sabresman17 Posted July 17, 2009 Report Posted July 17, 2009 What position are you not satisfied with going into the 09-10 season?
Stoner Posted July 17, 2009 Report Posted July 17, 2009 What position are you not satisfied with going into the 09-10 season? 10th.
spndnchz Posted July 17, 2009 Report Posted July 17, 2009 Well, according to the title of your thread, the lack of "d". :w00t:
North Buffalo Posted July 17, 2009 Report Posted July 17, 2009 Creative Center, minimum 2nd line capable. D seems to have largely been addressed.
carpandean Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 A top-6 winger/center (as in one that can actually play center on a scoring line, unlike Hecht) or another true center (moving Roy or Connolly to wing), preferably one that could be described as a "veteran leader" type and is willing to battle for the puck, to round out our top six and provide depth at scoring-line center. Not an easy task by any means, especially since it would require clearing salary to make it happen. However, the lack of scoring-line center depth has hurt us for roughly half of each of the last two seasons since we went from 3-1/2 to 1-1/2. You could just replay Darcy's presser from last year in which he said that we were fine at center as long as Connolly stays healthy, as nothing has changed (unless Timmy K is further along than we know.)
deluca67 Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 What position are you not satisfied with going into the 09-10 season? General Manager. What's the point of a thread talking about what the Sabres need when we all know their GM won't address any of them. It's apparent that after the extensive evaluation they felt they needed to add marginal NHL talent. That is the only need they addressed so far.
apuszczalowski Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 General Manager. What's the point of a thread talking about what the Sabres need when we all know their GM won't address any of them. It's apparent that after the extensive evaluation they felt they needed to add marginal NHL talent. That is the only need they addressed so far. Beat me to the punch on this one, I was going to say GM too We just have to look at previous years to know that Darcy won't make any moves that will make a huge impact unless its a salary dump or a rental of a player they will hype as having potential and then let walk
billsrcursed Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 It's funny to me that everyone keeps pointing the finger at the F.O. for not making any "moves". What moves do you suggest we make?? I'd be interested in seeing who you guys think would be dumb enough to give us their talent in exchange for the same guys we keep complaining about. Granted, the FO put us in this position in the first place, but I don't see anyone bringing that up. All I keep reading is post after post about how we aren't making any moves. Well, play GM for a minute, and instead of complaining, offer suggestions as to what moves you think are possible?? And trading Hecht and Tallinder for a top line center isn't what I'm talking about. What, realistically, do you expect Darcy to do with the heaping pile of Sloppy Joe he's created?? Point is, this team has put themselves in a position where they CAN'T make any moves, because nobody's interested in our guys.... and they sure as hell are NOT gonna go out and overpay for 1 guy expecting that to make enough of a difference to balance out the payroll via playoffs/ticket sales...
wonderbread Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 It's funny to me that everyone keeps pointing the finger at the F.O. for not making any "moves". What moves do you suggest we make?? I'd be interested in seeing who you guys think would be dumb enough to give us their talent in exchange for the same guys we keep complaining about. Granted, the FO put us in this position in the first place, but I don't see anyone bringing that up. All I keep reading is post after post about how we aren't making any moves. Well, play GM for a minute, and instead of complaining, offer suggestions as to what moves you think are possible?? And trading Hecht and Tallinder for a top line center isn't what I'm talking about. What, realistically, do you expect Darcy to do with the heaping pile of Sloppy Joe he's created?? Point is, this team has put themselves in a position where they CAN'T make any moves, because nobody's interested in our guys.... and they sure as hell are NOT gonna go out and overpay for 1 guy expecting that to make enough of a difference to balance out the payroll via playoffs/ticket sales... Hecht and Tallindar both have value. So DR packages them for draft picks. Don't tell me it can't be done. If Gomez and Ryan Smyth with their huge salaries can be move these two can as well. He needs to stop holding on to his fear that he will move them and they will produce better else where. Breaking up is hard to do. With this move it will allow the team approx 6.08 of cap space to sign a center on the market. Lang is yet unsigned and would serve two roles firstly a solid center and secondly a vetern presence to help the team develop. At 4 million last year he could be had for less this year say 2 years 7 million. That is a reasonable cap hit and will ensure that they have a solid center for the next year as well furthering time for players like Tim Kennedy/ Gerbe etc to develop. The extra money that is there approx 2.6 million could then be used to sign Stafford. This is just my .02. You asked.
