X. Benedict Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Just playing Devil's advocate, but I'd guess his response would be: first in the NE, third in the Conference, AHL rookie of the year last year, AHL All-Star MVP this year, Gerbe and Ennis scored when called up, leading candidates for Calder and Vezina, they had so many strong young defensemen that pushed themselves into roster spots that they have carried eight defensemen, they were confident enough in the pipeline to trade Paille and waive Mair to see if they could free up some spots, and played their most offensive-oriented defenseman in place of an injured winger just to get him some ice time. Like I've said, I'd like Darcy to be open to some moves to round-out the roster, but his idea isn't completely without merit. Most successful GMs would agree that building within is more important than the trading part in the current cap system. However, I also think that most would disagree that trading isn't also important, even if the lesser of the two. This team has been way too healthy. I would like to see more Ennis. I think Weber has come around too. I still think Darcy makes a move, but the best public posture is that you don't need to.
nfreeman Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 This team has been way too healthy. I would like to see more Ennis. I think Weber has come around too. I still think Darcy makes a move, but the best public posture is that you don't need to. As always, I am grateful for the voice of reason. But what makes you think Weber has come around?
carpandean Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 the best public posture is that you don't need to. Yeah, Darcy would say that they don't need to trade the day before blowing up the entire roster. He's a poker player.
Stoner Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Yeah, Darcy would say that they don't need to trade the day before blowing up the entire roster. He's a poker player. He's not in the game. The Mrs. won't have it.
static70 Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 He's not in the game. The Mrs. won't have it. I thought Darcy wore the skirt and Larry the pants :o ;)
Stoner Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Just playing Devil's advocate, but I'd guess his response would be: first in the NE, third in the Conference, AHL rookie of the year last year, AHL All-Star MVP this year, Gerbe and Ennis scored when called up, leading candidates for Calder and Vezina, they had so many strong young defensemen that pushed themselves into roster spots that they have carried eight defensemen, they were confident enough in the pipeline to trade Paille and waive Mair to see if they could free up some spots, and played their most offensive-oriented defenseman in place of an injured winger just to get him some ice time. Like I've said, I'd like Darcy to be open to some moves to round-out the roster, but his idea isn't completely without merit. Most successful GMs would agree that building within is more important than the trading part in the current cap system. However, I also think that most would disagree that trading isn't also important, even if the lesser of the two. Not to belabor the point -- nah, I wouldn't do that -- the stated goal of the franchise is to win a Cup. Until that happens, or until you're a serious contender more often than not, "the way things have always been done" really can't be held up as something wondrous. That's really the source of any friction on this board -- and I'd guess it applies to the fan base at large. An awful lot of people seem to be very content with having a team and occasionally being good to very good, but falling short -- darn curse and darn commish. A minority seems to want to demand what the organization has promised, even to the point of sounding "ridiculous" a lot of the time. But who looks more ridiculous, the geek who doesn't have the nerve to ask the hot cheerleader out, or the geek who gets rejected?
carpandean Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 But who looks more ridiculous, the geek who doesn't have the nerve to ask the hot cheerleader out, or the geek who gets rejected? I always like the ones where the guy grows up with the girl, so somehow he doesn't realize just how hot she is. He spends all his time drooling over someone else, only to realize in the end that the truly great girl had been right in front of him the whole time. :thumbsup:
Stoner Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 I always like the ones where the guy grows up with the girl, so somehow he doesn't realize just how hot she is. He spends all his time drooling over someone else, only to realize in the end that the truly great girl had been right in front of him the whole time. :thumbsup: Wow, it's too bad the BS power on this board couldn't be turned into a cheap, plentiful energy source.
spndnchz Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 I miss Pat Kaleta. There. I said it. :cry:
carpandean Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Wow, it's too bad the BS power on this board couldn't be turned into a cheap, plentiful energy source. Hey, I was just dueling metaphors.
shrader Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 I always like the ones where the guy grows up with the girl, so somehow he doesn't realize just how hot she is. He spends all his time drooling over someone else, only to realize in the end that the truly great girl had been right in front of him the whole time. :thumbsup: She takes of her glasses, gets a haircut, then suddenly she's a supermodel? The equivalent of the minor trade?
nobody Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 I miss Pat Kaleta. There. I said it. :cry: He's got a big black boot on. You should be able to catch him.
nfreeman Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 I think the plumbers have taken a bit of a step back in the last week or so. Greer doesn't seem to be moving without pain, Kennedy is just trying too hard, (ex. going for the hit in the last minute against the sens and then getting lost), things seem to be bouncing over Ellis stick. Mair gets reputation minors on more ticky-tack plays than can be believed. I don't need to see him every night, but I'm glad he's on the roster. Also Gaustad seems to have been MIA for a couple of weeks. An awful lot of people seem to be very content with having a team and occasionally being good to very good, but falling short -- darn curse and darn commish. A minority seems to want to demand what the organization has promised, even to the point of sounding "ridiculous" a lot of the time. Nonsense. Who is "very content," or even remotely satisfied, with this? A more accurate description might be that an awful lot of people think highly of Darcy and/or Lindy, think that ownership has pulled the rug out from under them not once but twice during their tenure here, and are willing to give them the chance to run the team the way they think it ought to be run -- as opposed to calling from the rooftops to blow the team up, trade for Kovy, dump Vanek, trade Miller, etc, etc.
nobody Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Also Gaustad seems to have been MIA for a couple of weeks. See, just like Darcy said - the team can get better internally so there is no need to make a trade.
