Robviously

My fantasy is still to trade Andrej Sekera for Patrik Berglund. They would probably want more than Sekera for Berglund though, so I'm willing to do Sekera and Stafford for Berglund and something. What would that something be? Not sure. I'd start by asking for Ty Rattie (which they would laugh at) and then let them negotiate down to something else. Then I'd go bananas and roll these lines: Vanek-Berglund-Adam Grigorenko-Ennis-Foligno Ott-Hodgson-Pominville with a fourth line of McCormick-Leino-Kaleta and John Scott somewhere Vanek-Berglund-Adam: We got a glimpse of what Vanek could do with a big center last year with Adam and it was really impressive. This line would take that to the next level. Berglund is the big offensive center we wish Adam was. Adam isn't a center anymore but he's still a big forward and we know he played well with Vanek before. I'd like to see Vanek finally play on a 'big' line, I'm madly in love with Patrik Berglund, and I still think Adam has a future (and this way we get to find out). Grigorenko-Ennis-Foligno: The magic line from last year except now we'd be asking Grigorenko to be the guy who puts the puck in the net instead of Stafford. Ott-Hodgson-Pominville: Hogdson centers our captain and best player from last year (Pomminsteinula) with Ott doing for this line what Foligno does for his line. Fourth line: Leino and a bunch of guys who punch other guys in the head. I sorta wish it was just the three guys who punch guys though. Will this team win? I don't know -- maybe. Will they be fun to watch? Yes (for me). We're not winning the Stanley Cup this year anyway so this is a good way to check out what we have in Adam and Grigorenko. Adding Berglund to Hodgson and Ennis gives us our best set of centers since pre-Black Sunday, and lets us develop Grigorenko and Girgensons a little slower (on the wing and in the AHL, respectively). Plus it's the fastest way to see a Sabres line of offensive forwards who are all 6'2" and taller (the Berglund one) and I can't remember the last time we tried that.

When he had 11 points in the last 10 games? That's an interesting way to go through life. "I don't care why!" 2011. 2012. Because they finished the season healthy. See above. You're either injured or you're not. I can't wrap my mind around this goofy notion that being injured and being productive with an injury are just a choice some athletes make. Pominville suffered a concussion and was off his game for most of 2010-2011; that was just the reality of the situation. Miller's concussion didn't help his game this year either. Are people questioning Ennis' heart or dedication because he missed time this past year? Or Sydney Crosby's for that matter?

We're actually splitting hairs about Thomas Vanek scoring goals in the wrong periods now. This is actually happening.

Oh, great, we're still doing this. Let's dive in! 1. He'd already assisted on our first goal of Game 2. We'd won Game 1 and were leading Game 2 (thanks, in part, to Vanek) when they took him out. Everything went downhill after that. He was played great in the limited time he had on the ice (and everyone should remember this because much of the talk leading up to the playoffs that year was how guys like Vanek, Pominville, Myers etc. would perform in the first playoff series post-Black Sunday). 2. Oh, he scored his goals in the wrong period of each game of the series. So five goals in seven games isn't as impressive if the goals gave us the lead early in the game. I'll give you points for creativity for this one, although I guess if a guy is scoring 5 goals in a 7 game stretch, I'm cool with him scoring those goals in whatever periods he wants. 3. You get no creativity for this point though. You can't blame the only two guys not the team doing anything right for the team's lousy record. By this terrible logic, Rick Nash sucks because Columbus sucks and Bobby Ryan sucks because Anaheim sucks. And even if you're saying they're "not but problem, but not the solution either", please try to remember that TWO PLAYERS are rarely the solution to a bad hockey team. Most bad teams have two good players. That doesn't mean you crap on their accomplishments because the team sucked. If anything, wouldn't you build around the guys who aren't the problem? Thrilling as always. We're due for someone to bitch about his salary so maybe we can get into that next.

