FogBat Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Rats! And my Paille jersey just showed up in the mail today, too. DOH! That had to hurt. EDIT: Additional material - It's hard not to say that we always seem to get draft picks in return. That isn't always true, but I've always thought that a team should get someone else who is playing on the opposite team in return - not a draft pick or two. It doesn't make sense. Could someone explain this to me why this is (without getting cynical)?
bob_sauve28 Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Just saw this on Twitter.. Paille has been traded to the Bruins.. more details to follow I'm glad they got something for him. I have no problem with grabbing a few draft picks for a player it seems is not in our plans
Stoner Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 DOH! That had to hurt. EDIT: Additional material - It's hard not to say that we always seem to get draft picks in return. That isn't always true, but I've always thought that a team should get someone else who is playing on the opposite team in return - not a draft pick or two. It doesn't make sense. Could someone explain this to me why this is (without getting cynical)? Haven't you been reading. It had to be done. Trust the braintrust. We're a better hockey team than we were at 6 p.m. Eastern.
FogBat Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Haven't you been reading? It had to be done. Trust the braintrust. We're a better hockey team than we were at 6 p.m. Eastern. Ok, so let me get this straight. Normally, if an average player gets shipped off somewhere (regardless if he's a Sabre or a Flame or a Bruin), normally they're going to get draft picks in exchange. Therefore, the Paille trade, given the mediocrity of his style of play and what we got in return, is normal. Furthermore, this would explain why when a star player gets traded that real bodies come back the other way. Correct? (BTW, I have been reading some of the past threads and I know that a bunch of us were disgusted with the way he was playing. I just didn't see it coming, given what DR has done in the past.)
Eleven Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Haven't you been reading. It had to be done. Trust the braintrust. We're a better hockey team than we were at 6 p.m. Eastern. PA, I know you tend to hate everything the team does just for the f*ck of it, but what would you have done? There's a surfeit of forwards, and Dan Paille was obviously the least skilled (and in many cases, the least motivated, to the fan's eye) in just about every category other than the "I'm Nathan Paetsch" category. You could send Kennedy down, keep Vanek on IR (could have kept Mair on IR), put Ellis on IR, etc. None are good moves. You could put Paille on waivers and get nothing for him, rather than a pick. This is a reasonable move; Paille isn't good enough to be a regular on the team, and the Sabs got something for it.
SwampD Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Oh man that is some sh*t luck DOH! That had to hurt. EDIT: Additional material - It's hard not to say that we always seem to get draft picks in return. That isn't always true, but I've always thought that a team should get someone else who is playing on the opposite team in return - not a draft pick or two. It doesn't make sense. Could someone explain this to me why this is (without getting cynical)? I didn't really get a jersey. It was just my sarcastic way of saying that I'm not that broken up about the trade. I guess it wasn't that funny. He's been a healthy scratch this year, he was a healthy scratch last year often, and just has never lived up to his potential. Maybe they'll get it out of him in Boston. It was never going to come out here.
shrader Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 I'm only surprised because I thought you had to get salary back when you trade salary.... and come to think of it, I thought Boston had a problem with the cap as it is? Either way, Danny wasn't going to play significant minutes on this team and they made a move. Boston made their cap dump yesterday with the Kobasew deal. Paille+Weller (if he actually plays in Boston) is still worth less cap space than Kobasew. PA, I know you tend to hate everything the team does just for the f*ck of it, but what would you have done? There's a surfeit of forwards, and Dan Paille was obviously the least skilled (and in many cases, the least motivated, to the fan's eye) in just about every category other than the "I'm Nathan Paetsch" category. You could send Kennedy down, keep Vanek on IR (could have kept Mair on IR), put Ellis on IR, etc. None are good moves. You could put Paille on waivers and get nothing for him, rather than a pick. This is a reasonable move; Paille isn't good enough to be a regular on the team, and the Sabs got something for it. Unless I missed something and Sekera is back, the team didn't HAVE to make a move. They did this by choice.
