Darcy was on WGR

[Stoner]

Around 11:50 of the audio version on the Sabres site.

 

"When you look at the UFA market; it's not a big market"

 

, I had to listen all the way through again. Note to self: find woman.

[nobody]

, I had to listen all the way through again. Note to self: find woman.

 

 

Unlock Chz from your basement for a few minutes.

[X. Benedict]

Around 11:50 of the audio version on the Sabres site.

 

"When you look at the UFA market; it's not a big market"

 

Thanks guys.

[LabattBlue]

I admit I have not read every post, but in general I am with X ... why should he tip his hand? he did that last year when he said Max needed a change of scenery and he couldn't move him.

I disagree. Not being able to trade Max had nothing to do with tipping his hand and everything to do with setting a deadline and making the best deal he could regardless of what the return was.

 

So what was the end result? Lindy was stuck with a player he despised and DR let another player go into UFA who he had no intention of re-signing.

[nfreeman]

I disagree. Not being able to trade Max had nothing to do with tipping his hand and everything to do with setting a deadline and making the best deal he could regardless of what the return was.

 

So what was the end result? Lindy was stuck with a player he despised and DR let another player go into UFA who he had no intention of re-signing.

While your post has the ring of truth, you must also admit that this is pure speculation. We have no idea whether anyone was willing to give Darcy anything at all for Max (or whether the only options included us taking back other bad contracts, etc.).

[BetweenThePipes00]

I disagree. Not being able to trade Max had nothing to do with tipping his hand and everything to do with setting a deadline and making the best deal he could regardless of what the return was.

 

So what was the end result? Lindy was stuck with a player he despised and DR let another player go into UFA who he had no intention of re-signing.

I'm not saying it was the only reason. the bigger reason was because he has sucked for two straight seasons. But what exactly was gained by broadcasting to the league that they wanted to trade him before the season even started? Nothing. It just made them look desperate to unload him which never makes for getting the most return.

[deluca67]

I assume you don't think the State Senate was a smoothly-functioning, ethical, highly effective unit until TG went on a deranged rampage and turned it upside down for no reason?

 

As for letting the team "rot" -- IMHO, TG knows he royally screwed up the team by vetoing the bigger/long-term contracts in 2006-07 that we needed to keep the team together, so last year he decided to give LQ & Darcy a budget and let them call the shots. This is why we saw the big extensions last summer for Miller, Pommer and Hecht. I'm sure TG isn't happy with not making the playoffs last year, but he saw enough improvement, after a single offseason with Darcy calling the shots, to give Darcy and Lindy another shot this year. If there are no playoffs this year I'd guess both will be gone.

 

I think we'll see at least one and possibly two solid additions from outside the organization this summer. I also think the Sabres will be back in the playoffs, and closer to the #4-5 slot than to #7-8. I even think DeLuca will jump back on the bandwagon.

 

But I'm an optimist.

 

Go Sabres.

I may bitch and moan but I truly hope you are right :thumbsup: Unless the Sabres make significant strides in changing the make up of this team I just don't see it happening. This is a front office stuck in it's ways. I believe Lindy talked about his team playing "out of character." For the team to make the playoffs this season the front office will have to attack this off-season "out of character." It's not going to happen. This team doesn't identify players and go get them. They wait to see what's left when it's their turn and then pick. That's just how it's going to be until they can prove they can change or others are brought in to make the decisions.

[deluca67]

So the gigantic increase in the value of the franchise wasn't the result he wanted?

You're right, it's just too bad that TG doesn't show the loyalty to the people actually responsible for that increase instead of Regier and Quinn.

[nfreeman]

I may bitch and moan but I truly hope you are right :thumbsup: Unless the Sabres make significant strides in changing the make up of this team I just don't see it happening. This is a front office stuck in it's ways. I believe Lindy talked about his team playing "out of character." For the team to make the playoffs this season the front office will have to attack this off-season "out of character." It's not going to happen. This team doesn't identify players and go get them. They wait to see what's left when it's their turn and then pick. That's just how it's going to be until they can prove they can change or others are brought in to make the decisions.