billsrcursed Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Hecht and Tallindar both have value. So DR packages them for draft picks. Don't tell me it can't be done. If Gomez and Ryan Smyth with their huge salaries can be move these two can as well. He needs to stop holding on to his fear that he will move them and they will produce better else where. Breaking up is hard to do. With this move it will allow the team approx 6.08 of cap space to sign a center on the market. Lang is yet unsigned and would serve two roles firstly a solid center and secondly a vetern presence to help the team develop. At 4 million last year he could be had for less this year say 2 years 7 million. That is a reasonable cap hit and will ensure that they have a solid center for the next year as well furthering time for players like Tim Kennedy/ Gerbe etc to develop. The extra money that is there approx 2.6 million could then be used to sign Stafford. This is just my .02. You asked. No way does Hecht carry nearly the same value as Gomez or Smyth. Also, I don't see ANYONE willing to give up draft picks AND take on his contract. Sorry, but I don't think we could give these guys away for free. I keep hearing the whole "scared of them moving and producing better elsewhere thing." Was this something actually said by someone or is it just common consensus amongst fans? Serious question, not trying to be smart.... I really do like your idea, and it's probably the most realistic move for us, but I just can't bring myself to putting any stock into the idea of another GM in the NHL willing to take these guys. For what? We watch them everynight, and they suck. I hope and pray that I'm wrong...
carpandean Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Hecht and Tallindar both have value. So DR packages them for draft picks. Don't tell me it can't be done. If Gomez and Ryan Smyth with their huge salaries can be move these two can as well. He needs to stop holding on to his fear that he will move them and they will produce better else where. Breaking up is hard to do. With this move it will allow the team approx 6.08 of cap space to sign a center on the market. Lang is yet unsigned and would serve two roles firstly a solid center and secondly a vetern presence to help the team develop. At 4 million last year he could be had for less this year say 2 years 7 million. That is a reasonable cap hit and will ensure that they have a solid center for the next year as well furthering time for players like Tim Kennedy/ Gerbe etc to develop. The extra money that is there approx 2.6 million could then be used to sign Stafford. This is just my .02. You asked. Lang has been on my list for a while now. Assuming his surgery was successful, he would be a great addition. No way does Hecht carry nearly the same value as Gomez or Smyth. Also, I don't see ANYONE willing to give up draft picks AND take on his contract. Sorry, but I don't think we could give these guys away for free. I keep hearing the whole "scared of them moving and producing better elsewhere thing." Was this something actually said by someone or is it just common consensus amongst fans? Serious question, not trying to be smart.... I really do like your idea, and it's probably the most realistic move for us, but I just can't bring myself to putting any stock into the idea of another GM in the NHL willing to take these guys. For what? We watch them everynight, and they suck. I hope and pray that I'm wrong... Of course Hecht (or Tallinder) isn't as valuable as Gomez or Smyth. The question is whether Hecht @ $3.5 million is any worse than Gomez at $7.4 million or Smyth at $6.25 million? If a team actually thinks that last year was a fluke for Hecht, then his contract is no worse than theirs. Tallinder is a different case because he only has one year left on his contract. Worse players have moved than those two, but is Darcy willing to go as low as it might take or even package them with a pick or prospect? For Lang, it might take moving just one of those two in order to get the necessary room. Tallinder would be the obvious choice since we have a glutton of defensemen and Hecht does have a chance of returning to his valuable self. As a side note: Darcy did make some comments about not getting fair offers for Max last year. It's hard to no what he was actually seeing, but given Max's salary, it would have been worth trading him for basically nothing.
