Tim Kennedy Buyout Makes Sense
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 11:47 AM EDT
Email
PrintIf you read any of the daily links today, you know that the public sentiment regarding the Tim Kennedy buyout is one of disgust. Sabres fans, and apparently the media, are not happy that Tim Kennedy will not wear a Sabres uniform next season. How could the Sabres let hometown boy Tim Kennedy walk over what amounted to $200K? The truth is, this decision was about much more than $200K.
If this decision was about only money, the Sabres had other players they could have bought out to save money. This decision came down to not paying a guy $1 million when there are similar or better players available for cheaper. Some of those players are already part of the organization.
Since the playoffs ended, with a disappointing first round loss, people have been going gaga over Tyler Ennis and to a lesser extent Nathan Gerbe. Where do Ennis and Gerbe fit if Kennedy is still on the roster? The experiment to play Kennedy at center failed miserably and thus the Sabres were stuck with another left-winger. The same position as Ennis and Gerbe who are pushing for a roster spot and Thomas Vanek and Jochen Hecht, who are firmly entrenched in their positions.
The truth is that Kennedy didn't fit in on this roster. He was just another player that was trying to make the team. In other words, he priced himself out of Buffalo with his arbitration award. I'm sure the Sabres would have loved to keep him for depth at a lesser contract but at $1 million, he became expendable for a cheaper and possibly better model.
The bigger question is...why was Tim Kennedy so popular?
I asked this question on Twitter just a couple of weeks ago. Why is Drew Stafford an outcast to Sabres fans while Tim Kennedy is one of the more popular players on the team? I feel the reason is simple. He grew up in Buffalo and we all love to see a hometown boy live out his childhood dream. It is nice to see a hometown kid play for his hometown team, but don't we all want to see a Stanley Cup in Buffalo?
Stafford vs. Kennedy
It is virtually impossible to compare the two players but they have been linked together because of what I call the Bucky Gleason brainwash. Gleason has been promoting the departure of Connolly, Roy and Stafford for quite sometime and he has used players like Kennedy as an example. He did it again in his article today.
Through it all, Regier rationalized that the Sabres were somehow better after removing a good player -- his term for Kennedy -- because they had $666,666 to spend elsewhere, such as defense, after the $333,333 buyout. He also could have bought out Drew Stafford and saved $1.53 million to spend elsewhere, such as better defensemen.
While they could have bought out Drew Stafford and saved more money, I wonder how this would make the team better. Both Stafford and Kennedy are 24 years-old but Stafford has played four seasons in the NHL and Kennedy has played only one season. Stafford struggled last season and had his lowest offensive output as a professional with only 14 goals and 20 assists. Kennedy scored 10 goals and added 16 assists as a rookie.
Offensive numbers are not the only bit of misinformation that is given when comparing the two players. Stafford is considered a one-dimensional offensive minded player but he has never been a minus player in his four professional seasons. Tim Kennedy is considered by many to be a defensive minded two-way forward but he was a minus player in his only NHL season.
In truth, Kennedy wasn't their most important player. He had 10 goals and 26 points last season as a rookie and struggled through a brutal 19-game stretch. But he was a solid, gritty winger who played well defensively and came on strong offensively late in the season. He kept his ears open, his mouth closed and did what was asked.
Tim Kennedy was not going to be the difference between a Stanley Cup and another first round exit for the Sabres. In fact he might have spent most of the season in Portland. While TK is a good player, it was easy to see that Ennis and Gerbe probably have a higher ceiling than TK does. That made this move easy for the Sabres because TK was easy to replace.
I understand that people will continue to form their own opinion regarding this move and what it means for the future of the organization but, instead of being angry because a local kid was released, we should be excited because the Sabres took a chance. Many teams buyout contracts and they become better for it, the Sabres finally took a chance and did something they thought would make them better. After all, the amount of money he will receive from Buffalo is much less than if he stayed, but the Sabres are paying TK to play elsewhere. That says something about the Sabres decision.
112 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This post completely misses the point that the uproar was not about Kennedy, but was about ownership. That people continue to focus on the player and not the organization just shows they aren’t seeing the forest through the trees.
by Philip Kneitinger on Aug 4, 2010 11:57 AM EDT reply actions
Not necessarily
There was plenty of angst over the player, especially at first. And if Sabres fans haven’t figured out that the organization was and will always be (under Golisano/Quinn) an extremely cost-conscious organization, then they just haven’t been paying attention. Yeah, it sucks that they won’t spend the max to win, but I’ve been surprised by the uproar of hatred at Golisano after this decision. He’s always been about the $$ first.
