BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Ugh ... wow am I ever glad I was away from the board yesterday ...
X. Benedict Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Alright....my old account name is "Done" since I deactivated it, or at least locked it out. No insult here....just a bit of a realistic view of what was coming down the tracks while everyone was slap-happy in 2006. Missed the $20 tickets by a year This was the thread that summed it all up. None of the core posters were involved in this one. The Greatest Game in Sabres History! Then everything vanishes......the kicker was before free agency lasy year and how it all played out. I do have to admit that there was a balanced viewpoint for most of the stretch between December and the Ottawa game. The Ottawa game just stoked everyone like no tomorrow. I guess I'll have to pay $600 for the old hard drive if I want some of the good stuff! Like I said, everyone that made it through the bandwagon period and is still here is a pretty solid fan. The board traffic is probably down, but it isn't nearly the snakepit it was. Good point. I was asking you do look at something that no longer exists. And it was silly of me to ask you to dredge up the past. Fair enough, then. I seem to recall that type of stuff as being an exception. But there seems to some truth there. I regret my last post. I admit to being slightly annoyed by what seemed to be a broad indictment. But I do think the board is more fun when people bring personality and it doesn't become about personalities.
shrader Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 WoW! Lawyer-Speak 101 coming from Shrader! You're right. Bernier is junk. The Sabres only ended up with a 3rd and a 2nd for him, then he gets offered 2.5 and Vancouver still takes him even though they could have broken even and let St. Louis have him. Its not lawyer speak. This deal never happens if that trade was never made. St Louis was giving Vancouver a taste of their own medicine. They can't do that by making an offer to Bernier while he's Sabres property. Take a look at Vancouver's remaining RFAs. No one was worth making this move on. Suddenly the Canucks get a player with a higher value that the whole world knows they want on their roster and its the perfect time for the Blues to return the favor.
X. Benedict Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Its not lawyer speak. This deal never happens if that trade was never made. St Louis was giving Vancouver a taste of their own medicine. They can't do that by making an offer to Bernier while he's Sabres property. Take a look at Vancouver's remaining RFAs. No one was worth making this move on. Suddenly the Canucks get a player with a higher value that the whole world knows they want on their roster and its the perfect time for the Blues to return the favor. Exactly. I just had an email from a very good friend in Vancouver. New management is under a tremendous amount of heat for no big free agents. They had to match. St. Louis new it. By trading for Bernier they were keeping their picks in play for another offer sheet. Davidson was saying welcome to the league....don't shop here.
shrader Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 By trading for Bernier they were keeping their picks in play for another offer sheet. That's an important point that I haven't seen mentioned around here yet. If you don't have your own picks, you can't even make an offer sheet to a player. Vancouver left the door open for themselves to make more offers this season, but close that door for next year.
X. Benedict Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 That's an important point that I haven't seen mentioned around here yet. If you don't have your own picks, you can't even make an offer sheet to a player. Vancouver left the door open for themselves to make more offers this season, but close that door for next year. That's right. I guess they might have an under 2.6 million player in mind.
shrader Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 That's right. I guess they might have an under 2.6 million player in mind. Or there could be someone at the higher levels of compensation that still call for a 2nd round pick. I doubt anything will come of it though, but they might as well leave the option open.
nobody Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Message boards are like politics - the extremists are the most vocal so they are the ones who get all the attention.