This would be very entertaining but I think the Sabres should keep GIrgensons in the AHL for the entire year (barring a huge set of injuries) and let him play 20 minutes a game, including PP and PK time. Even if he's physically ready for the NHL (which I don't think is 100% anyway), a full year in the AHL would do a lot more for him than 9 minutes a night in the NHL. Plus I think USHL to NHL is a ridiculous leap. Pominville played over 200 AHL games before becoming a regular in Buffalo and I think he really benefitted from it. He's one of the few guys on the team I have any confidence in.

I think it's pretty clear by now how I'm going to respond, but we can keep doing this in every thread forever if that's what you want. The turning point in the Boston series was Vanek getting taken out. If you're questioning a guy's leadership or heart, maybe look at how the team imploded without him. He was playing great until he was injured that series (and, no, I really don't think that slash was some crazy accident). And thank you for acknowledging that he put up "some numbers" against Philly. Most players would deserve accolades for scoring 5 goals in a 7 game stretch but I suppose "some numbers" is the closest you can get to complimenting the guy. As for periods 2 and 3 of Game 7 of that series, who was left to play by then? Pominville, Connolly, and Kaleta were all injured and out by then and Roy returned to the lineup after being gone for months so that he could skate on one leg. Our other centers were Gaustad, Niedermayer, Boyes (?), Hecht. Oh well, more facts that don't support the narrative and must be exluded. Again. Do Pominville and Vanek get any credit for carrying the team the first half of last year? You keep taking blanket shots at the guys wearing letters but the 'C' and one of the 'A's were the only guys getting anything done for about the first 40 games. Maybe those two weren't the problem.

The bold part at the bottom is a joke, right? How long until you decide to crop dust a few more threads with your version of what's wrong with Vanek? We're only a few days removed from you implying that his injuries didn't matter because they didn't require surgery (in the "Whole Mess of Stuff" thread) and that his wearing the 'A' was "inexplicable" (because he apparently doesn't care or get things done). You couldn't even resist in this reply when you said "Vanek disappearing for the 2nd half of the season." REALLY? He didn't just "disappear"; he was injured. Everyone could see it at the time and we got confirmation after the season ended. There's no mystery here. This is like saying Miller "disappeared" after the Lucic hit. Or like saying Pominville "disappeared" early in the 2010-2011 season (after his concussion). You use a vague term to pretend his injuries weren't a factor. And if you're going to reference our last two playoff appearances, you should note that Vanek played well in both. He had 5 goals in 7 games against Philly and we were dominating the Bruins into Game 2 before they slashed his ankle and took him out (although you might count that as "disappearing"). This information doesn't fit the narrative though so he must remain a player who "disappears" and never shows up in "crunch" time.

A billion???? I know this is Buffalo, NY, and we could find a way to screw anything up, but this is basically a demolition project for a one mile stretch of highway. The only cost estimate I found was $100M, here: http://www.bizjourna...1.html?page=all The best part of the article is here: He's completely right; this is the Buffalo mentality of "we're poor, we can't do anything right, it's not worth trying, let's just try to live with it." Why are we so quick to give up? The cost isn't crazy when you think about how much more we could do with that land and the money we'd be saving from not having to maintain and rehab that structure for decades to come.

No, it's really not. You don't like Vanek. You work your shots in at him in every thread you can. The part where you go out of your way to pretend he wasn't injured when talking about his "pathetic" performance isn't helping your case. You don't like him. Just own it.

Just a roster spot and millions of dollars. :(

It'd be really nice if we lived in a world where government officials thought primarily of taxpayer interests when they made decisions. Sort of a crazy notion at this point though.

FWIW, you're not alone in being very impressed with the Basilica. It's nicer than the cathedrals in Chicago and Seattle and not much of a downgrade from St. Patrick's Cathedral in NYC. If Doan really is a devout Catholic, it's probably something he'd like. When Mario Williams came to town, we showed him where he could live and hunt. It's cool to know the person you're trying to impress and cater their visit to his interests. I'd love to have Doan in a Sabres uniform come October but I'm not sure we're the best fit for him trying to end his career with a Cup. We're a couple years away from contending while the Canucks, Rangers, Flyers, etc. aren't far off.