Golisano’s stated goal was to make a profit, though a small one, each year. Its not like he wants 50M$, probably more like 5M$ a year. I realize Tom G. has like… 1.7 billion dollars, but he spend 60 million on the team or whatever and its only fair he makes some of that back (so he can build more 5M$ buildings at every college in upstate NY)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
I live near Golisano, I should really knock on his door and see if he’ll give me a job with the team.
"The three important elements of hockey are: forecheck, backcheck and paycheck." - Gil Perreault
by FloridaBuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
If Stafford was bought out would we be applauding management or criticizing? I think we can agree that most people would applaud the decision. This means it is absolutely about the player. Management did exactly what every other team in the league has done…they bought out a player they had no more use for.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ownership is Not the Problem.
There are plenty of worse owners around. Buffalo is probably lucky to have the ownership group that it does. First and foremost, we are lucky that they don’t want to move the team (not sure that the same can be said even for the great Mr. Wilson anymore). Second, the team has managed to put competitive AND entertaining squads on the ice most of the time, even given the rather strict budget constraints that it observes. Third, ticket prices have reamined relatively reasonable. For these reasons, I would say that Sabres’ ownership still cares about the fans more than many other teams’ do. Do you really want to complain about Golisano, when a quick survey of professional sports turns-up revolting individuals like Donald Sterling, George Shinn, the Wilpons, the Dolans, Jerry Moyes, and that Del Biaggio guy?
by chin8tao on Aug 4, 2010 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
As a Mets fan
I cannot express how much I appreciate an owner who lets his people do the jobs he hired them to do. Does he impose a budget? Yes, but so does every owner. His impact on day-to-day operations is nil and he trusts the intelligent people he has surrounded himself with (Darcy, Lindy, the scouting department).
Save Jenrry Mejia!
But if we want to focus on the player, lets. Drew Stafford is looked down upon because he represents the talented enigma. He’s talented but lazy, and doesn’t appear to show effort unless he wants to. Meanwhile, Tim Kennedy is propped up because he represents the hard-working player who can elevate his career through determination.
by Philip Kneitinger on Aug 4, 2010 11:59 AM EDT reply actions
I disagree…he is propped up because he is a local kid. Four years ago people were gaga over Stafford but he is old news now and people want to ship him out. I’ll take Stafford over Kennedy any day.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I don’t know…..seems to me that since his first season, Stafford has been lost out there and in the doghouse most nights. It’s the same thing as the Bills QB battle for me. I’ve seen how this story (with Stafford, and the rest of the “top 6” in my opinion) and I just yearn for something new. Ennis, Gerbe and Kennedy are something new. For me that’s certainly a part. At what point do we cut the cord on some of the players commanding big cash and not producing. 1 million or 200,000 isn’t the issue for me….it’s the production (and heart) for the price being paid.
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree, but...
Yeah Staff over Timmy is an easy decision. My only question is-why not both. Sure I probably like Ennis and maybe even Gerbe over Kennedy, but why can’t we spend the money? Of course it’s not MY money so who knows what I would be saying if it was.
Well, it used to be your money if you spent any money on tickets, shirts, jerseys, etc etc. lol
"The three important elements of hockey are: forecheck, backcheck and paycheck." - Gil Perreault
by FloridaBuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions
If you buy Stafford out, then you have to replace him with someone because the team won’t have their desired number of forwards. Besides, in my opinion, which doesn’t mean much, why buy out a player heading into his contract year?
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 4, 2010 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions
From Darcy’s perspective, it seemed that the original plan was: There’s no way he’s getting over a million so if we go for anything more than 850k we might as well go to arbitration and be stuck with whatever they give us.
Its also entirely possible that the arbitration hearing ends his career, there are only a couple teams that seem like they’d need him this year, and after this year, everyone will probably forget about him.
I think most of the rage about stafford is that he was a first round pick while kennedy was a sixth round pick. I for one would like stafford if we took him in the third round (though this means he’d be making less money too)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
I think most of the rage about stafford is that he was a first round pick while kennedy was a sixth round pick. I for one would like stafford if we took him in the third round (though this means he’d be making less money too)
This is absolutely irrelevant to winning hockey games. Sabres management is trying to build a winning team and anyone that thinks differently is missing the point.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
This is an emotional thing for many people, DO. I understand it isn’t rational but two things happened.
1. The local Buffalo boy got screwed.
2. We are reminded of our ownership situation.
It just makes you feel inferior.
I disagree about the ownership situation. The team is projected to spend almost $55 million this season and they signed a defenseman for over $2 million per season on the same day they placed Kennedy on waivers. There is definitely a commitment to winning.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
If Darcy never said the words “this team is over its projected budget” the situation wouldn’t have been such a PR nightmare. The fact that he mentioned the budget automatically makes people think this team is cheap and not willing to spend money.
