SabresFan526 Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Thanks Deluca and Nfreeman, this was a very nicely done back and forth debate that really touched allot of good points. This is the type of discussion that keeps me coming back. On a side note I was not on the debate team in school but lets ask PA's opinion since he added some fuel to the dicussion and he is a master of the craft and he brought Wilbur's onto the board thereby solidifying his credentials as a masterbater.. ;) Sadly enough, I was. I have not read much of this thread to comment on anything else. I can, however, appreciate Chuck Flether's aggressive move to sign Havlatt once Gaborik signed in New York. I just don't think it will do them much good as Havlatt is ridiculously injury prone and actually his game would have fit better under Lemaire than under the new coach as he's actually a decent two way player whereas Gaborik would have been even better under the new coach. But, Havlatt is probably no more injury prone than Gaborik and costs less, so he's probably a good replacement.
bob_sauve28 Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 To think that Sather negotiated 85 million in contracts with Gomez and Drury in in the first hour of free agency two years ago is even more amazing. True
Stoner Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Oh come on, you don't think the Rangers could have got to his agents through back channels long before this? Remember how well Drury was playing at beginning of the season? I think you've done the splits and snatched the story right there at the end of your post. When Drury started putting up the serious numbers at the beginning of the season, and the team was on a roll, I think all bets were off with the Sabres. Drury and his agent were probably delighted that the deal fell through. X. makes a great point. The whole July 1 scenario is a farce. Farcical.
X. Benedict Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 Wondering.......does anyone think that losing Pavel Kubina and adding Komiserik is a downgrade for the Leafs? Certainly a different package, but Kubina was pretty dangerous in the offensive zone. Burke seems to be getting the benefit of the doubt putting a tough stamp on the team........... Bucky's column seemed to gloss over that. ..... maybe because they are looking to move Kaberle too....
Alaska Darin Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 I honestly don't follow the Wild that closely. I was impressed by the message the move sent to the fans. They lost a big ticket star and instead of blaming the system or turning it into an ugly affair like what happened here they made a decisive move. I can respect that. It's always easier to be objective when you don't care or know much about a team. Go ahead and respect them. :lol:
nfreeman Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 To think that Sather negotiated 85 million in contracts with Gomez and Drury in in the first hour of free agency two years ago is even more amazing. I could be wrong, but I thought Briere signed early afternoon on Black Sunday, and Drury signed in the evening. I think you've done the splits and snatched the story right there at the end of your post. When Drury started putting up the serious numbers at the beginning of the season, and the team was on a roll, I think all bets were off with the Sabres. Drury and his agent were probably delighted that the deal fell through. X. makes a great point. The whole July 1 scenario is a farce. Farcical. It's certainly possible, but I suspect it went more like this: Drury's 1st choice was the Rangers. Drury was very high on the Rangers' wish list. The Rangers called his agent at 12:01 PM that day and made an offer. His agent counter-offered within an hour. They reached an agreement within another hour. They signed a contract (which is a very standardized form, as I understand it) within another couple of hours. The Sabres fell apart. Wondering.......does anyone think that losing Pavel Kubina and adding Komiserik is a downgrade for the Leafs?Certainly a different package, but Kubina was pretty dangerous in the offensive zone. Burke seems to be getting the benefit of the doubt putting a tough stamp on the team........... Bucky's column seemed to gloss over that. ..... maybe because they are looking to move Kaberle too.... I don't think it's a downgrade, but I do think Komisarek is a bit over-hyped, as is Burke. Still, the Leafs do look to be improved at this point -- if only because they've been so crappy for so long. Beauchemin is a real defenseman and Komisarek is pretty solid even if overrated. But if they trade Kaberle for a so-so forward who hits and is "a Burke guy", I might move to the overall downgrade camp.
shrader Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 If he does turn into 3/4 of pronger that will be good, but it won't even be that for a good few years. He can't be rushed. Look at Sekera, at end of last year, just out of gas. The younger kids just are ready for the full NHL season, it seems to me. I'm excited to see this kid play. I hope he is as good as all the talk about him. There's a long list of reasons why some players might develop quicker than others. In Sekera's case, I think a big one could be the fact that he's only been in north american since 2004. Yeah, it will probably take some time for Myers to develop, but we can't count out an immediate impact.
