bob_sauve28 Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 For all the crying about losing Drury and Briere the Sabres still scored goals in bunches. Not having a back up goalie was what really killed the team. Think about how important Biron was to the the last two seasons. He was huge. This year we could not even play our back up after awhile he was so bad. And that was totally a salary cap issue
Doohicksie Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I'm not sure I agree with you, but I won't argue with you either.
bob_sauve28 Posted April 5, 2008 Author Report Posted April 5, 2008 I'm not sure I agree with you, but I won't argue with you either. LOL, I basically have the same opinion of what I wrote
Bmwolf21 Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I'm not sure I agree with you, but I won't argue with you either. Agreed. I don't know if it was THE biggest loss but not having a capable backup definitely hurt. A lot.
nucci Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 For all the crying about losing Drury and Briere the Sabres still scored goals in bunches. Not having a back up goalie was what really killed the team. Think about how important Biron was to the the last two seasons. He was huge. This year we could not even play our back up after awhile he was so bad. And that was totally a salary cap issue If we did not trade him last year, he would have left as an UFA. No way he was staying as a back up again.
Hawerchuk Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 Agreed. I don't know if it was THE biggest loss but not having a capable backup definitely hurt. A lot. yeah, sums it up for me. Even though Marty can be a unbelievable sieve at times. We've all seen it. TBLOW really Blowed, 'cept for that MTL shutout. GO CAPS GO CAPS GO CAPS!!
Bmwolf21 Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 yeah, sums it up for me. Even though Marty can be a unbelievable sieve at times. We've all seen it. TBLOW really Blowed, 'cept for that MTL shutout.GO CAPS GO CAPS GO CAPS!! With Marty you knew that most of the time you'd get a decent performance when he was called upon - he might give up a soft goal or two, but for the most part he wouldn't kill you. With T-bo you had no idea what you would get - it was either a shutout or open the floodgates.
Claude Balls Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 No it wasn't, he was leaving anyways. The biggest loss was not re-signing Conklin. He was cheap and he played great this year. He easily could have started 20-25 games this year and won quite a few of those.
bob_sauve28 Posted April 5, 2008 Author Report Posted April 5, 2008 No it wasn't, he was leaving anyways. The biggest loss was not re-signing Conklin. He was cheap and he played great this year. He easily could have started 20-25 games this year and won quite a few of those. Ok, ok, biggest loss was not having a decent backup. If Miller could have been given a breather now and again he would have been better. How many games did our goalies win for us this year? Not many. How many games did the Sabres get beat by a goalie that stood like a wall? A lot, I can think of a few against Boston, for example. We shelled a lot of teams during that 10 game losing streak but couldn't put home the puck. :angry:
R_Dudley Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 No it wasn't, he was leaving anyways. The biggest loss was not re-signing Conklin. He was cheap and he played great this year. He easily could have started 20-25 games this year and won quite a few of those. Correct ,,,,,,,T-bo actually cost us about 800k for the season Conklin cost the Pens 500K on a 2way contract that started in wilkes barr baby pens, which was the better deal ? Who knew about T-Bo's hip surgery guess that video scouting didn't pick up on that :rolleyes: .... No excuse this season there is some decent backup available that should be reasonable if this managment gets off it's A$$ earlier enough in the FA season to talk to some before their gone.....
rickshaw Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I disagree. The goalie they should have kept was Mika Noronen. He, IMO, was the best of the three, but never got the chance to show it. Even if Ruff decided he wasn't the number one guy, he was definitely better than Biron and he was dealt away for nothing. First we had 3 good tenders, then just one. They should have dealt Biron and kept Noronen.
SabreNod Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 swing and a miss! Biron was never consistent, and try tellling a hardcore flyers fan that Biron is 'all that'. Most think they overpaid for him. great guy though!
nfreeman Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I challenge anyone here saying that we should've kept Conklin to state with a straight face that he would've pushed for doing so at the end of last year. Conklin was atrocious for the Sabres last year. My bottom line on the backup goalie issue is that no backup goalie is going to be any good if he plays one out of every 15 games.
Claude Balls Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I challenge anyone here saying that we should've kept Conklin to state with a straight face that he would've pushed for doing so at the end of last year. Conklin was atrocious for the Sabres last year. My bottom line on the backup goalie issue is that no backup goalie is going to be any good if he plays one out of every 15 games. Anybody would want a better back up than what Conklin was, but how many would have chosen T-bo over Ty if given the choice. I sure as hell wouldn't have. DR and LQ dropped the ball big time by waiting until the last possible second to bring someone in.