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 4, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
because 55M$ just clearly isn’t enough money.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
Exactly, and the worst part is that if the team spent more money on players they would have to increase something to justify that spending. The only thing the team could really increase is ticket prices which would send the fan base into an uproar.
Talking about money and internal caps to the media is a no-win situation.
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 4, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe its irrelevant to winning hockey games, but the Sabres showed that that’s not the only concern. It’s winning hockey games on a budget. I get it. I understand it. Just don’t go around telling me you’ll do whatever possible to win and then not spend to the cap and talk about “internal caps”. In my mind, whatever possible also means spending whatever possible. Just don’t say it that way if you aren’t willing to do it. It reaks of Rigas’s “we’ll give you the tools to win it all” remark and then the lack of follow through. They are responsible to do it and the reason its not working is they haven’t made all the best choices in who to invest and who to cut bait on. They just need to stop w/ the “changes will be made” mantra every offseason and then shuffling spare parts.
Also, the Sabres did something no one else has done since the CBA. How does that make them look to free agents? There are reasons for these things, but PR wise, they are often losers. The Sabres aren’t just looking for PR victories in Buffalo, they need them in NHL circles, also.
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I may be wrong about this, but I think the shift from a 2-way to 1-way contract was significant. As DO argued, there is a lot of competition for roster spaces amongst Ennis, Gerbe, Kennedy, McCormick. Now, if Kennedy got beat out; there’s a million in cap hit and a wasted roster spot.
by Traver on Aug 4, 2010 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Yup. A one-way contract means that they have to pay him to sit in the press box if someone else outplays him. Or, worse, it means a better player stays in Portland b/c of the budget and Kennedy’s contract.
He was placed on waivers in the hopes that he would find a job. The rest of the league passed at that price. Regier tried to trade him but couldn’t find a suitor. So, with that contract the kid had zero value around the league…. repeat ZERO VALUE.
Kennedy swung for the fences, trusted his inept agent, and is now unemployed. How is this management’s problem again? I feel for the kid, but he made his decisions based on the leverage he thought he had. Regier did the same thing. We complain that management doesn’t do all it can to make this a better hockey team, then when they do there’s a hue and cry. Complaints about overpaying guys like Connolly or Stafford are irrelevant. They are in a different world than Kennedy, a player who is, literally, not worth league minimum on a one-year deal. There’s a subtle Marxist (read class warfare) undertone to this outrage that reeks of hypocrisy.
The angst over this is beyond retarded. Seriously, beyond retarded.
Ta,
by Tom Luongo on Aug 5, 2010 8:53 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
He wasn’t taken on waivers because if they take him on waivers they cannot trade him until January 1 and cannot ever send him to the minors. (well, for one full season, but his contract was only 1 year)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
by Ubiquitous on Aug 5, 2010 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
No, it doesn't
Let me counter these arguments: I’d take Kennedy over Stafford any day. Stafford doesn’t give a s*it, doesn’t hit and represents every problem wrong with Buffalo that was clearly evidenced in the Bruins series. Give me a guy who at least seems alive and gives you effort night in and night out and has showed some offensive touch late in the year. Also we’ve seen Stafford’s ceiling but we’ve yet to see Kennedy’s. Truth be told if you told me one of these four would be scratched next year: KENNEDY, GERBE, ENNIS and STAFFORD, I’d scratch Stafford. And as for ripping Gleason for the negative Stafford backlash he’s only saying what anyone who actually watches this team is thinking
Also it’s not like they’re going to use the saved money on free agents. Regier says they’re at their budget max now. Really it was a difference of 666K cash in Golisano’s pockets. We could’ve kept that money and kept ayoung player
by mariangaborik10 on Aug 4, 2010 12:14 PM EDT reply actions
If it was about money there were other players that could have been bought out. This was a hockey decision based on finances. Kennedy was probably going to be a healthy scratch or spend some time in the minors this season, the team did not want to pay $1 million for an extra forward.
And as for ripping Gleason for the negative Stafford backlash he’s only saying what anyone who actually watches this team is thinking
Not everyone. I watch every Sabres game and I would take Stafford over Kennedy any day. The difference is that I want talented players on my team and I don’t care where they were born.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I also don’t think it was about money and instead it was about it being a one-way contract and not a two-way.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
I agree
They didn’t want to pay him $1 million to play in Portland this season. They feel that Gerbe and Ennis were going to push for roster spots and someone was going to go to Portland. If that had been Kennedy, they still would have had to pay him $1 million and they obviously weren’t willing to do that.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
No, I mean was the contract awarded by the arbiter a one way contract? In which case they wouldn’t be able to simply send him to Portland without him clearing waivers: a real headache.