apuszczalowski Posted July 8, 2009 Report Posted July 8, 2009 In regards to the Drury deal, do people really think that some of these huge deals are "negotiated between the teams and the players? In these situations where they sign so quickly, the team making the offer already has a contract and deal written up and sitting ina fax machine for the opening of FA to start. Deal gets faxed to the players agent who looks it over, shows it to the client, and they make any changes or accept the deal and iron out the finer details after
X. Benedict Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 I don't think it's a downgrade, but I do think Komisarek is a bit over-hyped, as is Burke. Still, the Leafs do look to be improved at this point -- if only because they've been so crappy for so long. Beauchemin is a real defenseman and Komisarek is pretty solid even if overrated. But if they trade Kaberle for a so-so forward who hits and is "a Burke guy", I might move to the overall downgrade camp. I like the Komisarek move....the simple physics of a big body that gets in the way and blocks pucks. From a team building standpoint, I hate the Beauchemin move. The guy logged a ton of minutes with Pronger.....but .........coming off a torn ACL ....gotta wonder....I don't think he was that nimble to begin with. Heavy, Heavy shot, but how are they going to use him? Komisarek plays physically, but he never struck me as particularly nasty. My bet is Kaberle becomes less disposable as that season progresses if he stays on the roster now that Kubina is gone.
bob_sauve28 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 There's a long list of reasons why some players might develop quicker than others. In Sekera's case, I think a big one could be the fact that he's only been in north american since 2004. Yeah, it will probably take some time for Myers to develop, but we can't count out an immediate impact. I hope so. And I hope Sekera bounces back from a tough second half of the season and we continue to see him improve.
nfreeman Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 I like the Komisarek move....the simple physics of a big body that gets in the way and blocks pucks. From a team building standpoint, I hate the Beauchemin move. The guy logged a ton of minutes with Pronger.....but .........coming off a torn ACL ....gotta wonder....I don't think he was that nimble to begin with. Heavy, Heavy shot, but how are they going to use him? Komisarek plays physically, but he never struck me as particularly nasty. My bet is Kaberle becomes less disposable as that season progresses if he stays on the roster now that Kubina is gone. I agree, which is why I hope they dump him for less than what they ought to get for him -- which might happen, because they need the cap space and they need to unload 1 or 2 defensemen.
bob_sauve28 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 I agree, which is why I hope they dump him for less than what they ought to get for him -- which might happen, because they need the cap space and they need to unload 1 or 2 defensemen. If they dump him they are crazy.
deluca67 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 If they dump him they are crazy. This should be a bigger topic, maybe even pinned. Should the Sabres make Kaberle a part of their core group? Is he worth the price for his rights and is he worth the money it would cost for a long term deal? Does he make the Sabres a playoff team? A contender? I am sure this conversation has to be going on at the HSBC Arena. If they can make the deal, get him signed long term and do so without giving up Myers? I say make the deal. If Myers is truly the player that is being talked about and Kaberle has the impact I would expect, all the Sabres would need is a little grizzle in the forward ranks and this team could be a playoff team again.
shrader Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 His rights? He's got 2 years left on his deal so he can't get a new one until next summer at the earliest.
deluca67 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 His rights? He's got 2 years left on his deal so he can't get a new one until next summer at the earliest. I used "rights" because I was thinking I wouldn't make the trade without a long term deal in place. If the wording is confusing I do apologize.
shrader Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 I used "rights" because I was thinking I wouldn't make the trade without a long term deal in place. If the wording is confusing I do apologize. See, there's the problem though, getting a long term deal in place isn't possible at this point.
deluca67 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 See, there's the problem though, getting a long term deal in place isn't possible at this point. They can only extend in the final year. I did forget about that. Scratch Kaberle then, no way would I ever support a move like that without long term security.
DR HOLLIDAY Posted July 9, 2009 Report Posted July 9, 2009 Obtuse again. Should we pretend that in those 5 years in which they missed the playoffs, none of the following events -- all of which were out of Darcy's control -- happened: 1. Darcy's boss refused to pay the team captain (Peca), so he held out for an entire year and was traded 2. The Sabres lost by far their best player (Hasek), who insisted on leaving because he realized he couldn't win here 3. The owner was arrested and jailed 4. The team went bankrupt 5. The team was taken over by the NHL 6. The team was in grave danger of folding or moving 7. Darcy's new boss refused to pay an important leader/grit guy (Grier), who left in free agency (note that this one is what Bucky claims Quinn did -- not corroborated) 8. Darcy's new boss refused to pay the co-captains, who then left in free agency 9. Darcy's new boss refused to pay their best defenseman, who was traded When you're trying to build a team with a budget that's in the 30th percentile in the NHL, you're walking a fine line. Darcy built a great team from the ashes of the first debacle and then had to watch as his new bosses took a hammer to it. You can blame him all you want, but if you don't take the context into account, IMHO you are missing the forest for the trees. I agree........... :thumbsup:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.