shrader Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 In fairness there were a lot of Sabres (and blueliners in particular) who had a bad year last year. The rest of your post I agree with. He's not going to be a top-4 guy, but he does give you decent play from a no.7 defenseman who gets 13-15 minutes a game. I think the thing that hurt him the most was the lack of playing time. He may be locked into this 7th role forever though because I really don't see him ever getting that extra ice time.
nfreeman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 In fairness there were a lot of Sabres (and blueliners in particular) who had a bad year last year. The rest of your post I agree with. He's not going to be a top-4 guy, but he does give you decent play from a no.7 defenseman who gets 13-15 minutes a game. Don't forget forwards and goalies.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Most of them had bad years ... but most were more proven to begin with than Paetsch ... so the jury is still out with him.
Knightrider Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 It is far more important to get Weber the ice time. The guy was a +12 in 16 games. Why in the hell would you send him to the AHL? The kid loves to hit hit and that's a quality the Sabres need desperately. Rivet is a veteran presence. So is Tallinder, Lydman and Spacek. The Sabres top four are not young defensemen. They have all been part of long playoff runs and are all qualified to help the younger d-men during any possible ruff patches. Year Team League GP G A Pts +/- PIM Shots Sh% 2007-08 Buffalo NHL 16 0 3 3 +12 14 12 .00 2007-08 Rochest AHL 59 1 13 14 -8 178 - - 2006-07 Barrie OHL 30 3 12 15 +22 86 - - 59 AHL games, and 16 NHL games isn't much evidence to say he is ready. It is far more important he get more ice time in the AHL. The guy people could care less about (Paetsch) had far more success in the AHL and had a great start in the NHL, too, before regressing. He was at one point was our solution to the power play. The guy is only 20 years old... Let him come up halfway through the season when Hank gets hit awkwardly into the boards and breaks something again. Set the guy up to succeed under incrementally increased expectations rather than anoint him a top 4 d-man and let him fail under the pressure.
SwampD Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I really think Paetsch is going to surprise everyone this year. I'm trying to figure out why people that are so willing to give players like Stafford and Paille a chance to develop are so willing to write this guy off. He has a lot of ability and speed and this will be only his third full season. He may have given up a couple of big plays last year but I was much more nervous watching lydman and tallinder last year than I was Paetsch. EDIT: Knight you beat me to it.
deluca67 Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 If the Sabres are battling for home ice in the playoffs this coming year, it will be because Lydman and Tallinder have rediscovered their game and the forwards showed a renewed commitment to defense. Sekera and Weber may be a big part of the future but expecting them to be major contributors this season is a reach. History is full of players that showed some potential at the tail end of the regular season never to be heard from again. The Sabres have had recent luck in that regard. I think even in the limited time they played last season that both Sekera and Weber showed they belong in the NHL. I don't think it's as much a reach to expect them to play well for the entire season as you do. Actually I have more faith in Weber and Sekera contributing to this team than I do Max and Connolly.
carpandean Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Hypothetically speaking, where do you think the Sabres would've finished the regular season if Weber and Sekera played the entire 07/08 season? Hard to say. Weber had player zero, count them ZERO games in any league higher than the OHL at the start of the season. Sekera had one AHL season under his belt and looked overwhelmed during his first call-up. Both learned a lot playing as the top line in Rochester for much of the first 3/4 of the season. How would they have looked if they were thrown into NHL play on day 1 of last season? Who knows. Maybe they get continually beat up on and don't get enough ice time to really progress. I think playing 20-25 minutes a game in Rochester, learning from mistakes made there and gaining confidence in their abilities was more useful than playing <10 minutes as an overwhelmed third pair. Of course, it is possible that they would both have stepped up to the challenge, but that's a big chance to take on two 20-21 year olds with a combined 54 AHL games and 2 NHL games under their belts. Sekera showed enough at the end of last season to make it worth taking the chance on him this year, now that he has 1 1/2 AHL seasons and 1/2 an NHL season of experience. Weber showed his potential in the sixteen games that he played, but that's a pretty small sample to base an opinion on. Even if he starts in the AHL, he will still likely play half a season in Buffalo this year, but a little more time on the top pair in Portland can't hurt his progression. If we can start with a highly skilled, calm-headed veteran defenseman to help complete Sekera's growth at the start of the season, as well as help Weber when he does get called up (and Paetsch when he gets used), I can't see that as a bad thing.
inkman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I really think Paetsch is going to surprise everyone this year. I'm trying to figure out why people that are so willing to give players like Stafford and Paille a chance to develop are so willing to write this guy off. ...because Paille and Stafford have shown that they actually posses talent where Paetsch, sans one brief 10 game power play injecting stint, has shown little more than AHL ability.