They wouldn’t have been able to send him down anyway. He played too many games. He would have to clear waivers regardless of a one-way or two-way contract. A two-way contract would pay him less money in Portland, the current contract would not.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
Ohhhhhh, that’s how it works? Well, even then, I can see how it would be a signifcant point of conflict for his contract.
I’m confused now though. Under which cases can a player be sent to and from Portland without waivers?
It is based on a couple of different factors. I believe age is involved, I know that any player not on their entry-level contract has to clear waivers and games played is another factor. Capgeek has a great waiver calculator that will help you look up any player.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
They also couldn’t wait and see because they only had two days after the arbitration hearing to make any buyouts.
Capgeek has the contract as one way, and im going to believe this because it’s not surprising.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
They also couldn’t wait and see because they only had two days after the arbitration hearing to make any buyouts.
There was a buyout deadline too? If that’s true, and you couple that with:
1. The competition for Kennedy’s roster spot
2. The fact they would be paying him $1m to play in Portland if he lost out.
Then this really does make a lot of sense.
yes, normally you only are allowed to do buyouts from June 15-30, but you get a special 2-day period after arbitration rewards (normally to clear space for the newly awarded contract)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
I’m looking for clarification on that rule because I thought that was the case as well but Brendan Witt was just bought out recently.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
If that is indeed the rule, and I believe it is, the Sabres could not have bought out Stafford at this time which would mean that only TK could have been bought out.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
you can buy anyone out during this period (but no more than 3 players per year outside of June 15-30), provided that they do not make less than 1M$.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
During which period? Now I’m confused again.
Can’t wait to try to explain this to someone freaking about the whole situation. lol
The two-day special buyout period after an arbitration reward.
The CBA is a good read, though very verbose.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
http://www.nhl.com/cba/2005-CBA.pdf
In all its confusing glory
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 4, 2010 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
My first reaction to all this was that I was pissed to see TK go, being young, local talent and all. Then I listened to Darcy’s reasoning, and think it may have been the right move for the team. Use the money to strengthen defense and call up Ennis, since he plays a similar style and is also a great young player (AHL ROY/All-Star MVP – and almost a point-per-game player).
As for the internal budget, I hate that we are a small-market team and can’t dish out the big bucks, but I understand it. More money to the players would mean higher ticket prices. This doesn’t matter to me personally, since I’ve moved from the area (the only games I’ll get to this year will be in ATL/maybe CAR) but I think they are doing right by the fans not increasing prices in a Capitals-esque manner.
So it sucks to see Timmy go, but it may be best for both parties to not have him playing in Portland, so I wish him well wherever he goes.
by The Burl 8 on Aug 4, 2010 1:17 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Internal Cap
David,
Correct me if I wrong, but my understanding is that many teams are not spending to the cap this year.
I would assume that, but I don’t think that we can actually confirm that.
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 4, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
James Mirtle: Four teams have expressed interest in former Sabres forward Tim Kennedy. Expect him to sign somewhere in the relatively near future.
Tampa’s on this list, but other than them who knows…
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
Probably Atlanta and the Islander are on the list.
two teams that likely have to spend some to reach the cap-floor (or not to be in danger of falling to it).
Save Jenrry Mejia!
Qualifying offer vs. award
Didn’t Darcy say the qualifying offer was two-way? He did say that, I heard him. Did they at some point change the offer to not be a two way offer? If not, it was probably their intention all along to ship him back to Portland. The award, I’m assuming (please correct me if I am), was not a two way contract and that would have forced them to pay him a million bucks even if they moved him down, especially since it made it so they couldn’t trade him until January. Darcy did say the difference was about $700,000, and that would make sense if he was comparing the AHL pay level to the million. Management absolutely did the right thing. If you want to make this about management then it should probably go something like “Excellent job! We have a smart GM willing to make the tough choices fans don’t always like.”
I don’t know what all the fuss over Stafford is. You don’t waive a player with a lot of potential in a contract year. That would change the above management speak to: “YOU @^$&*(%^ IDIOTS!”
by clownfat on Aug 4, 2010 2:13 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
No PT
Plain and simple with the depth up top, Kennedy would not have been a regular on this team. The deal he was awarded was 1-way and sending him down to the AHL would have required him clearing waivers.
The Sabres made a very wise business decision to cut ties with a clearly overpriced contract rather than paying it to have him sit in the press box.
Kennedy’s development is pretty much complete, if not already. He was given a year audition at the NHL level and didn’t show much other than some grit in front of the net and maybe some plus hands. Those 10 goals and 26 points are probably all you’ll get from him especially on line 3 or 4 and no power play time. There’s no future at Center and his lack of physical size is severely limiting. He’s a poor man’s gerbe in essence. Why employ both when your roster is hurting for size as it is?
