too teams that do not and have done a terrible job running there teams.
Maybe BC is going close to the cap, but considering there payrole was at 70 mil last year, he is just playing on the field that the small market OWNERS wanted.
Maybe he is being smart for staying put for now, and in a season or two they will be with the elite, but i really dont think so.
If I was in Nashville, Columbus, or Atlanta I would be pumped, what about Buffalo.
I dont want to insult anyone in Buffalo, but maybe he should sell to someone, or maybe the team should be moved to Canada.

ciflyer is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 04:10 AM
  #80
dolfanar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Like a midget at a urinal, I'm going to have to stay on my toes.
Posts: 2,948
vCash: 500
I think there is NO doubt that this PC was an effort to, as the latin's say, "assus protectus", but the man does make a point. I can see some of the dollars being forked over and kind of go "hmmm.... that seems a bit much" *particularly* on some of the older defensemen, but nothing in terms of salary has really jumped out at me, but the contract lengths have been absolutely startling. A 4 year deal to any player over 31 is a real dangerous piece of business, especially with a *supposed* return to a more run and gun style with the new rules changes. People often speak about how player conditioning has lead to the extending of careers, but imo an equal factor has been the overall slowing of the game which allows older slower players to remain competitive when they might otherwise be overshadowed by younger more agile players. In the "new NHL" players who were once effective may no longer be so, and players "too small" for the NHL previously may become the new standard... or not. Add to that the fact that many of these older players didn't even play last year, and you have to wonder how much player's previous track records are even worth. There is a great deal of uncertainty, more than there ever has been or likely ever will be again, so I certainly don't fault ANY team for standing back this year and taking a "wait and see" strategy.

dolfanar is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 05:24 AM
  #81
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
I am amazed at how many people think they've got this whole new environment figured out when they really don't understand the situation. It's pretty simple and makes perfect sense.

But you do, right? If you think it makes perfect sense to pay one player almost a quarter of your cap space, then good luck.

Macman is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 06:18 AM
  #82
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
But you do, right?
Well, yeah. I'm not the one wondering why teams that couldn't spend in the former CBA are spending now. You are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
If you think it makes perfect sense to pay one player almost a quarter of your cap space, then good luck.
That's a vague statement I have never made. Putting words in my mouth there.

First of all, no player can sign for more than a fifth of the cap space. Not a fourth. Second of all, how many players in this free agency have signed for the max salary?

This is really strange. You freak out about free agency for no good reason. I tell you this is making sense. You tell me I'm wrong to think it makes sense because of some non-issue you just made up.

So far I think the team that came the closest to the max is Anaheim. Niedermayer is eating up a little more than a sixth of their cap room. Wow. And from there it went downhill pretty fast.

On average, many of the good players take maybe 1/8 or 1/9 of the cap room. I fail to see how this is news. Great players that are unrestricted always make a disproportionate amount of money. Other players will make much less, as usual.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 06:59 AM
  #83
free0717
Registered User
 
free0717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Old Bridge, NJ
Posts: 2,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy
The smart GM's should hold out for the moon when high-spending teams have to adjust their rosters after arbitration awards. LA already got a third rounder for free with a ONE-YEAR big contract for a player who might actually earn it.
One thing Sather is doing for the most part is giving one year contracts. Malik got a 3 year and Weekes and Ward got 2 year deals, but no 5 year deals. Giving a 35 yo player a 5 year deal is insanity. Plus who know what will happen to the Cap next year. It may go down.

free0717 is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 07:25 AM
  #84
joechip
Registered User
 
joechip's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gainesville, Fl
Posts: 3,228
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to joechip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
The only proven thing I know that I have always seen is that success tends to breed success and that although the rules of the games have changed, I expect this trend to continue somewhat. If you wanna attract good UFAs, the best thing to do is try to be the best team possible not only financially but competitively.
And that's from where Darcy Regier was speaking. Whether you agree with him or not he's trying to build the most successful team he can with the market restraints he has. He knows he has to overspend, like McLean and Waddell, to attract players, but it's obvious he doesn't think the timing for that is right now.