I agree that we aren't going to see a wholesale change in their approach, but that doesn't mean they don't identify players and then get them. They targeted Drury, Grier, Spacek, Rivet, Briere, etc. It just means they don't identify Bouwmeester or Hossa and spend $50MM+ to get him. And, I would argue, that is largely the correct approach. How many high-profile UFA signings have translated into real success for their teams? For every one that has (like Chara, although Boston has won 1 playoff series in 3 years since getting him), I can name 3 that haven't (Souray, Gomez, Avery) -- and the washouts cripple their teams' budgets for years.

 

You can't build a real contender overnight. Darcy put together the post-lockout team over a period of several years. I think that given some time and breathing room from upstairs he can do it again. Of course, if he sits on his hands again this summer and we miss the playoffs again, I'll be as PO'd as anyone.

[deluca67]

I agree that we aren't going to see a wholesale change in their approach, but that doesn't mean they don't identify players and then get them. They targeted Drury, Grier, Spacek, Rivet, Briere, etc. It just means they don't identify Bouwmeester or Hossa and spend $50MM+ to get him. And, I would argue, that is largely the correct approach. How many high-profile UFA signings have translated into real success for their teams? For every one that has (like Chara, although Boston has won 1 playoff series in 3 years since getting him), I can name 3 that haven't (Souray, Gomez, Avery) -- and the washouts cripple their teams' budgets for years.

 

You can't build a real contender overnight. Darcy put together the post-lockout team over a period of several years. I think that given some time and breathing room from upstairs he can do it again. Of course, if he sits on his hands again this summer and we miss the playoffs again, I'll be as PO'd as anyone.

You can't build a real contender overnight, I agree. You also can't build a real contender by limiting the teams resources for adding to this roster. Buy not even considering the buyout option or ever taking a serious look into free agency you limit yourself and the ability for this team to grow. You can't build a team strictly on free agency. Was there a team in this years final four that didn't at least get a contribution form a free agent signing? Rafalski, Campbell, Gonchar and Pitkanen? Spacek was a good free agent signing for the Sabres? Free agency shouldn't be the base of any rebuilding plan. It shouldn't be ignored either.

[Stoner]

You can't build a real contender overnight, I agree. You also can't build a real contender by limiting the teams resources for adding to this roster. Buy not even considering the buyout option or ever taking a serious look into free agency you limit yourself and the ability for this team to grow. You can't build a team strictly on free agency. Was there a team in this years final four that didn't at least get a contribution form a free agent signing? Rafalski, Campbell, Gonchar and Pitkanen? Spacek was a good free agent signing for the Sabres? Free agency shouldn't be the base of any rebuilding plan. It shouldn't be ignored either.

 

A Bobby Kennedy quote came to mind. "There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?"

 

Then I saw this one on the same page: "Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly."

 

This organEYEzation lost its balls along the way, and if hockey is about anything, it's about balls. BALLS I say.

 

! ! Jism! Grandma! !

[carpandean]

You can't build a real contender overnight, I agree. You also can't build a real contender by limiting the teams resources for adding to this roster. By not even considering the buyout option or ever taking a serious look into free agency you limit yourself and the ability for this team to grow. You can't build a team strictly on free agency. Was there a team in this years final four that didn't at least get a contribution form a free agent signing? Rafalski, Campbell, Gonchar and Pitkanen? Spacek was a good free agent signing for the Sabres? Free agency shouldn't be the base of any rebuilding plan. It shouldn't be ignored either.

I don't have much problem with not looking at the buyout option because it is rarely a good one for the team. In order to buyout a player over 26 years old, the team must pay 2/3 of his total remaining salary over twice the remaining years in his contract. For example, buying out Tallinder would take $1.083 per year for the next two years and buying out Hecht would take $1.144 million for the next six years. While there may be some benefit to spreading it out, you basically have to decide that a player isn't worth 1/3 of his contract (choice is player with full salary vs. no player with 2/3 salary.) It is often less painful to move the player down in the depth chart or basically pay (through packing with valuable assets or taking back overpriced assets) another team to take the player off of your hands. How often (under the current CBA) have you heard about buyouts around the league? If you're not hearing 15+ teams buying out players around the league each year, then the Sabres are in the majority on that one.

 

(Note: while we don't care about the cap right now, it is something that Darcy has to consider. Buyouts do weird things to the cap hit based on whether the contract is increasing or decreasing. See here for the cap hits of the two example players above.)

