evil_otto Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/recap?gid=2008050409 Marty Turco had a franchise-record 61 saves for the Stars. Nabokov stopped 53 shots, but not the one set up after Brian Campbell was called for tripping Loui Eriksson close to the Dallas net. ?You?re trying to battle for a puck. From my point, he started flopping,? Campbell said. ?I can?t do much about it.? Coach Ron Wilson didn?t dispute the call. ?Well, it was tripping,? Wilson said. ?It was a trip, we had to kill it off, and we didn?t.? Ouch.
Bmwolf21 Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 I'm not a stenbaro-level defender of Soupy, but I thought the call (while correct) was pretty weak for a 4th OT, especially given some of the stuff they had overlooked earlier in the OT marathon.
carpandean Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 I'm not a stenbaro-level defender of Soupy, but I thought the call (while correct) was pretty weak for a 4th OT, especially given some of the stuff they had overlooked earlier in the OT marathon. They had to balance out the hooking call against Dallas earlier in OT (third one, I think.) That was clearly a hook, too, but no worse than a lot of what had been let go. They got one, so the Shark's got one. The Stars killed theirs off; the Sharks did not.
Bmwolf21 Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 They had to balance out the hooking call against Dallas earlier in OT (third one, I think.) That was clearly a hook, too, but no worse than a lot of what had been let go. They got one, so the Shark's got one. The Stars killed theirs off; the Sharks did not. Honestly I missed that one. I was fading in and out of sleep on the couch, waiting for the game to end.
carpandean Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 I was fading in and out of sleep on the couch, waiting for the game to end. Me, too. I watched the game winner right up by the TV, because I was looking for a tape to record the rest on. I almost missed it when I popped in a tape and it had the final minutes, plus OT from Game 5 against the Rangers last year. I watched, entranced, while Drury scored with 8 seconds left and then snapped out of it, stopping the tape just before Campbell's penalty.
Knightrider Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 They had to balance out the hooking call against Dallas earlier in OT (third one, I think.) That was clearly a hook, too, but no worse than a lot of what had been let go. They got one, so the Shark's got one. The Stars killed theirs off; the Sharks did not. I know what you mean, but the fact that that is the way a playoff game gets officiated kills me. If you see a penalty, call it, and forget about balancing penalties. Perhaps people won't fall asleep watching what is supposed to be an exciting 129 minute (equivalent of a game 6, a game 7 & 9 minutes of OT) playoff game. Perhaps it doesn't even make it to OT if the whistles aren't put away in the third.
X. Benedict Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 They had to balance out the hooking call against Dallas earlier in OT (third one, I think.) That was clearly a hook, too, but no worse than a lot of what had been let go. They got one, so the Shark's got one. The Stars killed theirs off; the Sharks did not. Yep. Soupy's trip was borderline. I really don't think the skater falls down unless he's dead tired. Besides that, it wasn't a clear scoring opportunity or really congruent with how they called the 3rd, 1-2-3rd OT. That is pretty old school though, balancing out the calls. For the most part they let them play. But it means Buffalo gets the 26th pick and not the 30th. I don't think San Jose spends the money for Campbell. Unfortunately I think he goes to Ottawa. (or maybe Chicago?)
jimiVbaby Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 Yep. Soupy's trip was borderline. I really don't think the skater falls down unless he's dead tired.Besides that, it wasn't a clear scoring opportunity or really congruent with how they called the 3rd, 1-2-3rd OT. That is pretty old school though, balancing out the calls. For the most part they let them play. But it means Buffalo gets the 26th pick and not the 30th. I don't think San Jose spends the money for Campbell. Unfortunately I think he goes to Ottawa. (or maybe Chicago?) I was just skimming the Sharks board.. general consensus from last nights GDT is that Campbell is worth a discounted price, but nowhere near $6.5mm a year. Geez San Jose, we could have told you that. But thanks for Steve Bernier and the first rounder. We're a better team for it.
Bmwolf21 Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 I was just skimming the Sharks board.. general consensus from last nights GDT is that Campbell is worth a discounted price, but nowhere near $6.5mm a year. Geez San Jose, we could have told you that. But thanks for Steve Bernier and the first rounder. We're a better team for it. And while we've got you on the phone, can I interest you in a speedy, shifty winger who is a proven scorer? For the right price he can be yours...imagine him flying down the ice alongside Cheechoo and Marleau. Man, what an offense that would be! Come on...what do we have to do to close this deal?
tom webster Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 I was just skimming the Sharks board.. general consensus from last nights GDT is that Campbell is worth a discounted price, but nowhere near $6.5mm a year. Geez San Jose, we could have told you that. But thanks for Steve Bernier and the first rounder. We're a better team for it. Are you sure about that?