If he did, he would have chased one of these guys.

His comments about the contracts being given out, I think, are geared more toward the 2nd tier ones than the top tier players...

Spacek @ $2.25
Dandenault @ $1.7
Zhamonv @ $4.0
Malik @ $2.5

Those are the ones that are going to get teams in real trouble, and tie their hands vis a vis their star players.

The Ducks have a problem now with Salei at $1.8 million, I think, or Vishnevsky at $1.1. One of those guys is going to have to log #5 minutes, or worse, they log #4 minutes and Ozo logs #5 at $2.75.

Ta,

joechip is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 08:21 AM
  #85
Cmoneyflyguy
Registered User
 
Cmoneyflyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wayne, Pa
Country: United States
Posts: 2,141
vCash: 500
Reiger is blinded right now, by the dust Clarke is leaving him in.
If there was an all star team for GM's this year, he'd be captain

Cmoneyflyguy is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 08:22 AM
  #86
Badger Bob
Registered User
 
Badger Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in my happy place
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz
Thats a very closed minded way of looking at it. Did you not read this post in this thread?
Closed-minded for having a different take on the situation that deviates from the all-knowing Vlad? Yeah, he does make many astute analyses, but too many members of this board act as though his every utterance is like something being handed down from Mt. Arafat.

Buffalo is not an unstable market, as was suggested. It is well-established, having a 35 year history. It features a loyal fan base, which even set record attendance for Rochester Amerks games, played at HSBC. (Other parent clubs picked up on the idea of scheduling AHL games in NHL arenas, during the lockout.) The owner is a billionaire, who wants to operate the organization, like a sound business venture but with commitment to the entire Western New York region. A relatively new building is in place. The Rigas business has been laid to rest, with the old man and the son being sentenced to prison. The Empire Sports Network was too dependent on Sabres hockey, and its ties with Adelphia, along with being part of premium cable packages in other parts of New York state, forced it to cease operations. Now, the games will be picked up by MSG.

It will be a transition year for the Sabres, to be sure. However, there is a decent group of prospects. (Ryan Miller looks like he'll be fine.) So, the future doesn't look too bleak. After rebuilding, the team might turn out to be in a good position, in a year or so, after the dust settles with the working within the contraints of the new CBA. Is Regier frustrated? Most probably. As other posters pointed out, his remarks really weren't that controversial under the circumstances. BTW, Teppo Numminen isn't a bad signing. He's not what he once was, but he's still a stable influence.

BTW, it wasn't "blaming" Columbus, as one of the Bluejackets' fans realized earlier. It was more expressing surprise that they've suddenly upgraded to attracting A-level talent, going from signing Luke Richardson to Adam Foote. They were able to do it. Good for them.

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 08:38 AM
  #87
Malefic74
Registered User
 
Malefic74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Halfway between Nothing and Not Much Else
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
It's because:

1-Revenue sharing

2-The players they can get are actually worth it and the system allows a good turnover for every team.

It makes no sense to pay $5M on some bum. But suddenly, it makes a lot of sense for the Oilers to pay a superstar like Pronger this amount.

I am amazed at how many people think they've got this whole new environment figured out when they really don't understand the situation. It's pretty simple and makes perfect sense.
Exactly. Under the old system $5 million got you Martin Lapointe. Under the new system $5 million gets you Chris Pronger.

No matter how you cut it, that's an improvement.

None of these contracts are being offered in a vacuum. Each team has needs and plans and these deals suit that for the most part. What does Clarke care if he's at the max this season? End of the year $11 million comes off their salary structure. Lowe had always said they were going to stockpile picks and when the new CBA came out they would use them to get some stars to build around. Guess what? That's exactly what he did.

All I know this is way more interesting when 20 teams seem willing to go out and improve themselves as opposed to the 4 team bidding wars we used to get.