Stoner Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 A more accurate description might be that an awful lot of people think highly of Darcy and/or Lindy, think that ownership has pulled the rug out from under them not once but twice during their tenure here, and are willing to give them the chance to run the team the way they think it ought to be run -- as opposed to calling from the rooftops to blow the team up, trade for Kovy, dump Vanek, trade Miller, etc, etc. I actually hope you are right. I hope this is the new arrangement down there. The excuses are sure running thin for these guys. I have to believe LQ is still calling the shots though, after consulting with Nickel Deposit Tom.
LabattBlue Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Also Gaustad seems to have been MIA for a couple of weeks. I'll be better after a couple of wins, but for now... A good faceoff man who is physical about 25% of the time, fights 3 times and has offensive skills associated with a 4th line player shouldn't cost 2.3 mil per year(cap hit). Just sayin'. :rolleyes: PS He may not be physical, but I'd take Maholtra at 1/3 the salary for the 3rd or 4th line any day of the week over Gaustad. Note to DR...Maholtra is a UFA at the end of the season.
X. Benedict Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 I'll be better after a couple of wins, but for now... A good faceoff man who is physical about 25% of the time, fights 3 times and has offensive skills associated with a 4th line player shouldn't cost 2.3 mil per year(cap hit). Just sayin'. :rolleyes: PS He may not be physical, but I'd take Maholtra at 1/3 the salary for the 3rd or 4th line any day of the week over Gaustad. Note to DR...Maholtra is a UFA at the end of the season. Maholtra was a steal by San Jose.
X. Benedict Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 She takes of her glasses, gets a haircut, then suddenly she's a supermodel? The equivalent of the minor trade? :lol: In the movie script she is always hotter than the girl that is supposed to be hot and John Cussack figures it out 2/3rds in.
Eleven Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 :lol: In the movie script she is always hotter than the girl that is supposed to be hot and John Cussack figures it out 2/3rds in. It's always freaking Cusak, isn't it?!
Eleven Posted February 5, 2010 Report Posted February 5, 2010 Also Gaustad seems to have been MIA for a couple of weeks. Nonsense. Who is "very content," or even remotely satisfied, with this? A more accurate description might be that an awful lot of people think highly of Darcy and/or Lindy, think that ownership has pulled the rug out from under them not once but twice during their tenure here, and are willing to give them the chance to run the team the way they think it ought to be run -- as opposed to calling from the rooftops to blow the team up, trade for Kovy, dump Vanek, trade Miller, etc, etc. Amen.
Sabretip Posted February 6, 2010 Report Posted February 6, 2010 See, just like Darcy said - the team can get better internally so there is no need to make a trade. Listening to Regier's interview on WGR today really summed up how absurd the argument the Sabres are relying on is - he argues that all 6 of his top forwards are signed for next season and all will continue to improve. As usual, he ignored the fact that only Connolly will end up posting career numbers and, along with Hecht, finish with stats better than last year - his "core" of Vanek, Stafford, Roy and Pominville are all on pace this season for huge drop-offs in production. In the case of Pominville, his goal production has steadily declined for 4 consecutive years. How does any of that represent improvement or cause for optimism that it will happen magically next year?
Rip Titwide Posted February 6, 2010 Report Posted February 6, 2010 Per MSG Devils pre-game Oduya 4 Pts. in 40 Games Bergfors 0 Goals in last 16 Games Why cant WE trade struggling players, again?
Stoner Posted February 6, 2010 Report Posted February 6, 2010 Listening to Regier's interview on WGR today really summed up how absurd the argument the Sabres are relying on is - he argues that all 6 of his top forwards are signed for next season and all will continue to improve. As usual, he ignored the fact that only Connolly will end up posting career numbers and, along with Hecht, finish with stats better than last year - his "core" of Vanek, Stafford, Roy and Pominville are all on pace this season for huge drop-offs in production. In the case of Pominville, his goal production has steadily declined for 4 consecutive years. How does any of that represent improvement or cause for optimism that it will happen magically next year? Darcy got a little rattled, and for once I really applaud Schopp and the Bulldog for representing the fans with some tough questions.
shrader Posted February 6, 2010 Report Posted February 6, 2010 :lol: In the movie script she is always hotter than the girl that is supposed to be hot and John Cussack figures it out 2/3rds in. Of course, in the movie, the ugly chick looks like a young Catherine Zeta Jones while in real life the ugly chick looks like inkman.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.