billsrcursed Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Lang has been on my list for a while now. Assuming his surgery was successful, he would be a great addition. Of course Hecht (or Tallinder) isn't as valuable as Gomez or Smyth. The question is whether Hecht @ $3.5 million is any worse than Gomez at $7.4 million or Smyth at $6.25 million? If a team actually thinks that last year was a fluke for Hecht, then his contract is no worse than theirs. Tallinder is a different case because he only has one year left on his contract. Worse players have moved than those two, but is Darcy willing to go as low as it might take or even package them with a pick or prospect? For Lang, it might take moving just one of those two in order to get the necessary room. Tallinder would be the obvious choice since we have a glutton of defensemen and Hecht does have a chance of returning to his valuable self. As a side note: Darcy did make some comments about not getting fair offers for Max last year. It's hard to no what he was actually seeing, but given Max's salary, it would have been worth trading him for basically nothing. I agree with all of that, I just don't see it happening. Maybe once we get closer to the start of the season, or maybe during the season, but at this point in time I can't see a team willing to take Hecht. Hank, o.k. maybe, but not Hecht, not at 3.5 mil. I guess my thing is, and I don't want to come off as that guy who likes to defend the FO, but it's quite possible Darcy simply can't do anything right now. Didn't he (it may have been Quinn) say something along the lines of having to wait until the first wave of free agency passes in order to make a move? That, to me, would make more sense in terms of Hecht/Tallinder. Moving them as teams start to look for "role players" whom they feel would complete their roster may bring in more value than if we were to attempt a move now. Does that make sense? Or better yet, is that a wise strategy? I would think yes, but would like everyone else's opinion...
mercury Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Beat me to the punch on this one, I was going to say GM too Indeed.
Kristian Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Q : What do you think the Sabres need to address the most? A : Their attitude, top to bottom.
Calvin Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Q : What do you think the Sabres need to address the most? A : Their attitude, top to bottom. well said :thumbsup:
carpandean Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 I guess my thing is, and I don't want to come off as that guy who likes to defend the FO, but it's quite possible Darcy simply can't do anything right now. Quite possible. I just have a gut feeling that he eliminates some possible moves because he doesn't believe that he is getting enough in return, forgetting the opportunity cost of the salary and roster spot being used for that player. I'm not in any hurry to condemn Darcy. If we hit training camp without any other moves, I will be upset. Until then, I will anxiously check TSN every day, waiting for an announcement.
Stoner Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 Quite possible. I just have a gut feeling that he eliminates some possible moves because he doesn't believe that he is getting enough in return, forgetting the opportunity cost of the salary and roster spot being used for that player. I'm not in any hurry to condemn Darcy. If we hit training camp without any other moves, I will be upset. Until then, I will anxiously check TSN every day, waiting for an announcement. You think Darcy forgets that?
apuszczalowski Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 It's funny to me that everyone keeps pointing the finger at the F.O. for not making any "moves". What moves do you suggest we make?? I'd be interested in seeing who you guys think would be dumb enough to give us their talent in exchange for the same guys we keep complaining about. Granted, the FO put us in this position in the first place, but I don't see anyone bringing that up. All I keep reading is post after post about how we aren't making any moves. Well, play GM for a minute, and instead of complaining, offer suggestions as to what moves you think are possible?? And trading Hecht and Tallinder for a top line center isn't what I'm talking about. What, realistically, do you expect Darcy to do with the heaping pile of Sloppy Joe he's created?? Point is, this team has put themselves in a position where they CAN'T make any moves, because nobody's interested in our guys.... and they sure as hell are NOT gonna go out and overpay for 1 guy expecting that to make enough of a difference to balance out the payroll via playoffs/ticket sales... Moves don't have to be in the form of trades, there are other ways of changing players on a team. And there really is no one on this team that should be considered untouchable, but there are some that you should only move if the offer is in your favour and blows you away. Some guys might be more valuable just to move for the sake of moving (i.e. maybe not getting what you belive is fair trade value) just to clear some cap space, or picking up some late picks that can be used as part of other trades. My complints aren't about FA so far this year, its the same every year with Darcy. You can always rule out the Sabres in the running for any top level player, and can expect only a couple of mid to lower level players that have not lived up to potential that they hope will live up to it in Buffalo. Other GM's and teams can make changes in the off season to try and improve their team, why can't Darcy? You asked us what kind of deals we expect Darcy to make and what teams would want the players on the Sabres in a deal, remember, Darcy was the one who signed those guys to those deals, handcuffing the team. A team that finished out of the playoffs the year before after spending 2 straight years in the ECF's should not be content with their current roster and not be making some bigger changes. Draft picks and prospects can be very valuable on the trading market too.
... Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 You think Darcy forgets that? Yeah, that raised a red flag over here as well. I don't think DR "forgets" about any aspect of a deal and how it may affect the team - I think he's simply unable to make "a big move" for several reasons (in no specific order): He's a naturally frugal person. His masters have him working within tight parameters. He doesn't want to make a mistake (read: anxiety-ridden). Now, of those three, I think the masters' tight parameters contributes the most to what DR does or does not do. The only good replacement for DR, then, would be a bombastic, nearly rogue GM who is willing to ignore the mandates from his/her masters for the sake of the team. That, of course, would make such a GM short-lived in the Sabres organization.
carpandean Posted July 18, 2009 Report Posted July 18, 2009 You think Darcy forgets that? Perhaps "forgets" was the wrong word; "underestimates" may be better. While it may simply have been a ploy to garner an offer, he suggested last year that he has some interest in Max, but wasn't receiving what he thought was "fair" value (no, I don't have a link, but I do remember him saying that in an interview.) It's possible that he meant someone was offering their own problem, but that wasn't the impression that I got. My impression was that he wasn't willing to take a sixth/seventh-round pick or the like. The thing was that the opportunity cost associated with Max's salary/cap/roster spot was much more than the value that he brought as a player, so he should have been willing to take any offer as the season approached. The same could be said of Tallinder this year.
deluca67 Posted July 19, 2009 Report Posted July 19, 2009 Yeah, that raised a red flag over here as well. I don't think DR "forgets" about any aspect of a deal and how it may affect the team - I think he's simply unable to make "a big move" for several reasons (in no specific order): He's a naturally frugal person. His masters have him working within tight parameters. He doesn't want to make a mistake (read: anxiety-ridden). Now, of those three, I think the masters' tight parameters contributes the most to what DR does or does not do. The only good replacement for DR, then, would be a bombastic, nearly rogue GM who is willing to ignore the mandates from his/her masters for the sake of the team. That, of course, would make such a GM short-lived in the Sabres organization. Please! Enough of the "tight parameters." He has $50 million to spend. The problem isn't the amount, it is how the money was spent. Regier has done a piss poor job evaluating talent and compensating that same talent. It wasn't Golisano that signed Connolly, Tallinder, Lydman and Pominville to god awful contracts. He trusted his Team President and General Manager to spend the money budgeted wisely, they failed.
... Posted July 19, 2009 Report Posted July 19, 2009 Please! Enough of the "tight parameters." He has $50 million to spend. The problem isn't the amount, it is how the money was spent. Regier has done a piss poor job evaluating talent and compensating that same talent. It wasn't Golisano that signed Connolly, Tallinder, Lydman and Pominville to god awful contracts. He trusted his Team President and General Manager to spend the money budgeted wisely, they failed. But were they going to let him trade away Max for peanuts? Or will they let him dispose of Tallinder or Hecht for next to nothing? That's the kind of tight control I'm speaking of. It only makes sense to dump those guys even at a loss. I don't disagree that there's enough money to populate the roster with better players, but is DR that big of a fool on his own to not do anything about the roster? Personally I don't think he is, I think something else is at play with how the roster is made up. Hence, he must be operating under parameters set up for him.
Guest Sloth Posted July 19, 2009 Report Posted July 19, 2009 Please! Enough of the "tight parameters." He has $50 million to spend. The problem isn't the amount, it is how the money was spent. Regier has done a piss poor job evaluating talent and compensating that same talent. It wasn't Golisano that signed Connolly, Tallinder, Lydman and Pominville to god awful contracts. He trusted his Team President and General Manager to spend the money budgeted wisely, they failed. Other than your remark about Pomminstein, your summary of Darcy could not have been said any better. Drinking a beer on that one! :beer:
sabresman17 Posted July 19, 2009 Author Report Posted July 19, 2009 Please! Enough of the "tight parameters." He has $50 million to spend. The problem isn't the amount, it is how the money was spent. Regier has done a piss poor job evaluating talent and compensating that same talent. It wasn't Golisano that signed Connolly, Tallinder, Lydman and Pominville to god awful contracts. He trusted his Team President and General Manager to spend the money budgeted wisely, they failed. Would you stop complaining about Pominville he's not a bad player.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.