Malefic74 is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 08:44 AM
  #88
dolfanar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Like a midget at a urinal, I'm going to have to stay on my toes.
Posts: 2,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malefic74
All I know this is way more interesting when 20 teams seem willing to go out and improve themselves as opposed to the 4 team bidding wars we used to get.
That's a very true statement for me personally. As much as specific deals leave me scratching my head, overall it's very nice seing only 4 or 5 teams standing pat while the the rest of the league goes out an sign guy's vs. the old system where the SAME 4 or 5 teams went out throwing crazy money around year after year while the other 25 teams stood around like dear about to be hit by a giant struck.

dolfanar is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 08:46 AM
  #89
joepeps
Registered User
 
joepeps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Italy
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolfanar
That's a very true statement for me personally. As much as specific deals leave me scratching my head, overall it's very nice seing only 4 or 5 teams standing pat while the the rest of the league goes out an sign guy's vs. the old system where the SAME 4 or 5 teams went out throwing crazy money around year after year while the other 25 teams stood around like dear about to be hit by a giant struck.

what i'm mad about is what I was saying before the lockout ended....

THE DRAFT AND HOW IT WILL BE DONE....

Pitts gets the first pick pitts signs everyone... seems fair...

they shouldn't have had a draft like I said and give it to the weakest team...

or a 1/30 shot. but w/e.... whats done is done...

joepeps is online now  
Old
08-05-2005, 08:52 AM
  #90
Takeo
Registered User
 
Takeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 18,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawksfan_27
Sour grapes is what I say. Maybe instead of having press conferences to whine about the teams signing these players, maybe they should be signing people.
Problem is Buffalo has no draw power. No one wants to play there.
The press conference was for the Numminen signing. Check your facts before you run your mouth.

Takeo is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 09:17 AM
  #91
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
Closed-minded for having a different take on the situation that deviates from the all-knowing Vlad? Yeah, he does make many astute analyses, but too many members of this board act as though his every utterance is like something being handed down from Mt. Arafat.
No, it had nothing to do with the poster, it had to do with his post. Too many people here dont seem to realize that the city has something to do with the signings.

Maybe other posters like him because he posts bright opinions...?

Cawz is online now  
Old
08-05-2005, 09:32 AM
  #92
stanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cmoneyflyguy
Reiger is blinded right now, by the dust Clarke is leaving him in.
If there was an all star team for GM's this year, he'd be captain
I'm not trying to pick on you specifically, but this is the kind of post that does nothing but build animosity. It's more complex than you insinuate. Regier either 1) hasn't been given the resources by ownership, or 2) is sitting on his hands. Either way, it's not a level playing field. Yet, that's not Clarke's problem. It's neither fair nor accurate to directly compare the two.

We have a salary cap, but Clarke’s bosses still are willing to spend more (e.g., LeClair, Amonte buyouts). Then again, nobody should take anything away from the Flyer front office. They spent up to the cap because they could. What should they do, go with AHL defensemen based on principle? They did refuse to offer Richards or Carter any incentives. Surely, all front offices had to be cheering that move, and don’t call me ‘Shirley.’

Vlad or someone already suggested that we really know a lot less about how this will all turn out this soon in the game, and I think that’s pretty accurate. I have been wrong more times with predictions and speculation over the past week than I think I have in three-odd years of HF time.

stanley is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 09:44 AM
  #93
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
 
Jaded-Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joepeps
what i'm mad about is what I was saying before the lockout ended....

THE DRAFT AND HOW IT WILL BE DONE....

Pitts gets the first pick pitts signs everyone... seems fair...

they shouldn't have had a draft like I said and give it to the weakest team...

or a 1/30 shot. but w/e.... whats done is done...

Gonchar and Roy is signing everyone? Might as well write our name on the cup now with that Roy for a $1 m. signing.

Jaded-Fan is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 10:00 AM
  #94
Jersey Fresh
Video Et Taceo
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.A.
Country: Israel
Posts: 7,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane
Yeah, and Dan McGillis is making $4.1 million, Vladimir Malakhov is making $3.6 million, Marek Malik is making $2.5 million. Those contracts are an absolute joke.
Dan McGillis is making $1.1 million per year. They reported it wrong and posted Rafalski's numbers for McGillis.

But yeah, $3.6 million is too much for Malakhov...

