tom webster Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 I could think of a few teams that would be better served going for the elite forward, but yeah, I'm with you on this one. Obviously any team would love to have either, but this team definitely needs that warhorse defenseman more than they need a forward. But then again, I may just be blinded by the last 6'6 defenseman that went 2nd overall (hopefully this year's #1 works out better than that year's). That year may rank as one of the worst draft classes by our beloved Sabres although they did somewhat make up for it by trading the 220th pick for the 111th.
X. Benedict Posted April 15, 2009 Report Posted April 15, 2009 I could think of a few teams that would be better served going for the elite forward, but yeah, I'm with you on this one. Obviously any team would love to have either, but this team definitely needs that warhorse defenseman more than they need a forward. But then again, I may just be blinded by the last 6'6 defenseman that went 2nd overall (hopefully this year's #1 works out better than that year's). Sometimes it is easy to get caught up in a players size and frame, but this kid can move the puck already and he's got Mat Sundin's body. I think Burke is talking up Tavares with his sights on this kid. Can you imagine Schenn and this kid together for a decade?
thesportsbuff Posted April 16, 2009 Report Posted April 16, 2009 Ok, now that I've finished laughing at this suggestion, I'll ask a question. Sure, the Islanders need to rebuild, but why would they accept a pick heavy offer when they're staring into the face of as close to a guarantee as you'll ever find? They'd be giving up essentially a known quantity in return for a bunch of questionable picks with no guarantee of ever panning out. If either of these picks are moved, it's going to be for actual, NHL proven or ready bodies. And now, it won't be the likes of MacArthur, Paille, and Hecht. In terms of Sabres players, it would take at least someone of Roy's status and then a few more higher level players, mixed in with a couple prospects. In other words, it's not happening. so, no deal? that's about as far as I'd go, realistic or not.
billsrcursed Posted April 16, 2009 Report Posted April 16, 2009 Enough of the grand terms, I don't see you as some sort of hockey yoda. Seldom are leaders dropped into teams from outside, most come up there systems, were placed in situations to succeed, developed by and given the support of management. Waiting and looking around outside to find who someone else has developed to be your leader and captain ludicrous.I would more than enjoy further discussion providing it can be done with some respect. Otherwise I will not waste my time. Don't mind if I do..... Who is it then that should have been given the "C"?? Keep in mind, you eluded to the notion that bringing Rivet in and allowing the players to vote him Captain played a vital role in us not making the playoffs, so my next post is going to be why having "_________" as our Captain still wouldn't have gotten us to the playoffs. <_<
joe w bags Posted April 16, 2009 Author Report Posted April 16, 2009 Do you have any thoughts yourself? Don't mind if I do..... Who is it then that should have been given the "C"?? Keep in mind, you eluded to the notion that bringing Rivet in and allowing the players to vote him Captain played a vital role in us not making the playoffs, so my next post is going to be why having "_________" as our Captain still wouldn't have gotten us to the playoffs. <_<
shrader Posted April 16, 2009 Report Posted April 16, 2009 That year may rank as one of the worst draft classes by our beloved Sabres although they did somewhat make up for it by trading the 220th pick for the 111th. I never even thought to look at our draft that year. My god that was horrible. Scott Nichol was the only one to actually have an NHL career and he was our last pick (11th round). At least we got something out of Tsygurov though. Yeah, he looks to be a throw in on that LA deal, but at least they convinced someone he had value. Sometimes it is easy to get caught up in a players size and frame, but this kid can move the puck already and he's got Mat Sundin's body. I think Burke is talking up Tavares with his sights on this kid. Can you imagine Schenn and this kid together for a decade? It's a scary thought, but personally I don't think having two defensemen like that works longterm in the salary cap era. Sure, it paid off in Anahiem, but look at the trouble it brought on. I'm not so sure you can sign two guys like that with the intention of keeping them long term.
billsrcursed Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 Do you have any thoughts yourself? So you're not going to answer my question? Wow, thanks... My thoughts pertaining to our Captaincy is that I was good with Rivet being VOTED in as Captain. I'm not in the locker room, but if the majority felt it best to give it to Craig, who am I to disagree? For the record, there wasn't anyone else worthy of the "C" in that locker room this year, although I would have been good with Goose getting it.