djwilli3 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 3 places the team has improved: 1. Defense (Rivet was a very nice pickup) 2. Goaltending (Lalime is an upgrade over Thibault. I am confident that he can give Miller some nights off every now and then). 3. Leadership (Rivet. Also, some of the younger players have one more year under their belt to start to develop into leaders). Is this a joke? So, we lost our best defensemen last season because the FO wouldn't give him a decent offer (which would have cost us far less than what Chicago paid for him) and we lost kalinin, who wasn't very good, but he was solid depth. You think that Rivet is as good as Campbell? There is no guarantee that Teppo or Pratt are going to resign. If they don't we are FAR worse off on D. Rivet is an average D man at best and is not what we needed to fix the problems on the blue line, and is just another bandaid to an increasingly growing problem on the back end. Did you see Lalime play? Clearly not. At least Thibault had a shut out last year. Why is it that we had to settle for overpaying Lalime who is clearly washed up, and couldn't get Alex Auld? He got the same salary, 2 yrs 2 mil to go elsewhere and is clearly a better goalie than Lalime. This would have allowed us to give Miller at least a few extra games off without much fear of loss. Knowing how horrible Lalime has been, expect Miller to have a 65+ start season and get worn down yet again. This was a terrible desperation move because the FO was to slow in getting off its ass and making a play for Auld, even if we would have had to pay him a bit more. Guess Bucky was right. We were too slow and cheap. As for leadership, uh, we had a leadership hole after Drury and Briere and Campbell left. If we don't resign Teppo and Pratt, there will be a net LOSS in experience and veteran leadership from last year. Something that our "young and growing" team can't afford. You can't gut your veteran leadership and then bring in a guy and say, see, we're getting veteran leadership for our young players. Yeah, you had to settle for a mid tier guy because you couldn't keep Drury, Briere or Campbell and all your top veterans left. This is the perfect demonstration of what they are NOT doing right. So, basically, none of things you have pointed too are actually improvments so much as putting a band aid on an artery rupture. Sorry, but your points just go to show how pathetic this FO is.
Bmwolf21 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Is this a joke? So, we lost our best defensemen last season because the FO wouldn't give him a decent offer (which would have cost us far less than what Chicago paid for him) and we lost kalinin, who wasn't very good, but he was solid depth. You think that Rivet is as good as Campbell? There is no guarantee that Teppo or Pratt are going to resign. If they don't we are FAR worse off on D. Rivet is an average D man at best and is not what we needed to fix the problems on the blue line, and is just another bandaid to an increasingly growing problem on the back end. Did you see Lalime play? Clearly not. At least Thibault had a shut out last year. Why is it that we had to settle for overpaying Lalime who is clearly washed up, and couldn't get Alex Auld? He got the same salary, 2 yrs 2 mil to go elsewhere and is clearly a better goalie than Lalime. This would have allowed us to give Miller at least a few extra games off without much fear of loss. Knowing how horrible Lalime has been, expect Miller to have a 65+ start season and get worn down yet again. This was a terrible desperation move because the FO was to slow in getting off its ass and making a play for Auld, even if we would have had to pay him a bit more. Guess Bucky was right. We were too slow and cheap. As for leadership, uh, we had a leadership hole after Drury and Briere and Campbell left. If we don't resign Teppo and Pratt, there will be a net LOSS in experience and veteran leadership from last year. Something that our "young and growing" team can't afford. You can't gut your veteran leadership and then bring in a guy and say, see, we're getting veteran leadership for our young players. Yeah, you had to settle for a mid tier guy because you couldn't keep Drury, Briere or Campbell and all your top veterans left. This is the perfect demonstration of what they are NOT doing right. So, basically, none of things you have pointed too are actually improvments so much as putting a band aid on an artery rupture. Sorry, but your points just go to show how pathetic this FO is. FYI - Lalime had one shutout last year and had better numbers than Thibault in most categories. Pretty much by any measure Lalime had a better year than Thibault, and is by definition an improvement.
djwilli3 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 FYI - Lalime had one shutout last year and had better numbers than Thibault in most categories. Pretty much by any measure Lalime had a better year than Thibault, and is by definition an improvement. The difference in numbers was not that statistically significant and Lalime played more games. Plus, an improvement from rock bottom is hardly the improvement that one is looking for. The fact is, the point I was making is still unchanged. Rather than going for the best player they could for the price they settle for a mediocre guy who is likely to see no more time on the ice than Thibault did. Auld would have been a much better choice and we could have gotten him for the same price. See his new contract. Too bad we didn't even make a pitch for him or at the very least one that amounted to anything. But hey, why change the status quo?