 

I also don't have much of a problem with not being active in the big name, July 1st FA market. You list Campbell as contributing to a playoff team this year, but his contract will be detrimental to the Blackhawks' future over its course. They will have to give up more valuable players because of his contract and that's a common story for those top few 7/1 FAs. Same with guys like Drury, Gomez, Campbell, Briere, etc., etc. ...

 

However, after those top three or four, the prices become more reasonable and those next tier UFAs should be seen as viable options. While Darcy hasn't been a major player there over the last couple of years, I don't know if he actually won't look to those next tiers for talent. Obviously, he prefers the trade market and has had decent success there, but he talks more about the "July 1st market" being overpriced than about FAs in general.

[nfreeman]

You can't build a real contender overnight, I agree. You also can't build a real contender by limiting the teams resources for adding to this roster. Buy not even considering the buyout option or ever taking a serious look into free agency you limit yourself and the ability for this team to grow. You can't build a team strictly on free agency. Was there a team in this years final four that didn't at least get a contribution form a free agent signing? Rafalski, Campbell, Gonchar and Pitkanen? Spacek was a good free agent signing for the Sabres? Free agency shouldn't be the base of any rebuilding plan. It shouldn't be ignored either.

On this we agree, although I would want the Sabres to focus more on the 2nd-tier/less costly FAs (like Pitkanen, who was an RFA, or Gonchar, who was not cheap at $5MM per year, but not crazy expensive either) than on the $7MM+ guys.

 

I don't have much problem with not looking at the buyout option because it is rarely a good one for the team. In order to buyout a player over 26 years old, the team must pay 2/3 of his total remaining salary over twice the remaining year in his contract. For example, buying out Tallinder would take $1.083 per year for the next two years and buying out Hecht would take $1.144 million for the next six years. While there may be some benefit to spreading it out, you basically have to decide that a player isn't worth 1/3 of his contract (choice is player with full salary vs. no player with 2/3 salary.) It is often less painful to move the player down in the depth chart or basically pay (through packing with valuable assets or taking back overpriced assets) another team to take the player off of your hands. How often (under the current CBA) have you heard about buyouts around the league? If you're not hearing 15+ teams buying out players around the league each year, then the Sabres are in the majority on that one.

 

(Note: while we don't care about the cap right now, it is something that Darcy has to consider. Buyouts do weird things to the cap hit based on whether the contract is increasing or decreasing. See here for the cap hits of the two example players above.)

 

I also don't have much of a problem with not being active in the big name, July 1st FA market. You list Campbell as contributing to a playoff team this year, but his contract will be detrimental to the Blackhawks' future over its course. They will have to give up more valuable players because of his contract and that's a common story for those top few 7/1 FAs. Same with guys like Drury, Gomez, Campbell, Briere, etc., etc. ...

 

However, after those top three or four, the prices become more reasonable and those next tier UFAs should be seen as viable options. While Darcy hasn't been a major player there over the last couple of years, I don't know if he actually won't look to those next tiers for talent. Obviously, he prefers the trade market and has had decent success there, but he talks more about the "July 1st market" being overpriced than about FAs in general.

Good post. Soupy's deal will probably result in Chicago losing Havlat, who was their leading scorer this year. And as mentioned above, I would favor bringing in a 2nd-tier FA (although I suspect Darcy's preference is to bring someone in via trade).

[Mbossy]

A Bobby Kennedy quote came to mind. "There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?"

 

Then I saw this one on the same page: "Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly."

 

This organEYEzation lost its balls along the way, and if hockey is about anything, it's about balls. BALLS I say.

 

! ! Jism! Grandma! !

Wow. I guess you have to wait until the first of the month to get those meds refilled, eh?

 

Because you may have got some on your computer screen and because of my concern for your health, I am providing you with this Special Program link at no cost to you to correct this fast growing potential Health Problem.

 

Click on this link to clean the inside of your screen: because I care.

 

http://www.raincitystory.com/flash/screenclean.swf

[nobody]

Internet Tourette's is no laughing matter.

[nobody]

A little more insight perhaps from Darcy:

 

Sabres plan bulk for farm

 

"We want to make sure we provide our skilled players with players who can do the work in the corners to supplement them," Regier said. "We're going to add size at both levels of the organization."