Bmwolf21 Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 Are you sure about that? Absolutely makes the franchise better. We got a first-rounder and a young, big winger in exchange for an overpriced defenseman who was not coming back. At least we got something before losing Brian for nothing.
tom webster Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 Absolutely makes the franchise better. We got a first-rounder and a young, big winger in exchange for an overpriced defenseman who was not coming back. At least we got something before losing Brian for nothing. Agreed, its better then nothing. However, I would trade Bernier and that pick in a minute for a solid 25 minute defensemen who is priced right. Besides, Bernier showed Buffalo the same thing he showed San Jose, flashes of brilliance wedged in between largely uninspired play. So will he be Kotalik or will he be Pominville? Anyone that says they know for sure is either delusional or lying. And the 26th pick? That has even longer odds.
stenbaro Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 You still don't get it, do you. Here's a guy who directly lost a 3rd straight elimination game because he can't play defense. He did it against Carolina, he did it against Ottawa, and he did it again last night against Dallas. And little Buffalo in the post failed lockout era is supposed to throw $36 million at him .People like you will never get it. :wallbash: NO YOU DONT GET IT!!!!!!! ITS NOT JUST THE BRIAN CAMPBELL EPISODE ITS THE WAY THEY HANDLE THEIR WHOLE FREAKING FREEAGENCY CAMPBELL IS THE ICING ON THE CAKE..IF IT WASNT FOR BRIAN CAMPBELL BEING PART OF THIS TEAM WE DONT MAKE IT AS FAR AS WE DID FOR THE PAST 2 YEARS..ALONG WITH DRURY AND BRIERE..KEEP MAKING EXCUSES TO FEEL BETTER.. :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: Edit: I have tried to stay away from these arguments..I am just gonna stop posting altogether..They are riodiculous and if you guys cant see the dropoff without these players and see how the Sabres management screwed up then so be it...I am done fighting the battle..Senseless...Bottom line is just like I said last year the day we lost Drury we wont make the playoffs..remember these again..If they dont change the way they do business this team will get worse....MARK IT DOWN
X. Benedict Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 And the 26th pick? That has even longer odds. I'm usually not one to fall in love with a draft board, but.... If there is any year to have it, I think it is this year. And who knows, packaging a 13th and a 26th to move up isn't out of the question.
tom webster Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I'm usually not one to fall in love with a draft board, but.... If there is any year to have it, I think it is this year. And who knows, packaging a 13th and a 26th to move up isn't out of the question. I hope they do move up but in the end that will mean thy will have traded their first round pick and Brian Campbell for what will probalbly turn out to be a defensemen that will be as good as Brian was in three years plus Steve Bernier. Just seems like a vicious cycle baseball fans know as the Oakland A's.
X. Benedict Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I hope they do move up but in the end that will mean thy will have traded their first round pick and Brian Campbell for what will probalbly turn out to be a defensemen that will be as good as Brian was in three years plus Steve Bernier. Just seems like a vicious cycle baseball fans know as the Oakland A's. I'm okay with that. I'll be watching in three years too.
X. Benedict Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Just watched Stan Fishler on MSG. He says: "Rangers are prepared to go after Campbell in a big way" Also, "Shanahan won't play with Jagr again...so in NY it is one or the other" Of course I wouldn't put it past Sather to talk up a market for someone he has no intention of going after. He has an entire defense to sign. So Campbell going too high to someone else is like taking money off the table
Bmwolf21 Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Just watched Stan Fishler on MSG. He says: "Rangers are prepared to go after Campbell in a big way" Also, "Shanahan won't play with Jagr again...so in NY it is one or the other" Of course I wouldn't put it past Sather to talk up a market for someone he has no intention of going after. He has an entire defense to sign. So Campbell going too high to someone else is like taking money off the table As in Shanny says he won't be on a team with Jagr?
carpandean Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I hope they do move up but in the end that will mean thy will have traded their first round pick and Brian Campbell for what will probably turn out to be a defensemen that will be as good as Brian was in three years plus Steve Bernier. Just seems like a vicious cycle baseball fans know as the Oakland A's. Not really. In February, we traded three months of Campbell and first negotiation rights to him for three months of Bernier, first negotiation rights to him and a first-round pick. Since they didn't feel that they would be able to sign Brian to a mutually agreeable contract in the summer and Bernier is a young RFA who isn't coming off of a break-out season (i.e., not Vanek last year), you could basically say that they traded three months of Campbell for having Bernier in their system for at least the short-term future (or some more draft-picks if it gets to the offer sheet phase) and a first-round draft pick. Even though that first-round pic turned out to be lower than they probably would have guessed back in February, that's still a pretty good deal. They might package two first-rounders to move up or they could use them in trades.