LabattBlue Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 So you're not going to answer my question? Wow, thanks... My thoughts pertaining to our Captaincy is that I was good with Rivet being VOTED in as Captain. I'm not in the locker room, but if the majority felt it best to give it to Craig, who am I to disagree? For the record, there wasn't anyone else worthy of the "C" in that locker room this year, although I would have been good with Goose getting it. The whole problem with an "outsider"(Rivet) being named captain is that it implied that the guys who have been on the team for several years thought so little of their existing teammates as leaders that they chose to look elsewhere. IMO, the red flag went up right then and there.
Eleven Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 The whole problem with an "outsider"(Rivet) being named captain is that it implied that the guys who have been on the team for several years thought so little of their existing teammates as leaders that they chose to look elsewhere. IMO, the red flag went up right then and there. Or, they thought a lot of Rivet. Wasn't his nickname "Coach Craig" in San Jose? But I do agree that the returning players in 2008 didn't include too many natural-born leaders.
shrader Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 The whole problem with an "outsider"(Rivet) being named captain is that it implied that the guys who have been on the team for several years thought so little of their existing teammates as leaders that they chose to look elsewhere. IMO, the red flag went up right then and there. It's easy to say this now, but where were these comments at the start of the season? Personally I think it's nothing more than revisionist history.
LabattBlue Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 It's easy to say this now, but where were these comments at the start of the season? Personally I think it's nothing more than revisionist history. I'm not sure I said it here, but that was the first thing that came to mind.
Stoner Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 It's easy to say this now, but where were these comments at the start of the season? Personally I think it's nothing more than revisionist history. There were plenty of question marks surrounding the selection of Rivet.
shrader Posted April 17, 2009 Report Posted April 17, 2009 I'm willing to give you guys a pass on this one, but I've seen more than enough people who around here who change their opinions every second, all while saying "I knew it from the start". My big issue with it though, is why is this such a big deal? Whether or not Rivet was the right guy isn't the issue here. If management thinks a lack of leadership is an issue, they need to try and fill that gap. Regardless of what newbie thinks, these guys won't just suddenly become leaders. They need to see a true leader in action and learn from that. Being a leader on a team full of 16 year olds is a far cry from leading an NHL team. Sure, some guys just have it and always will. Others have the potential, but they need to see someone else in action. And I also know that some of you are probably thinking "they had leadership and they let it go", but what's done is done. They can't go and undo that. All they can do now is to try and move forward with what they have now.
sabresnutinphoenix Posted April 18, 2009 Report Posted April 18, 2009 We already have solid young talent developing. I would not give up the house to land Tavares. I agree about the part about not giving up the farm for Tavares...
Two or less Posted April 18, 2009 Report Posted April 18, 2009 We already have solid young talent developing. I would not give up the house to land Tavares. I wouldn't want Tavares anyways. He's a snot. Bigger then Crosby so no thanks. The swedish kid, Scheen or Kane i'd rank higher then him.
spndnchz Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Red Line Report Tavares third behind Hedman and Duchene. Tavares, 104 points and only a plus +10? Duchene- 79 points, +32. A bit smaller, but more two way Hedman- "a defenseman around which teams build a franchise" 21 points and +21 I don't see any team giving up enough to move into the top three picks.
joe w bags Posted April 22, 2009 Author Report Posted April 22, 2009 yes , I was thinking when I read that :blush: Many seem to think Burke's desire is really Duchene, of Brampton Battalion. Also speculated that Islanders because they need a player to market will keep pick and choose Tavares, he the fancy pick. Tampa Bay on the other hand may be open to talk because they need $$. No real harm in Burke stating he wants to move up, many have commented its shooting for the stars maybe he finds the moon. -critique on Tavares is he has not came up big in the current playoffs. Seems a little harsh as Knights are currently playing Spitfires, they are down 3 - 1 , all the games have gone into overtime. My intent of post was not so much Tavares, as should the Sabres do what they can to move up and pick one of the top picks and what would you give up to do so. These top picks fine players but are any of them really franchise guys. Red Line Report Tavares third behind Hedman and Duchene. Tavares, 104 points and only a plus +10? Duchene- 79 points, +32. A bit smaller, but more two way Hedman- "a defenseman around which teams build a franchise" 21 points and +21 I don't see any team giving up enough to move into the top three picks.