Bmwolf21 Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Don't forget forwards and goalies. True. There weren't a lot of Sabres who met or exceeded expectations last year.
nfreeman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Year Team League GP G A Pts +/- PIM Shots Sh% 2007-08 Buffalo NHL 16 0 3 3 +12 14 12 .00 2007-08 Rochest AHL 59 1 13 14 -8 178 - - 2006-07 Barrie OHL 30 3 12 15 +22 86 - - 59 AHL games, and 16 NHL games isn't much evidence to say he is ready. It is far more important he get more ice time in the AHL. The guy people could care less about (Paetsch) had far more success in the AHL and had a great start in the NHL, too, before regressing. He was at one point was our solution to the power play. The guy is only 20 years old... Let him come up halfway through the season when Hank gets hit awkwardly into the boards and breaks something again. Set the guy up to succeed under incrementally increased expectations rather than anoint him a top 4 d-man and let him fail under the pressure. Excellent post.
Mbossy Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Maybe not to the caliber that we need, but I still think he's decent. Besides, Lindy has played him at wing in the past, so he's versatile enough to not let go. Heck, why not slot him into wherever they'd put Max? You would take out Max and put in Paetsch? Honestly :bag:
wjag Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Hypothetically speaking, where do you think the Sabres would've finished the regular season if Weber and Sekera played the entire 07/08 season? Same place they did or worse.
inkman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 True. There weren't a lot of Sabres who met or exceeded expectations last year. Roy, Paille and Spacek. The list ends there. Unless you want to include Mair and Kaleta but I couldn't bring myself to do that.
SwampD Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 ...because Paille and Stafford have shown that they actually posses talent where Paetsch, sans one brief 10 game power play injecting stint, has shown little more than AHL ability. I think all three have shown about equall flashes of NHL talent. Stafford and Paille are completely utile forwards, but I'm still waiting for either to do something that makes me say,"Wow, this guy's gonna be great". I'm not saying they won't, I just haven't seen it yet and I know both are still young. And unlike forward, where I think you need more inate ability, I think Paetsch has enough skill to learn to be a better defenseman.
inkman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I think Paetsch has enough skill to learn to be a better defenseman. I think living in Rochester, seeing Nate play for several years before he reached the NHL, he never really stood out in the AHL. He was basically the exact same player you see now, just with a little more ice time.
inkman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I'm still waiting for either to do something that makes me say,"Wow, this guy's gonna be great". I saw it on a nightly basis for the Amerks. Those guys were clearly too talented for the AHL.
SwampD Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I think living in Rochester, seeing Nate play for several years before he reached the NHL, he never really stood out in the AHL. He was basically the exact same player you see now, just with a little more ice time. Like defensive backs in the NFL, if a defenseman doesn't stand out, it usually means he's doing his job. You only notice them when they get burnt.
carpandean Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Roy, Paille and Spacek. The list ends there. Unless you want to include Mair and Kaleta but I couldn't bring myself to do that. Pommer?
Bmwolf21 Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 Roy, Paille and Spacek. The list ends there. Unless you want to include Mair and Kaleta but I couldn't bring myself to do that. Pommer? Adding Pommer pretty much ends that list. It's pretty sad that those are the only guys (who started the season on the roster) who had a good year last year.
shrader Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I'm tempted to add Hecht to that list. Basically, he is what he is and seems to put in the performance you expect each night.
nfreeman Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I'm tempted to add Hecht to that list. Basically, he is what he is and seems to put in the performance you expect each night. I'd go along with Hecht and I'd add Sekera and (bracing myself for hostile reaction) Kotalik. Even with those additions, though, it's a short list.
Stoner Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I'd like to cast of vote of confidence in Nathan Paetsch. It might merely be the nice stretch of power play success with him at the pont, but I like the guy (but I don't really really like the guy and refuse to overhype him). He has a certain quality, I don't know. Seems unflappable in interviews, which could be telling. I think his best is yet to come. You heard it here first.
gregkash Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 I think all three have shown about equall flashes of NHL talent. Stafford and Paille are completely utile forwards, but I'm still waiting for either to do something that makes me say,"Wow, this guy's gonna be great". I'm not saying they won't, I just haven't seen it yet and I know both are still young. And unlike forward, where I think you need more inate ability, I think Paetsch has enough skill to learn to be a better defenseman. that makes me say wow, he's gonna be awesome.
wjag Posted July 24, 2008 Report Posted July 24, 2008 that makes me say wow, he's gonna be awesome. I remember that shot. He has a one-game, one shot, highlight reel. He didn't come close to that level of play last year.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.