awill29 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 The difference in numbers was not that statistically significant and Lalime played more games. Plus, an improvement from rock bottom is hardly the improvement that one is looking for. The fact is, the point I was making is still unchanged. Rather than going for the best player they could for the price they settle for a mediocre guy who is likely to see no more time on the ice than Thibault did. Auld would have been a much better choice and we could have gotten him for the same price. See his new contract. Too bad we didn't even make a pitch for him or at the very least one that amounted to anything. But hey, why change the status quo? Your points make no sense. Cool, Thibault got a shutout. Two, actually. One of which came against a Boston team that was just saving gas for the playoffs. Did you watch the Nashville game following the trade deadline? We had that game well in hand, until Miller gets hit in the mask and it's 3-1. He comes out of the game, only to be rushed back in because T-Blow let in 2 goals in <5 mins. Patty Lalime, on the other hand, played 32 games last year and had a winning record. So please, explain to me how 2 shutouts, one of which is meaningless, gives T-Bo the upper hand on Lalime? And for the Auld situation, you can't say Buffalo didn't try to get him. If they did, it's a pretty easy decision for a goalie. Do I want to back up Ryan Miller and get about 15 starts, or do I want to go to Ottawa and compete for the starting job with Gerber? 1m/yr is a little much for a goalie, and I doubt the Sabres would go higher. They really didn't stand a chance of landing Auld.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 The difference in numbers was not that statistically significant and Lalime played more games. Plus, an improvement from rock bottom is hardly the improvement that one is looking for. The fact is, the point I was making is still unchanged. Rather than going for the best player they could for the price they settle for a mediocre guy who is likely to see no more time on the ice than Thibault did. Auld would have been a much better choice and we could have gotten him for the same price. See his new contract. Too bad we didn't even make a pitch for him or at the very least one that amounted to anything. But hey, why change the status quo? They are all not-so-good backup goalies, you are acting like Ken Dryden showed up at their door and they turned him away. Do you know for sure the Sabres never offered Auld the same deal first or even a slightly better one but he chose Ottawa? Besides, he sucked worse than Lalime or T-bo in Phoenix before he got traded, and despite his better numbers still lost more than he won in Boston on a playoff team. Take away his games against the Sabres and the numbers get ordinary too. A lot of goalies numbers woudl have gotten better playing behind that trap in Boston.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 That's right. I guess they might have an under 2.6 million player in mind. Like Paille.....we had the same discussion a week ago!
Bmwolf21 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 The difference in numbers was not that statistically significant and Lalime played more games. Plus, an improvement from rock bottom is hardly the improvement that one is looking for. The fact is, the point I was making is still unchanged. Rather than going for the best player they could for the price they settle for a mediocre guy who is likely to see no more time on the ice than Thibault did. Auld would have been a much better choice and we could have gotten him for the same price. See his new contract. Too bad we didn't even make a pitch for him or at the very least one that amounted to anything. But hey, why change the status quo? First, the differences were statistically significant: Thibault: 12 GP, 7 starts; 3-4-2, 3.31 GAA, .869 SV%, 2 SO Lalime: 32 GP, 30 starts; 16-12--2, 2.82, .897 SV%, 1 SO Lalime is half a goal better per game and stops a higher percentage of the SA. Second - how do you know we didn't make a serious offer to Auld? Assuming Auld had some interest in competing for the starter's job, or even playing more than 15 games, why would he, in his right mind, want to come here when we have an entrenched franchise goalie who has started 84% of his team's games (152/180) the last two years? In Ottawa the "no.1" has started 81 of the team's last 188 games (43%) and has lost his "starter's status" so many times that they used Ray frigging Emery in the playoffs last year. Which team offers him a better chance to play 30, 40, maybe more games? The fact is, the original post is correct. Lalime IS an improvement over Thibault. How much of an improvement is debatable, but that wasn't the point.