Aside from paying for his heart and birth location that $1m would have been flushed down the toilet.
Harsh but shrewd move in my eyes.
by killabstingz on Aug 4, 2010 2:23 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
We were all clambering for Stafford to be signed after his 45 point 08-09 season. He regresses and disappears in 09-10 and everyone is calling for him to disappear from the roster. I can only imagine what the reaction will be when the Sabres decide to not sign Stafford after the 10-11 season and he has a break out year.
Oh, the pendulum of fandom..
I would love to see more out of Stafford, but IMO one bad season does not make him a bad player that needs to be dumped. He’ll be 25 this season and we really haven’t seen everything he has to offer. He can be a highlight reel player at times and who knows maybe he finally wakes up and realizes that he’s in the NHL, living a dream of being a pro athlete, and finally reaches his potential.
Swing Pendulum, Swing.
"The three important elements of hockey are: forecheck, backcheck and paycheck." - Gil Perreault
I’d hate to see what would happen if Miller or Myers have a rough year. Fans (esp. in Buffalo) never seem to cut the players a break. I still don’t understand the hatred of Connolly, he is one of our top performers and by far the most skilled. Roy, Stafford, Hecht, and Pommer are great players as well, and entitled to have off-years. Sure they are not very physical, but no one was expecting them to be when they were signed. The other player I still can’t understand the hatred for is Afiogenov. He was a superstar forward for multiple seasons, and then he hits one stretch of nagging injuries (its hockey people, injuries are going to happen) and he is relegated to the bottom lines. He was obviously not going to produce on a line with Mair and Peters, yet people expected him to. I don’t get it, but now he will re-establish himself as a skilled and speedy forward for some other team. There is no fan loyalty to players in Buffalo, just constant spacegoating and backstabbing. One year we love a player, the next year he’s the cause of all our problems. Same goes for Ruff and sometimes even Regier. I wonder if other fan bases are this negative, or if its a product of constant suffering through Buffalo sports…
by lassathrax on Aug 4, 2010 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It is the Bucky Gleason brainwashing. That is why good players are always run out of town by the fans. I think Bucky hates Connolly and Roy because they are not Drury and Briere, there is no other good explanation. Bucky will forever love those two and nothing will ever be good enough anymore.
If the Sabres ever win a cup I’m sure Bucky will write a story about how it would have happened sooner if Drury and Briere were still here.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
I think i can say with almost absolute certainity that over the last three years Roy+Connolly have more points than Drury+Briere. Oh, they also cost half as much, and are younger.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
Rofl its actually true!
Last 3 Seasons:
Old:
Briere: 150
Drury: 146
New:
Roy: 220
Connolly: 152
QED. I’m willing to give Drury a bit of leeway because the rangers never score any goals… but still…
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
How about playoffs????
Not that playoff production has anything to do with the discussion, as it is unreasonable to expect the Sabres to be a Cup contender as constituted. Here are the numbers for the last 3 seasons……
Briere 50 (30 last year)
Drury 7
Roy 2
Connolly 1
I guess its just the media and the fans fault for this……
by Rock Pile 494 on Aug 4, 2010 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Those numbers cannot be compared because Roy and Connolly played 6 games each in the playoffs over the past 3 years while Briere played 46 and Drury played 16. Plus, as in the playoffs you do not play similiar teams, its much harder to compensate for playing say, washington or pittsburgh (which inflates your point totals though not your +/-) compared to a montreal or boston.
Plus, this would be where Hawerchuk would appear and type SMALL SAMPLE SIZE in big letters.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
You’re right, but let’s not downplay Briere’s post-season record. He’s been money in the playoffs now for multiple teams, including us. Connolly and Roy still haven’t proven they can produce close to what Briere has done in the playoffs. I don’t mind them, ultimately, and wouldn’t mind upgrades, but Briere’s been lights-out come playoff-time.
I’d have him back here in a minute. If there’s any mistake of Regier’s to lament, it’s not getting this guy signed. I was wrong then, and so was everyone else who preferred Drury. I wonder if Larry Quinn is man enough to admit he was wrong as well.
Ta,
I agree entirely, though i can’t really disagree with Darcy’s prediction that he was going to attract more money than the sabres could pay in free agency, he still should have tried to do something to keep him.
I guess none of us realized that Drury might want to retire closer to home. Ah, hindsight.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
Of course they can be compared, but you need not make excuses to why the comparison isn’t fair to Roy and Connolly. all four are paid to score and win games, some just do it better than others. What a team is willing to pay and the moves they make is definitely a different story.
Yes 6 games is a small sample size and its sad that is all we have been given for the past three years. But to make it a fair comparison Roy or Connolly would need to play 3x or 6x times the games as Briere to match his production.