Stoner Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Boston made their cap dump yesterday with the Kobasew deal. Paille+Weller (if he actually plays in Boston) is still worth less cap space than Kobasew. Unless I missed something and Sekera is back, the team didn't HAVE to make a move. They did this by choice. Interesting. Isn't Darcy the "we don't have to make a move until we have to" guy? He won't commit to Myers for that reason. I guess I have to have one of the sophisticated hockey people on this board explain to me why I should be excited, or satisfied, or pleased. The Sabres made a trade -- the Sabres are not better -- they are slightly weakened, in fact. Yay. Here's another first-rounder the organization couldn't develop. Sent away for nothing. It's not a good day. I'm just a hater, though, who can't appreciate the brilliance of the move.
SwampD Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Interesting. Isn't Darcy the "we don't have to make a move until we have to" guy? He won't commit to Myers for that reason. I guess I have to have one of the sophisticated hockey people on this board explain to me why I should be excited, or satisfied, or pleased. The Sabres made a trade -- the Sabres are not better -- they are slightly weakened, in fact. Yay. Here's another first-rounder the organization couldn't develop. Sent away for nothing. It's not a good day. I'm just a hater, though, who can't appreciate the brilliance of the move. The Sabres are not weaker because Paille is gone. They're not better either but they certainly are not weaker. The only thing that happened is OSP saved some money. I will be mad though if Boston gets Danny to play the way Ruff could not.
Eleven Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Interesting. Isn't Darcy the "we don't have to make a move until we have to" guy? He won't commit to Myers for that reason. I guess I have to have one of the sophisticated hockey people on this board explain to me why I should be excited, or satisfied, or pleased. The Sabres made a trade -- the Sabres are not better -- they are slightly weakened, in fact. Yay. Here's another first-rounder the organization couldn't develop. Sent away for nothing. It's not a good day. I'm just a hater, though, who can't appreciate the brilliance of the move. Satisfied is the right emotion, maybe pleased, and not excited. The team is better; it rid itself of dead weight in case it needs to bring someone on later. Got a third-rounder in exchange, which may be more than Paille is worth. Sure, he was a first-round pick, but this is the NHL. Lots of 'em don't work out, especially those taken in the late end of the round. And assuming it was a mistake to take Paille in the draft (I would agree), would you prefer that the team hang on to him? Or cut its losses now? If it's the former rather than the latter, well, let's play poker sometime.
SDS Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Interesting. Isn't Darcy the "we don't have to make a move until we have to" guy? He won't commit to Myers for that reason. I guess I have to have one of the sophisticated hockey people on this board explain to me why I should be excited, or satisfied, or pleased. The Sabres made a trade -- the Sabres are not better -- they are slightly weakened, in fact. Yay. Here's another first-rounder the organization couldn't develop. Sent away for nothing. It's not a good day. I'm just a hater, though, who can't appreciate the brilliance of the move. for me, the story isn't complete until we see what becomes of that pick (or two). So, maybe just reserve judgment until it plays out.
sjb012 Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 for me, the story isn't complete until we see what becomes of that pick (or two). So, maybe just reserve judgment until it plays out. Agreed. We are stocked with picks and STILL are in need of a top 6 forward. Say....a disgruntled Frolov in LALA comes to Buffalo? Just Dreamin'
Stoner Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 for me, the story isn't complete until we see what becomes of that pick (or two). So, maybe just reserve judgment until it plays out. I don't have that much time.
deluca67 Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 I hope Paille does well in Boston and has a long career in the NHL. That said, I am ecstatic that this front office finally found the stones to say enough is enough when it comes to one of their one. I did not want to see Paille flounder around here until the Sabres rights ran out. Paille may be the first, I hope he is not the last.