GoatheadInCT Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I vehemently disagree. Not resigning Conklin and putting Thibault in his place was far worse. Marty would have been overpaid, and frankly aside from his off the ice personality, he was expendable. We erred when we should have secured better defensemen to protect our STARTING goaltender and let Edmonton have Vanek... BOY ohh boy I wish we had that $$ back!!!
Bmwolf21 Posted April 5, 2008 Report Posted April 5, 2008 I challenge anyone here saying that we should've kept Conklin to state with a straight face that he would've pushed for doing so at the end of last year. Conklin was atrocious for the Sabres last year. My bottom line on the backup goalie issue is that no backup goalie is going to be any good if he plays one out of every 15 games. Agree on both points. Conklin was awful for us last year. Awful. There is no way anyone sat here and said "we shoulda kept Conklin, he's way better than Tbo..." If someone wants to make the argument that there were better options out there than Tbo last offseason I might agree, but I'd have to see who was out there. As for the number of games for the backup, I agree completely. That ratio is way too high (1/15 games) - if you figure Ryan should play 60-65 games, that would mean the backup should play every 5th-6th-7th game or so.
shrader Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 I think our biggest problem was that we lost our veteran leadership, Teppo Numminen. Defense was clearly our biggest weakness and he's the one that made our D go since he's been here. Just watching tonight you could see all those little things he does that makes his game successful. A whole season of that and the others seeing him do it and we're in a different spot right now.
rbochan Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 I think our biggest problem was that we lost our veteran leadership, Teppo Numminen. Defense was clearly our biggest weakness and he's the one that made our D go since he's been here. Just watching tonight you could see all those little things he does that makes his game successful. A whole season of that and the others seeing him do it and we're in a different spot right now. I don't think you're wrong on this. He got on the ice and made the Bruins play _his_ game. It was as if he hadn't missed one game. I was a doubter about his health up until I saw him on the ice tonight. He blocked shots, played the boards, made good passes, and just about had an assist. It was great fun to see him out there again.
shrader Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 I don't think you're wrong on this. He got on the ice and made the Bruins play _his_ game. It was as if he hadn't missed one game. I was a doubter about his health up until I saw him on the ice tonight. He blocked shots, played the boards, made good passes, and just about had an assist. It was great fun to see him out there again. Just one game but it had me questioning whether or not they'd consider bringing him back next year.
Claude Balls Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 Conklin was awful for us last year. Awful. There is no way anyone sat here and said "we shoulda kept Conklin, he's way better than Tbo..." If someone wants to make the argument that there were better options out there than Tbo last offseason I might agree, but I'd have to see who was out there. I almost threw up when I saw that we brought Conklin in to replace Biron. But then he had that remarkable shutout against Florida where he faced 50 some shits I believe. But yes, I wanted a new backup for this year, but if I knew it was going to be T-bo and only T-bo, I would have lobbied to keep Conklin in a heartbeat. There is a reason T-bo was all that was left when the Sabres signed him (other than them dragging their feet) and that's because all the other teams passed on him to sign other FA goalies. Besides, I'm perfect anyways and am never wrong. Capeesh? <_<
rickshaw Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 But then he had that remarkable shutout against Florida where he faced 50 some shits I believe. 50??? Wow, that is a lot to face in one night. Messy too!
Kristian Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 Our real problem is that our backups just have a way of stinking the place up once they get here. But honestly, who wouldn't have stunk it up behind this "defense"? Conklin was beyond bad last year, and does anyone remember Bob Essensa?
cdexchange Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 But then he had that remarkable shutout against Florida where he faced 50 some shits I believe. The boys probably introduced him to Mighty that day... :ph34r:
Bmwolf21 Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 I almost threw up when I saw that we brought Conklin in to replace Biron. But then he had that remarkable shutout against Florida where he faced 50 some shits I believe. But yes, I wanted a new backup for this year, but if I knew it was going to be T-bo and only T-bo, I would have lobbied to keep Conklin in a heartbeat. There is a reason T-bo was all that was left when the Sabres signed him (other than them dragging their feet) and that's because all the other teams passed on him to sign other FA goalies. Besides, I'm perfect anyways and am never wrong. Capeesh? <_< He did face a ton of shots against Florida (45) but it was a 5-3 victory, not a shutout. It was his only win in a Sabres' uniform and just his third "W" of the season.
stenbaro Posted April 6, 2008 Report Posted April 6, 2008 For all the crying about losing Drury and Briere the Sabres still scored goals in bunches. Not having a back up goalie was what really killed the team. Think about how important Biron was to the the last two seasons. He was huge. This year we could not even play our back up after awhile he was so bad. And that was totally a salary cap issue He was a loss but the biggest not by a longshot...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.