Briere by the way put up 30 against NJ, Bos (10 pts against the team that made the Sabres disappear), Mtl, and Chi
But like I said playoff production has nothing to do with it when talking about the Sabres, we had a good run and I’m sure we’ll have another. I am just one of the opinion that it is not this group that will do it and its not because Bucky said so either.
by Rock Pile 494 on Aug 6, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
.
But to make it a fair comparison Roy or Connolly would need to play 3x or 6x times the games as Briere to match his production.
Um, no. That doesn’t make it a fair comparison because your still basing Roy and Connolly’s numbers of of a SSS.
Save Jenrry Mejia!
You know why? Because Connolly and Roy seem to come up small in big moments…..and I haven’t read Bucky Gleason in years so I’m not a part of the brainwashing…….
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
2006 Tim Connolly disagrees with this comment. Well, prior to getting destroyed by a random Senators jerk (Peter Schaefer)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
Four years ago? That is my point. Weren’t there some major changes around him made after that season pushing him into a role with more pressure? Wonder if the two things are related.
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I imagine failing under pressure has more to do with Zdeno Chara than any of those reasons.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
Chara is 4 season worth of underachieving/injury? For all of the top 6 or just Connolly? The Sabres shouldn’t have to hope for their 3rd and 4th liners to score big goals in the playoffs, they should have a sense that their top 6 will do it, not question when they actually will do it. This team hasn’t dealt well w/ adversity in 4 years and that’s b/c the “top 6” is looking to others to step up instead of doing it themselves.
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 4, 2010 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Hal Gill, who isn’t nearly as good as chara, shut down Ovechkin and Crosby pretty well in consecutive series.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
OK, but Crosby has a history of coming up big in big moments, so I’m not sure about that comparison…….
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 5, 2010 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think its just that, I think both are seen as players that are lazy and not willing to be physical. Most Buffalo fans would be happy to see a team full of Mike Griers that can score.
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 4, 2010 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Hell yeah! Who doesn’t want a team full of Mike Griers, scoring or not? I’d also like to see an entire team of Paul Guastads. Really, any team made up of a single player, assuming they are all clones would be pretty interesting to watch. Imagine the chemistry!
by clownfat on Aug 4, 2010 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Daniel Briere is more lazy than Connolly or Roy could ever imagine being and yet he is loved by Sabres fans because of BGBW (Bucky Gleason Brain Washing).
You are right that most Sabres fans would be happy with a team full of Mike Griers but they would lose and don’t forget that it was a lazy play by Grier that allowed Satan to score in double overtime.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
I don’t care if you think I am BGBW or not but 48 was awesome on this team. Perhaps he had the complimentary players like a young 29 but you can’t take away his two lights out seasons during the ECF runs.
This organization will always have an internal cap and they made the move to fall within that cap. We have a lot of the same player on this team, buying out one of them isn’t going to make much of a difference.
The population of Pominville keeps rising!
by Blackcapricorn on Aug 4, 2010 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, I haven’t read Bucky Gleason in about 5 years and I’ve run out of patience for Stafford and Connolly. So…..
by bluecollarbuffalo on Aug 5, 2010 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Just because you haven't personally read the guy
doesn’t mean you haven’t fallen into the same over-arching MSM message that a disproportional group of fans share.
Save Jenrry Mejia!
Amen, finally someone said something positive about Connolly, Pommer and Roy. They’re great players, yet our fan base feel it necessary to consistently knock these star players! What you said is exactly how I feel and how any logical Sabres fan should feel.
I know, its awful. If I were a professional hockey player I would not want to play for the Sabres. The fans and media are brutally unforgiving, and let’s face it, its not like the city has many selling points in general (hell, I got out when I could). Not to mention ownership is concerned more with turning profits than building a champion. And as much as I respect Ruff, he can be very bone-headed and once you’re in that doghouse, good luck ever getting out.
In regards to Lindy's dog-house
the guys who never get out, usually got a lot of chances before ever finding themselves on their (see one Afinogenov, Maxim and his seeming refusal to play 2-way hockey).
Save Jenrry Mejia!
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, especially the part about spacegoating. :)
In all seriousness I do actually agree with what you are saying, it made me sort of angry when the fans were booing Afinogenov in his first game back as a Thrasher. It isn’t like he wanted to leave or left for more money or something. You don’t boo that. I was happy when he scored. I’ll be happy each time he scores against the Sabres for that booing. Those fans deserve it.
Thank you
I’m so glad someone has had the guts to write this article. Kennedy played hard this year, but he clearly is not the player that Ennis is. We don’t need another smallish forward with mediocre skills. I don’t care where he grew up.