Knightrider Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Is this a joke? So, we lost our best defensemen last season because the FO wouldn't give him a decent offer (which would have cost us far less than what Chicago paid for him) and we lost kalinin, who wasn't very good, but he was solid shaky depth. You think that Rivet is as good as Campbell? There is no guarantee that Teppo or Pratt are going to re-sign. If they don't we are FAR worse off on D. Rivet is an average D man at best and is not what we needed to fix the problems on the blue line, and is just another bandaid to an increasingly growing problem on the back end. I'm sorry, but Campbell was gone as soon as Vanek signed his contract. There was simply too much money out there for Brian. I just hope Miller and Pominville are interested in winning a Cup, and that exorbanant salaries hurt your chances of getting that cup. Defensively, Rivet is much better than Campbell. Offensively, I hope to see Teppo back. If I had a choice between Kalinin/Campbell and Rivet/Numminen, I'd take the latter combo, thank you. Did you see Lalime play? Clearly not. At least Thibault had a shut out last year. Why is it that we had to settle for overpaying Lalime who is clearly washed up, and couldn't get Alex Auld? He got the same salary, 2 yrs 2 mil to go elsewhere and is clearly a better goalie than Lalime. This would have allowed us to give Miller at least a few extra games off without much fear of loss. Knowing how horrible Lalime has been, expect Miller to have a 65+ start season and get worn down yet again. This was a terrible desperation move because the FO was to slow in getting off its ass and making a play for Auld, even if we would have had to pay him a bit more. Guess Bucky was right. We were too slow and cheap. Last Season: Lalime:2.82 GAA, 16 wins, 12 losses, 2 OTLs, .897 %SV TBO : 3.11 GAA, 3 wins, 4 losses, 2 OTLs, .869 %SV Auld: 2.32 GAA, 9 wins, 7 losses, 5 OTLs, .919 %SV Career: Lalime:2.93 GAA, 191 wins, 148 losses, 43 OTLs, .905 %SV TBO : 2.75 GAA, 238 wins, 238 losses, 75 OTLs, .904 %SV Auld: 2.84 GAA, 58 wins, 57 losses, 18 OTLs, .903 %SV Looks to me like Lalime is performing pretty much like he has throughout his career, while TBO is the guy who hit the wall. Why would Auld sign in Buffalo for the same money knowing he has no chance to become starter? He does have that chance on Ottawa. As for leadership, uh, we had a leadership hole after Drury and Briere and Campbell left. If we don't resign Teppo and Pratt, there will be a net LOSS in experience and veteran leadership from last year. Something that our "young and growing" team can't afford. You can't gut your veteran leadership and then bring in a guy and say, see, we're getting veteran leadership for our young players. Yeah, you had to settle for a mid tier guy because you couldn't keep Drury, Briere or Campbell and all your top veterans left. This is the perfect demonstration of what they are NOT doing right. So, basically, none of things you have pointed too are actually improvments so much as putting a band aid on an artery rupture. Sorry, but your points just go to show how pathetic this FO is. If Teppo and Pratt don't sign, we are even in the leadership department compared to last year. Rivet has more experience than Campbell, and I doubt missing the playoffs sat well with the young guys, either. If one of them signs, we're ahead WRT to leadership. WRT Campbell's "Leadership", I just don't see evidence of it. He fades in the playoffs, doesn't hit enough, and he held out for the big payday, even though "he wanted to be here"... BS.
Knightrider Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 First, the differences were statistically significant: Thibault: 12 GP, 7 starts; 3-4-2, 3.31 GAA, .869 SV%, 2 SO Lalime: 32 GP, 30 starts; 16-12--2, 2.82, .897 SV%, 1 SO Lalime is half a goal better per game and stops a higher percentage of the SA. The fact is, the original post is correct. Lalime IS an improvement over Thibault. How much of an improvement is debatable, but that wasn't the point. Phew, the stats match... :thumbsup:
apuszczalowski Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 I'm sorry, but Campbell was gone as soon as Vanek signed his contract. There was simply too much money out there for Brian. I just hope Miller and Pominville are interested in winning a CupStaying in Buffalo, and that exorbanant salaries hurt your chances of getting that cup. If they were most interested in winning a cup, I think they would follow Hossa and sign a deal with someone like Detroit who is almost always a favorite to win the cup every year
Bmwolf21 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Phew, the stats match... :thumbsup: :lol: Yep, your Lalime and Thibault numbers are correct. The numbers you posted for Auld's 07-08 season are partially right -- his 9-game numbers are from his time in Phoenix -- but he also had 23 starts in Boston. His combined totals for 2007-08 are 12-13-5, 2.68, .907, 3 SO.