Jersey Fresh is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 10:05 AM
  #95
Cmoneyflyguy
Registered User
 
Cmoneyflyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wayne, Pa
Country: United States
Posts: 2,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanley
1) hasn't been given the resources by ownership,
Teams will be spending the checks that the Flyers will be sending them with revenue sharing.

Cmoneyflyguy is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 10:42 AM
  #96
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
Well, yeah. I'm not the one wondering why teams that couldn't spend in the former CBA are spending now. You are.



That's a vague statement I have never made. Putting words in my mouth there.

First of all, no player can sign for more than a fifth of the cap space. Not a fourth. Second of all, how many players in this free agency have signed for the max salary?

This is really strange. You freak out about free agency for no good reason. I tell you this is making sense. You tell me I'm wrong to think it makes sense because of some non-issue you just made up.

So far I think the team that came the closest to the max is Anaheim. Niedermayer is eating up a little more than a sixth of their cap room. Wow. And from there it went downhill pretty fast.

On average, many of the good players take maybe 1/8 or 1/9 of the cap room. I fail to see how this is news. Great players that are unrestricted always make a disproportionate amount of money. Other players will make much less, as usual.

Revenue-sharing isn't a bottomless pit and it isn't a cure-all for teams that were losing money hand over fist under the old system despite limited payrolls. Will a team like Edmonton fall into the bottom 15 payrolls and qualify for revenue-sharing this year with Pronger, Peca and maybe Kariya in the lineup? It's too early to say.

Maybe I read you wrong, but I understood you to say the cap system makes perfect sense. I disagree and I didn't make up a non-issue to make my point. Under the cap, the maximum for a salary is 20 per cent for one person. The last time I checked a fifth is "almost a quarter." No, nobody is at the limit yet, but it will happen. Maybe not this year, but maybe next if guys like Thornton enter the mix. And with guys like Niedermayer and Pronger making more than $6 mil a season now, those salaries move closer to the max when the cap falls next year as it is expected.

I don't have a problem with great players making big money. I have a problem with good or even average players make $4 and $5 mil a season. We saw it with no cap and we're seeing it again with one.

Macman is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 11:53 AM
  #97
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
Will a team like Edmonton fall into the bottom 15 payrolls and qualify for revenue-sharing this year with Pronger, Peca and maybe Kariya in the lineup? It's too early to say.
I think the key here is that Edmonton doesn't want to be. They want to be a playoff team, not a welfare recipient. Maybe they won't make the playoffs, but I commend them for trying. It sure as hell beats doing nothing, and crying "woe is me".

PecaFan is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 12:33 PM
  #98
Badger Bob
Registered User
 
Badger Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in my happy place
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz
No, it had nothing to do with the poster, it had to do with his post. Too many people here dont seem to realize that the city has something to do with the signings
Oh, OK. It's the city. Thanks for clarifying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz
Maybe other posters like him because he posts bright opinions...?
Sometimes does, sometimes he doesn't.

Yes, on occasion, it's entertaining to read posts from teenagers cooing over all of his posts, as if he's the holder of the mysteries of The Force, like an HF Boards Obi Wan Kenobi.

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 12:37 PM
  #99
HockeyCritter
Registered User
 
HockeyCritter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egil
He isn't the only GM sitting on the sidelines. Muckler in Ottawa and JFJ in Toronto have both expressed similar sentiments. And many of us here have said the same thing (including myself).
Add McPhee in Washington to the list as well -------

HockeyCritter is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 01:07 PM
  #100
stanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cmoneyflyguy
Teams will be spending the checks that the Flyers will be sending them with revenue sharing.
Listen, revenue sharing is going to be a drop in the bucket. Furthemore, it's hardly the reason Sabre ownership hasn't opened up the wallet so Regier could spend on the level where we could compare his moves to Clarke's moves. That shouldn't diminish what Clarke and his front office have done over the past few days, nor should it elevate what Regier and his front office haven't done. It merely states what is rather obvious. The amount of money ownership permits the respective franchises, even with a $39M salary cap, is different. Therefore, a comparison between Regier and Clarke should be tempered accordingly.

stanley is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:33 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.