What an awful argument
Terrible article. Stafford v. Kennedy as your model of comparison?? A guy who has not fulfilled potential (come on, did you see his reaction after he scored his first after that 10+ game goaless streak. Even he knew he had it bad last year) compared to a rookie who’s potential seemed to get better as the season went on…you’ve got to be kidding me. A 1st round draft pick v. a 6th round pick? A guy who LOOKED better on the Roy-Vanek line than Stafford did!!!!! ARE you kidding me????
Look, I’m not going to begin name-calling, but I am going to assume you already forgot watching the Sabres last season. As for being a minus player, he played with the checking/shutdown line most of last year. With Mike Grier (great offensive threat that guy is).
This isn’t just an opinion I don’t agree with. These are facts twisted and mangled to fit into your little dream world….in fact…this post read a lot like Bucky Gleason to me
Let me give you some facts
Drew Stafford
Age 21 – 41GP – 13G-14A-27P +5
Age 22 – 64GP – 16G-22A-38P +3
Age 23 – 79GP – 20G-25A-45P +3
Age 24 – 71GP – 14G-20A-34P +4
Tim Kennedy
Age 21 – 42GP-20G-23A-43P (Michigan State – NCAA)
Age 22 – 73GP-18G-49A-67P -2 (Portland Pirates – AHL)
Age 23 – 78GP-10G-16A-26P -3
I keep hearing the argument that Kennedy is a good defensive forward and yet he is a minus player in his only two professional seasons. Stafford has never been a minus player in his four year NHL career.
Kennedy is looked upon as being feisty and Stafford is considered to be soft. Stafford has one fight in each of his NHL seasons, giving him four career fights. Tim Kennedy has zero fights in his short NHL career.
Drew Stafford was scratched for most of the playoffs and Kennedy was bullied off the puck by 42 year-old Mark Recchi.
I can list facts all night but the bottom line is that Tim Kennedy is an average player that can be replaced by just about anyone, Drew Stafford is an underachieving first round draft pick. If given the choice I pick the underachieving first round pick and hope he has a breakout season because I know I can replace Mr. Average.
D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by David Oleksy on Aug 4, 2010 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
But this isn't about Stafford v. Kennedy
If given a choice, I’d choose Kennedy over Stafford. But that’s an argument we could battle back and forth about. If you want to argue that Kennedy’s release gives opportunity to Gerbe and Ennis, I disagree with that. Hecht-Connolly-Pomminville and Roy-Vanek-Whoever are staple lines for next year. With Cody McCormick, Grier, Kaleta, Niedermayer, and the Goose signed already through next season, I’m assuming Nidermayer was brought on to be on our third (shutdown) line. Ennis or Gerbe really fit on that? Okay so that line is Grier-Niedermayer-Kaleta. Do either benefit playing on a fourth energy line? I’m just a realist here…I love Ennis like any fan but Niedermayers signing and Staffords retention almost mean a demotion to Portland for both….until injury brings Ennis up.
Fights don’t equal fiesty. There is no stat for how often Kennedy was either the agitator being agitated after the whistle. There is no stat for board play, and Kennedy’s offensive production with viable offensive weapons can not be measured throughout an 82 game season.
By losing Kennedy are we saying we’re not challenging for the Cup? Definitely not. As an armchair GM he wouldn’t be in my longterm plans on who I’d build my team around. Does announcing that it was a budget decision over 200,000 look good for Darcys reputation among future free agents: definitely not.
I agree with Bucky that even at 1mil and in Portland at least with Kennedy within the organization we’d have some depth in the forward position. Adam and Tropp will have to make quantum leaps, and Kassian did NOT look even CLOSE to being ready to compete in teh NHL at prospect camp.
You are automatically assuming that Kennedy was going to make the team this year over Ennis and Gerbe and by the signals of this move, that obviously wasn’t the case. Spending $1 million on a player in Portland is an absolute waste.
Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere
by Zachary Zielonka on Aug 5, 2010 7:57 AM EDT up reply actions
“Stafford v. Kennedy as your model of comparison?”
Yes, because his article was in part a response to Bucky Gleason’s article.
“he played with the checking/shutdown line most of last year”
If he fit on an NHL scoring line; I’d trust in Lindy to make that determination. Fact is, that is what TK is: an undersized, checking line-winger with a clearly limited offensive upside.
“These are facts twisted and mangled to fit into your little dream world”
DO took the time to write out a thought-out article which challenges the knee-jerk reaction that everyone else had.
You responded with a poorly written rant.
Look closer than those stats
does 1 fight a year make you fiesty?
Drew Staffords salary would’ve been 2.4X that of Kennedy’s this season…so what about the production of last season?