SDS Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 I don't have that much time. I think we'll see come the trade deadline if it gets used. If we actually use the pick, then... well, big deal.
nfreeman Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 There is a lot of talk that they are gathering up prospects/picks to make a move for Kovalchuk. As of right now, they have 9 picks in the first 2 rounds in the next 2 years. Picks and some of their big young kids could land Kovy... You're kidding, right? EDIT: Additional material - It's hard not to say that we always seem to get draft picks in return. That isn't always true, but I've always thought that a team should get someone else who is playing on the opposite team in return - not a draft pick or two. It doesn't make sense. Could someone explain this to me why this is (without getting cynical)? As 11 points out below, sometimes you need to make the best out of a bad situation. The Sabres didn't want to expose Mair, Ellis, Paetsch or Paille to waivers and they didn't want to send Kennedy down. The only option was to trade one of them. I'd guess Paille was the one they liked the least. This way they got a decent return instead of zero. PA, I know you tend to hate everything the team does just for the f*ck of it, but what would you have done? There's a surfeit of forwards, and Dan Paille was obviously the least skilled (and in many cases, the least motivated, to the fan's eye) in just about every category other than the "I'm Nathan Paetsch" category. You could send Kennedy down, keep Vanek on IR (could have kept Mair on IR), put Ellis on IR, etc. None are good moves. You could put Paille on waivers and get nothing for him, rather than a pick. This is a reasonable move; Paille isn't good enough to be a regular on the team, and the Sabs got something for it. Well said. Interesting. Isn't Darcy the "we don't have to make a move until we have to" guy? He won't commit to Myers for that reason. I guess I have to have one of the sophisticated hockey people on this board explain to me why I should be excited, or satisfied, or pleased. The Sabres made a trade -- the Sabres are not better -- they are slightly weakened, in fact. Yay. Here's another first-rounder the organization couldn't develop. Sent away for nothing. It's not a good day. I'm just a hater, though, who can't appreciate the brilliance of the move. It's been a little while, but this is...obtuse. Not happy about things? Why not pretend that every 1st-round pick in the 20s works out and so this one's failure to do so must be the team's fault? Why not pretend that it was either make a trade for some return, send down a player no one wants to send down, or expose a player to waivers and thus likely lose him and get zero in return? Why not pretend that it can't be a good move to make the best out of a bad situation? Why not pretend that if it's not a brilliant move, it must be a stupid one? Why not pretend that there's no such thing as addition by subtraction? Satisfied is the right emotion, maybe pleased, and not excited. The team is better; it rid itself of dead weight in case it needs to bring someone on later. Got a third-rounder in exchange, which may be more than Paille is worth. Sure, he was a first-round pick, but this is the NHL. Lots of 'em don't work out, especially those taken in the late end of the round. And assuming it was a mistake to take Paille in the draft (I would agree), would you prefer that the team hang on to him? Or cut its losses now? If it's the former rather than the latter, well, let's play poker sometime. Well said.
SDS Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Satisfied is the right emotion... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAxzcwDNgHU
SDS Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Interesting. Isn't Darcy the "we don't have to make a move until we have to" guy? He won't commit to Myers for that reason. I guess I have to have one of the sophisticated hockey people on this board explain to me why I should be excited, or satisfied, or pleased. The Sabres made a trade -- the Sabres are not better -- they are slightly weakened, in fact. Yay. Here's another first-rounder the organization couldn't develop. Sent away for nothing. It's not a good day. I'm just a hater, though, who can't appreciate the brilliance of the move. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MejtR81RzCo
inkman Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 I didn't really get a jersey. It was just my sarcastic way of saying that I'm not that broken up about the trade. I guess it wasn't that funny. He's been a healthy scratch this year, he was a healthy scratch last year often, and just has never lived up to his potential. Maybe they'll get it out of him in Boston. It was never going to come out here. FWIW, I knew you weren't goin to be sporting # 20 anytime soon.
Buffalo Fan Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 I don't have that much time. How old are you??
SDS Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 How old are you?? Got the Book of Genesis handy?
Eleven Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Got the Book of Genesis handy? Wrong thread.
Buffalo Fan Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Got the Book of Genesis handy? I'm sure he's in bed already...that's why he hasn't responded.
FogBat Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 Got the Book of Genesis handy? :w00t: :lol: Yeah, I saw the humor in that. :thumbsup:
SDS Posted October 21, 2009 Report Posted October 21, 2009 :w00t: :lol: Yeah, I saw the humor in that. :thumbsup: I meant nothing other than PA was old.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.