Kristian Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Just watched Stan Fishler on MSG. He says: "Rangers are prepared to go after Campbell in a big way" Also, "Shanahan won't play with Jagr again...so in NY it is one or the other" Of course I wouldn't put it past Sather to talk up a market for someone he has no intention of going after. He has an entire defense to sign. So Campbell going too high to someone else is like taking money off the table Hmm, I guess that will be 8 mill. a year rather than 7 mill. then. But yeah, this could all be a decoy, though I could easily see them sign Brian and surround him with 5 Rory Fitzpatrick clones. They miss Leetch in NY, apparently they think Brian is the second coming of him.
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 NO YOU DONT GET IT!!!!!!! ITS NOT JUST THE BRIAN CAMPBELL EPISODE ITS THE WAY THEY HANDLE THEIR WHOLE FREAKING FREEAGENCY CAMPBELL IS THE ICING ON THE CAKE..IF IT WASNT FOR BRIAN CAMPBELL BEING PART OF THIS TEAM WE DONT MAKE IT AS FAR AS WE DID FOR THE PAST 2 YEARS..ALONG WITH DRURY AND BRIERE..KEEP MAKING EXCUSES TO FEEL BETTER.. :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: Edit: I have tried to stay away from these arguments..I am just gonna stop posting altogether..They are riodiculous and if you guys cant see the dropoff without these players and see how the Sabres management screwed up then so be it...I am done fighting the battle..Senseless...Bottom line is just like I said last year the day we lost Drury we wont make the playoffs..remember these again..If they dont change the way they do business this team will get worse....MARK IT DOWN Making it as far as we did is not good enough... Winning the Cup is! For a team like BFLO, they will either have to win it all or suck royally... Mediocrity is the problem if you can't get over the hump. See: PENS They (BFLO) can't handle free agency like a bigger market club... You will see the results in years to come, trust me! It MAY get worse, true... But, then it will get radically better... And that is the push that will possibly propel this team into a Cup VICTORY... No other way will work for a club and market like BFLO and being organizationally SOUND. For BFLO there will be ebb and flow, they will have to properly ride the ebb and USE IT to propel them in a positve and goal orientated direction... Just riding the flow, they are doomed to get themselves in organization killing types of situations. See what I am saying?... It is all in the model... You probably don't! :wallbash: :nana:
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I'm not a stenbaro-level defender of Soupy, but I thought the call (while correct) was pretty weak for a 4th OT, especially given some of the stuff they had overlooked earlier in the OT marathon. The game had to eventually end! SJS had a PP oppotunity in OT prior to the Campbell penalty. THey both had a crack at OT PP's... Dallas made it count.
Kristian Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 NO YOU DONT GET IT!!!!!!! ITS NOT JUST THE BRIAN CAMPBELL EPISODE ITS THE WAY THEY HANDLE THEIR WHOLE FREAKING FREEAGENCY CAMPBELL IS THE ICING ON THE CAKE..IF IT WASNT FOR BRIAN CAMPBELL BEING PART OF THIS TEAM WE DONT MAKE IT AS FAR AS WE DID FOR THE PAST 2 YEARS..ALONG WITH DRURY AND BRIERE..KEEP MAKING EXCUSES TO FEEL BETTER.. :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: Edit: I have tried to stay away from these arguments..I am just gonna stop posting altogether..They are riodiculous and if you guys cant see the dropoff without these players and see how the Sabres management screwed up then so be it...I am done fighting the battle..Senseless...Bottom line is just like I said last year the day we lost Drury we wont make the playoffs..remember these again..If they dont change the way they do business this team will get worse....MARK IT DOWN Briere - 8.0 mill. Drury - 7.1 mill. Vanek - 7.0 mill. Campbell - 6.0 mill. Roy - 4.0 mill. According to your way of doing things, that means we throw 32.1 mill. into FIVE players!! Take away a possible 4-5 mill. on the "home team discount" all these guys always talk about being willing to give, yet we never see happening, and it's still leaves us with virtually no money to sign Miller or Pominville. Sorry if you don't like it, but those are the facts. Last years team got manhandled in the worst way when meeting the first quality team in the playoffs last year, and yet we should blow almost our entire budget on them? It was quite clear we didn't have what it took, when push came to shove, and neither Briere, Drury or Campbell added squat to change this. We were just as lazy and disinterested with them, as we were without them. Sorry, but this is not how you win a championship, just ask the Rangers about that. And no, I couldn't care less if the Rags made it to round two, as they won nothing yet again. You develop from within and from youth, then hopefully add the two or three pieces you need through trades, to put you over the top. You don't hand out ridiculous contracts to players who have proven nothing more than the fact that they get their butts handed to them when they're all healthy, and have the best chance of a cup ever. And yes I mean ever - We were talented, we were getting all the calls, and by god we were healthy - We just didn't feel like working for it. And those are the players we should be spending money on? Management dropped the ball on Drury. The rest? No thanks. So we get worse? So be it, we weren't good enough to win it when we were at our very best, and our budget wouldn't let us get better either. *Disclaimer - This post in no way indicates that Quinn is not a Moron, Ruff isn't a crybaby who took 3 months to stop feeling sorry for himself before starting to coach the players he DID have, and Regier enjoys figure-skating over hockey any day.