26 points rookier season on 3rd/4th line v. 34 on the second line
And any idiot knows that +/- is one of the most inconsistent/unreliable stats to use to determine defensive ability. Max Afinogenov was a +19 in 2006. That must mean he’s a much better defender than Stafford and Kennedy put together!!!!!
And in Lindy you trust? Why was Tim playing in the playoffs and Stafford scratch for the majority of it?
You want me to admit that Kennedy gone is a big deal? Nah, not really. I’ll miss him but DO is right, he’s replaceable. Not much cheaper…but replaceable. Staffords 1.9 mil cap hit with Tyler Ennis….now…that’s replaceable at a cheap, cheap cost
Stafford was still hurt from that concussion he was playing through that. stafford has big play ability and he has a very friendly contract. everyone is entitled a bad season. kennedy is very average and undersized. i like kennedy and think we should have kept him for this season but guess not. kennedy can play on a checking line and has average offensive abilities to be a good fill in for a scoring line. if ennis makes the team he will most likely be on the connolly pomminville line (in my opinion). id imagine were not going to roll 4 lines as much as we have done in the past if were only keeping 20 skaters on a roster. lines would look
vanek roy stafford leopold meyers
ennis connolly pomminville morrisonn rivet
hect neidemeyer greer sekera montador
mccormick gaustad kaleta butler
if the lines wind up like this, where do you see TK fitting in at? over hect? over stafford? i just dont see it. also if we have injuries hect or ennis could always step up a line and kaleta or mccormick could fill in on the checking line.
time to ring that championship bell
‘26 points rookier season on 3rd/4th line v. 34 on the second line’
Fact: Kennedy did not spend whole year on 3rd/4th line nor did Stafford spend the whole year on the 1st second.
And any idiot knows that +/- is one of the most inconsistent/unreliable stats to use to determine defensive ability. Max Afinogenov was a +19 in 2006. That must mean he’s a much better defender than Stafford and Kennedy put together!!!!!
This argument goes back for years and years. Of course pulling up fino’s numbers looks like it says something but it’s out of context.
And in Lindy you trust? Why was Tim playing in the playoffs and Stafford scratch for the majority of it?
Concussion?
“Staffords 1.9 mil cap hit with Tyler Ennis….now…that’s replaceable at a cheap, cheap cost”
It would cost twice as much to buy Stafford out. Besides, he’s in a contract year and sorely needs to redeem himself. According to Dave Davis, Stafford has spend the offseason training with Kyle Okposo and Zach Parise – not bad company.
“he’s replaceable. Not much cheaper…but replaceable”
Tim Kennedy is totally replaceable, I agree. And the replacements are already on the roster! Neidermayer, Gerbe, Ennis, McCormick.
Drew Stafford? Sure, you could throw him out and replace him with Ennis. But Stafford has talent and size. A big scoring forward, not easy to replace. And it’s a contract year!
I thought Kennedy was really good for the Sabres as a rookie. I am actually more impressed at Kennedy’s body of work over a year than I was at the short- term play of Ennis. He was not a huge producer on offense, but he was reasonable from the circle for a guy who was unaccustomed to the center position. I thought his defense was as good as most of our undersized forwards, and I loved his willingness to compete. I thought he played bigger than his size, and if more guys did that they could have got out of the first round. My opinion has nothing to do with him being from Buffalo either. Never even been there myself.
What is the maximum number of one-way players you can hold on your roster? I think Kennedy’s arbitration hearing forcing the Sabres into a one-way contract is the real motivation underlying the buyout, because we all know the extra $200,000 would be no big deal if he was two-way. Darcy obviously wanted to sign 2 FA defensemen to replace Hank and Toni, and when he signed Niedermayer he may have been expecting TK to stay in a two-way contract. Once TK’s contract became forced one-way, someone had to go or Darcy would have to give up on signing a second FA defenseman (Morrisonn). In light of this I think the moves make perfect sense, and the outrage is a bit absurd.
Excuse me, I got bored.
Derek Roy – 26G, 43A, 69Points, +9 4.0mil
Vincent Lecavalier – 24G, 46A, 70Points, -16 7.7mil
ROY is a BARGAIN! lol
"The three important elements of hockey are: forecheck, backcheck and paycheck." - Gil Perreault
by FloridaBuffalo on Aug 5, 2010 5:24 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
What is a "buyout"?
I know what it means outside of hockey, but what does it mean here?
He who controls the puck controls the buck.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Wild prospect Justin Fontaine suspended by team for using gay slur on Twitter
- Monday’s Three Stars: Staal leads Hurricanes; Pavelski’s four-point night
- Capitals’ Holtby rocked from the red line, juggles shot into own net (Video)
- Report: Rick Nash on the trading block; are the Rangers ready to pounce?
- Flyers’ Zac Rinaldo suspended two games for high hit, being Zac Rinaldo
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