Swedesessed Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Link- http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_dadd...s?urn=nhl,92689 i know it's not a secret and a reality, just thought i'd post it. The writer is a Devils fan. Just remember that everyone.
Knightrider Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 If they were most interested in winning a cup, I think they would follow Hossa and sign a deal with someone like Detroit who is almost always a favorite to win the cup every year I guess you have a point...
X. Benedict Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Like Paille.....we had the same discussion a week ago! :lol: It could happen. I don't expect it to though. Vancouver has their winger.
nobody Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 If Thibault had another 23 starts last year his numbers most likely would have improved and ended up at least as good as Lalime's. We're talking about goalies who get better with the number of games they play in a season. None of these guys are the classic backup tenders who play great in spot roles - they are all former starter type guys who need to play alot to have decent numbers.
jad1 Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 If they were most interested in winning a cup, I think they would follow Hossa and sign a deal with someone like Detroit who is almost always a favorite to win the cup every year Yeah, because Pittsburgh has no chance of winning the Cup. It's a good thing that Hossa left that bunch of losers! :wallbash:
hopeleslyobvious Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Is this a joke? So, we lost our best defensemen last season because the FO wouldn't give him a decent offer (which would have cost us far less than what Chicago paid for him) and we lost kalinin, who wasn't very good, but he was solid depth. You think that Rivet is as good as Campbell? There is no guarantee that Teppo or Pratt are going to resign. If they don't we are FAR worse off on D. Rivet is an average D man at best and is not what we needed to fix the problems on the blue line, and is just another bandaid to an increasingly growing problem on the back end. Did you see Lalime play? Clearly not. At least Thibault had a shut out last year. Why is it that we had to settle for overpaying Lalime who is clearly washed up, and couldn't get Alex Auld? He got the same salary, 2 yrs 2 mil to go elsewhere and is clearly a better goalie than Lalime. This would have allowed us to give Miller at least a few extra games off without much fear of loss. Knowing how horrible Lalime has been, expect Miller to have a 65+ start season and get worn down yet again. This was a terrible desperation move because the FO was to slow in getting off its ass and making a play for Auld, even if we would have had to pay him a bit more. Guess Bucky was right. We were too slow and cheap. As for leadership, uh, we had a leadership hole after Drury and Briere and Campbell left. If we don't resign Teppo and Pratt, there will be a net LOSS in experience and veteran leadership from last year. Something that our "young and growing" team can't afford. You can't gut your veteran leadership and then bring in a guy and say, see, we're getting veteran leadership for our young players. Yeah, you had to settle for a mid tier guy because you couldn't keep Drury, Briere or Campbell and all your top veterans left. This is the perfect demonstration of what they are NOT doing right. So, basically, none of things you have pointed too are actually improvments so much as putting a band aid on an artery rupture. Sorry, but your points just go to show how pathetic this FO is. Campbell was our best defenseman? Sure he was our biggest named defenseman, but IMHO he never really lived up to his own reputation. Yes, he was a very good offensive defenseman, but he was weak in his own zone. Everyone wanted a defensive defenseman, and that's exactly what we got. This point is moot though. You asked us to name 3 areas where the Sabres have improved since the end of the season. Campbell played for SJ at the end of the season, so I am wondering why you are even considering him in your analysis. I think everyone has already addressed Lalime. I would just add that Thibault's numbers might be slightly skewed by the shutouts. He did not play enough games to offset these shutouts and reflect how bad he was most nights. If we can get 15-20 games out of Lalime I think our goaltending as a whole will see a big improvement. Miller ran out of gas at the end of the year, and having some extra nights off will really help. As for leadership...Rivet brings some experience and proven leadership to the locker room. Not much to add there.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.