stenbaro Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Briere - 8.0 mill.Drury - 7.1 mill. Vanek - 7.0 mill. Campbell - 6.0 mill. Roy - 4.0 mill. According to your way of doing things, that means we throw 32.1 mill. into FIVE players!! Take away a possible 4-5 mill. on the "home team discount" all these guys always talk about being willing to give, yet we never see happening, and it's still leaves us with virtually no money to sign Miller or Pominville. Sorry if you don't like it, but those are the facts. Last years team got manhandled in the worst way when meeting the first quality team in the playoffs last year, and yet we should blow almost our entire budget on them? It was quite clear we didn't have what it took, when push came to shove, and neither Briere, Drury or Campbell added squat to change this. We were just as lazy and disinterested with them, as we were without them. Sorry, but this is not how you win a championship, just ask the Rangers about that. And no, I couldn't care less if the Rags made it to round two, as they won nothing yet again. You develop from within and from youth, then hopefully add the two or three pieces you need through trades, to put you over the top. You don't hand out ridiculous contracts to players who have proven nothing more than the fact that they get their butts handed to them when they're all healthy, and have the best chance of a cup ever. And yes I mean ever - We were talented, we were getting all the calls, and by god we were healthy - We just didn't feel like working for it. And those are the players we should be spending money on? Management dropped the ball on Drury. The rest? No thanks. So we get worse? So be it, we weren't good enough to win it when we were at our very best, and our budget wouldn't let us get better either. *Disclaimer - This post in no way indicates that Quinn is not a Moron, Ruff isn't a crybaby who took 3 months to stop feeling sorry for himself before starting to coach the players he DID have, and Regier enjoys figure-skating over hockey any day. You are missing my whole point..I have said it a million times before...For my last time..These deals could have and should have been done way earlier and would have been done for less money...Throw those last numbers out the window..If they hadnt approached it with the head in sand style they use they wouldnt be in this mess..Thats all I am trying to say..I could care less if this was Tallinder were speaking about instead of Cambell, Campbell is another illustration of a mistake, granted they got something for him better than zip but I would have rather had him signed at a reasonable cost than the bs he is gonna get and they could have..I dont particulary like the way campbell plays he is just another example of how screwed up this organization is...Hope that clears it up ...
Kristian Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 You are missing my whole point..I have said it a million times before...For my last time..These deals could have and should have been done way earlier and would have been done for less money...Throw those last numbers out the window..If they hadnt approached it with the head in sand style they use they wouldnt be in this mess..Thats all I am trying to say..I could care less if this was Tallinder were speaking about instead of Cambell, Campbell is another illustration of a mistake, granted they got something for him better than zip but I would have rather had him signed at a reasonable cost than the bs he is gonna get and they could have..I dont particulary like the way campbell plays he is just another example of how screwed up this organization is...Hope that clears it up ... I know that's what you were saying, but you have to admit, it's kind of like me wondering why you didn't put down a $1000 on the Ducks to win it last year, once the playoffs started. It's a constant gamble. Sometimes you win, sometimes you don't. I think we lost out on Drury, and Briere and Campbell just priced themselves out of town. And yes, I know players like to talk a lot about the home team discount, but barring the Drury cluster#%^$#!, I personally believe it's pure horseshit purely to appease the fans. Nobody wants to go get booed every shift in any building, no matter how they claim to be able to ignore it. Briere wanted to stay - Yes he did, had we paid him about 7 or 7.5. I'll pass on that "discount". That is not to say that management is free from criticism, personally I think they're doing a crap job in every aspect of the game right now. No word on signing RFA's, no word on signing prospects, and no word on signing the future of the franchise. Business as usual with Larry the Moron.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.