Player Discussion Jordan Greenway, LW, Extended 2-years, $4M AAV, 5-team NTC

[Zman5778]

With his reputation as a floater

That reputation should be pretty well put to bed by now. Sure he has a game or two that he's quiet......but he's a more consistent player than he was in Minnesota.

 

[buffalowing88]

Seems to me like Greenway and McLeod have formed a pretty solid pair when they've played together.....which makes some sense given that their skills are quite complementary.

Who's the other winger if that's the line we go with? I think since the season is off the rails, we try putting a Peterka or a Tuch on a line with them and just see what meshes.

 

[TheBarnIsElectric]

Happy to see they were able to sign Greenway for a couple more years. What he brings, we need. 2 years is perfect.

 

[Zman5778]

Who's the other winger if that's the line we go with? I think since the season is off the rails, we try putting a Peterka or a Tuch on a line with them and just see what meshes.

Benson getting an extended run with those two might be nice.

 

[Fezzy126]

People have their own motivations - maybe he likes the challenge. Maybe there is a relationship.

I'm sure opportunity and role played a big factor too. He's a solid middle 6 player here because of the heavy game he brings and how scarce that skillset is with the current players, and he also gets time on the top line line when we need to juggle the lines.

How many other clubs are offering that type of role? He'd most likely be battling for a spot in the bottom 6, if not the 4th line.

 

[TheMistyStranger]

I'm sure opportunity and role played a big factor too. He's a solid middle 6 player here because of the heavy game he brings and how scarce that skillset is with the current players, and he also gets time on the top line line when we need to juggle the lines.

How many other clubs are offering that type of role? He'd most likely be battling for a spot in the bottom 6, if not the 4th line.

I actually really liked the Greenway - Tage - Tuch line, at least on paper. I would have given them more time to gel.

 

[Krieger Bot]

Pleased with this. I figured he would get around $4m. I suspect that's going to be the going rate for good middle 6 forwards in the rising cap world. A bit surprised it's only for 2 years. I thought Greenway might want a little more financial stability. But I get it. This gives him the flexibility to leave if: (1) things stay bad here, or (2) the cap explodes and he wants to cash in. Plus, it gives us the flexibility to walk away if we have enough young forwards ready to go.

 

[Jim Bob]

Keeping Greenway is better than losing him and trying to replace him, IMO.

I do not want to live in a world where Kevyn Adams has to go out in FA or trade and replace a guy like Greenway. If that were the case, we probably have to see Rosen trying to replace him in the lineup.

No thanks.

Adults > kids

 

[joshjull]

I'm not too concerned, I can rationalize out the Buffalo tax they are constantly paying. But at some point they need someone at market value (or better).

I like Greenway as a defensive player and PKer. The nights when he's moving people around like a bulldozer are great - his game against the Rangers for example. The sleepy nights seem fewer and far between but they're there. For a team that is bulging with small players who don't go into traffic and don't engage in battles, I'm fine with keeping him around.

I’m not sure how they’re going to get deals like that in their current situation unless they gamble on unproven players. They did that with Tage, Cozens, UPL, Power and Sammy. Tage is about the only one I would say fits the bolded.

Worrying about value deals seems on par with worrying about overpaying in trades. We desperately need players and we’re not in a position to dictate very favorable terms. I could care less if we do both if it leads to a winning team.

I also think this forum has repeatedly underestimated possible contracts leading to misguided anger over deals. Dahlin being the most recent example. Add in the cap going up a lot and I imagine posters will be repeatedly up in arms about various contracts.

EDIT: I wanted to add, the various contract predicting models are interesting tools. But much of their data comes from a flat cap era. I don’t think they’re capable of factoring in the upcoming cap jump’s impact on contracts. Plus its predictions are happening in a vacuum, as in each teams circumstances or players situation isn’t factored in. The contracts have factors that don’t fit into an equation.

Leaning into it as the end all be all of what contracts should be seems misguided to me. Not saying you do that. But it seems like many use those numbers as if they are the final word on contracts. Its shouldn’t be but it’s a good jumping off point.

 

[BFLO]

It's fine. He's a bog standard NHL bottom 6er. We're overpaying him a little, but that comes with the territory.

What's bad is that this is what we've been reduced to. No other fan base would be this excited about signing an average 3rd/4th liner, who plays 60ish games a season, to $4m aav x 2 years.

It's embarrassing that we're this excited for something so inconsequential. But that's what Terry/Kevyn have done this once proud franchise.

 

[Chainshot]

I’m not sure how they’re going to get deals like that in their current situation unless they gamble on unproven players. They did that with Tage, Cozens, UPL, Power and Sammy. Tage is about the only one I would say fits the bolded.

Worrying about value deals seems on par with worrying about overpaying in trades. We desperately need players and we’re not in a position to dictate very favorable terms. I could care less if we do both if it leads to a winning team.

I also think this forum has repeatedly underestimated possible contracts leading to misguided anger over deals. Dahlin being the most recent example. Add in the cap going up a lot and I imagine posters will be repeatedly up in arms about various contracts.

EDIT: I wanted to add, the various contract predicting models are interesting tools. But much of their data comes from a flat cap era. I don’t think they’re capable of factoring in the upcoming cap jump’s impact on contracts. Plus its predictions are happening in a vacuum, as in each teams circumstances or players situation isn’t factored in. The contracts have factors that don’t fit into an equation.

Leaning into it as the end all be all of what contracts should be seems misguided to me. Not saying you do that. But it seems like many use those numbers as if they are the final word on contracts. Its shouldn’t be but it’s a good jumping off point.

AFP pointedly states their factoring in the announced cap increases. As for the rest, I did say it's a minor quibble --- nothing earth shaking or really anything more than just "eh, it would've been nice".

 

[kirby11]

Glad to keep him around at a fairly reasonable price, especially as one of three or four forwards total that aren't complete trainwrecks in their own end