Agree with both of you guys on everything here.

So basically if you're watching a concert, surrounded by thousands of people, and possibly a little buzzed, you don't notice the Skyway as much. What about the other 99% of the time when its a horrible eyesore? This is sorta like saying the Sabres shouldn't make improvements around the Arena because if the game is really good, you don't think about the arena so much. It's obtrusive and doesn't fit any of the new development in the area. The artist renderings that are honest enough to actually show the Skyway cutting through all the new buildings look awful. If we ever want the waterfront to look beautiful -- not just OK, but beautiful -- that thing has to go. And we don't need to replace it. Traffic isn't a big issue in Buffalo. BTW, in other good news for the region, 60 and 61 story towers proposed for Niagara Falls, ON: http://www.buffalonews.com/city/communities/southern-ontario/article975904.ece

I see it's time for the weekly two-minutes-hate against Vanek. :rolleyes: Seriously, he was injured. Everyone watching the games could tell at the time and he finally confirmed it after the season ended. He also finished with 11 points in his last 10 games so between that and trying to play through multiple injuries, it's not like he wasn't doing everything he could to help the team win. Please factor that in like a rational person would. Pominville had a bad year two years ago but he suffered a nasty concussion against Chicago early that season and was almost certainly struggling in the aftermath. Context matters. Also, feel free to admit that you really just don't like Vanek. You don't have to say "I don't want to trade him" as part of your weekly posts about how "pathetic" he is. Just own it and say you don't like the guy and want him gone. Anyone who doesn't think Miller's injury was affecting his play last year is totally nuts.

Or "player who was never very good to begin with."

Dude, Philly won more than us then and they're poised to win more than us now (i.e. this year). 1. My Berglund fetish involves a center. Flippula is also a center. 2. I don't want to go after Ryan. I'm fine with cutting bait there.

Philly wins more than we do. The Sabres should be working on trades because: 1. Our roster isn't nearly good enough. We only have two centers unless we play Grigorenko at center on the third line (which is sorta ridiculous for an 18 year old offensive forward). 2. We have too many defensemen. We literally can't keep all the defensemen we have without sending Brennan through waivers (where we'll lose him).

I thought everyone on the Sabres sucked though. :unsure:

They need defense and we have more guys than we need as it is. http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/02/blues-may-have-to-trade-top-six-forward-to-acquire-defenseman/

Sounds legit.

The Blues have way more reason to part with Berglund than the Ducks (23rd in scoring last year) do to part with Ryan.

Yup. Exactly my thoughts. Yup again. Or we could forget about acquiring Ryan completely and get Berglund to center Vanek. Just sayin'. #PatrikBerglundManCrushContinues

I think it's pretty safe to say that was one of the most humiliating moments in Sabres history. You could make a pretty good case that the team should have completely cleaned house after it happened (everything from Regier to Ruff to the players), and they may still have to. When it comes to Regier and Ruff, the worst thing you can say is that they built a team that barely managed a whimper after their star goalie got concussed by another team's tough guy. That's brutal. And it wasn't just Miller getting run; according to Paul Hamilton, the Bruins spent the rest of that game hitting Sabres players and mocking them for not fighting back. Our coach and players whining to the media about how "cheap" it was afterwards didn't help either. I'm not sure how you go from that to winning a Stanley Cup. Every time I think about it, it makes me made that we've only traded Gaustad and Roy in the aftermath.

Good memory. Detroit picked up Datsyuk in the 6th round in 1998 (the Kalinin year) and Zetterberg in the 7th round in 1999. Interestingly, none of the guys they drafted before those two were really that good -- Jiri Fischer plays 302 NHL games, a couple other guys each had a handful of games, and none of the rest ever saw the NHL. The Sabres did something similar in 1999 when they drafted a bunch of scrubs before landing Ryan Miller in Round 5. The 2002 Draft is interesting for Buffalo too in that they got Ballard, Paille, and Wideman, all of whom went on to play hundreds of NHL games but basically none for Buffalo (only Paille for a couple seasons).