shrader Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Just out of curiousity, if your point wasn't Tavares, why put him in the thread title?
joe w bags Posted April 22, 2009 Author Report Posted April 22, 2009 Nothing more than he at this time according to NHL scouting is number one pick, my intent was to ask how far would you go for number one pick. Sorry my desire is to get along , get to know you folk, contribute, get some information, have some fun. Whats up? Just out of curiousity, if your point wasn't Tavares, why put him in the thread title?
jimiVbaby Posted April 23, 2009 Report Posted April 23, 2009 Red Line Report Tavares third behind Hedman and Duchene. Tavares, 104 points and only a plus +10? Duchene- 79 points, +32. A bit smaller, but more two way Hedman- "a defenseman around which teams build a franchise" 21 points and +21 I don't see any team giving up enough to move into the top three picks. This whole report just wreaks of people trying to bring Tavares down. The thing is, I've been a little less high on Tavares after seeing his work at the WJC and I still believe the kid has the skills to be picked number one or two. Moving him down to 3 behind Duchene is absurd. Sure Tavares gets most of the goals by banging them home right on the doorstep, but he has great hockey sense, passing, shooting and the ability to take over a game. If you are the Islanders you have to pick Tavares and you're happy about it because you're going to get a very good to great NHLer.
spndnchz Posted April 23, 2009 Report Posted April 23, 2009 This whole report just wreaks of people trying to bring Tavares down. The thing is, I've been a little less high on Tavares after seeing his work at the WJC and I still believe the kid has the skills to be picked number one or two. Moving him down to 3 behind Duchene is absurd. Sure Tavares gets most of the goals by banging them home right on the doorstep, but he has great hockey sense, passing, shooting and the ability to take over a game. If you are the Islanders you have to pick Tavares and you're happy about it because you're going to get a very good to great NHLer. He is a great NHL'r, or at least going to be. Look at the Islander's with 2nd to worst Goals for and last goals against, they need everything. Tavares would only be a piece of the puzzle, Hedman another. I'd expect them happy with either.
jimiVbaby Posted April 23, 2009 Report Posted April 23, 2009 He is a great NHL'r, or at least going to be. Look at the Islander's with 2nd to worst Goals for and last goals against, they need everything. Tavares would only be a piece of the puzzle, Hedman another. I'd expect them happy with either. Very true, the redline report even says that he's been more of a spectator during the OHL playoffs which are considerable red flags. At least he'd be getting paid good money for watching such a horrible Islander team. :thumbsup: In fairness though, the Islander market needs John Tavares to survive. He's been lauded as the next great one, since every canadian besides Don Cherry were foaming at the mouth for Crosby. If you want to disenfranchise your fan base to the Nth degree, take Hedman and move the team to Kansas City.
shrader Posted April 23, 2009 Report Posted April 23, 2009 Very true, the redline report even says that he's been more of a spectator during the OHL playoffs which are considerable red flags. At least he'd be getting paid good money for watching such a horrible Islander team. :thumbsup: In fairness though, the Islander market needs John Tavares to survive. He's been lauded as the next great one, since every canadian besides Don Cherry were foaming at the mouth for Crosby. If you want to disenfranchise your fan base to the Nth degree, take Hedman and move the team to Kansas City. And would no showing in a playoff series mean all that much when he's drafted by a team that won't see the playoffs for a very long time?
joe w bags Posted April 23, 2009 Author Report Posted April 23, 2009 International Scouting Services Top 30 Matt Duchene passes Hedman in rankings.....
shrader Posted April 23, 2009 Report Posted April 23, 2009 International Scouting Services Top 30 Matt Duchene passes Hedman in rankings..... #26 and 27 really irritate me. Morin and Werek both bailed on the NCAA to go major junior instead. Now LeBlanc is the only potential first round guy playing in New England this year.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.