Jump to content

2012 Trade Deadline Thread


spndnchz

Recommended Posts

Posted

Find me 6 that kept the same mediocre core for almost a decade and "lucked" into one. When your biggest move in 9 years was getting Zubrus........

Same core, and that is the question at hand.

 

And they played in the finals in 06 and won a total of 1 playoff series between then and last summer. They totally qualify for this debate. I think they might be the only one.

 

Sorry, Pommer.

 

I don't think the Mavs last year "lucked" into their championship.

Posted

The trade deadline news thread and we're talking about the Dallas Mavericks and the St. Louis Cardinals thread. Makes sense.

Actually, yeah it does. We're Sabres fans. Regier is the GM, and our team is about as exciting as waiting in line at the DMV.

Posted

I don't really have time to research this but one could argue that both the Giants in the NFL and the Cardinals in baseball did nothing this year but settle for mediocrity and then rode hot streaks to championships.

 

To be clear, I want Darcy fired and basically agree with the last few paragraphs of the post in question. However, I wholeheartedly disagree with the premise that bold moves are required, or even help to win championships. As much fun as free agency and the trade deadline are, the vast majority of moves amount to nothing and as many have a negative impact as have a positive on.

 

Tanking a season or two, getting lucky with a couple of late round picks, those seem to have as much to do with it as anything bold or outside the box.

Cardinals didn't stand Pat, they made a deal to get Edwin Jackson, Mark Rzypchinski (sp?) Octavio Dotel and possible someone else from the Jays in exchange for Colby Rasmus, and a couple relievers the Jays threw away
Posted

2011 Dallas Mavericks.

 

just 5 more to go...

 

Its really impossible to argue with those that choose to place arbitrary labels to define what they perceive to be happening. Drane knows the point I am making and knows that I'm not going to engage him at length. I just don't have the time but he's too smart not to know both sides of the argument he is making.

 

Cardinals didn't stand Pat, they made a deal to get Edwin Jackson, Mark Rzypchinski (sp?) Octavio Dotel and possible someone else from the Jays in exchange for Colby Rasmus, and a couple relievers the Jays threw away

 

And are those moves any more dramatic then what the Sabres' did in the off-season?

Posted

And are those moves any more dramatic then what the Sabres' did in the off-season?

Serious question: Were the Sabres moves actually dramatic? They traded their no.5/6 defenseman and a minor leaguer for Regehr (good trade) and then they just spent money on two free agents.

 

Paying a lot for free agents certainly seems dramatic for Sabres fans because none of us could remember the last time it happened, but other teams do this all the time. But we didn't touch our core or trade any key assets to bring in key assets.

 

What the Flyers did was dramatic. The Sabres made a good trade and spent some money, which blew us all away because we're all a little dead inside from the Rigas and Golisano regimes. I liked their moves but I really thought they needed to make fundamental changes to the roster.

Posted

Wow even this thread can go so off topic when handed to Sabres fans....

 

If you think its only a Sabres' fan trait, you are much too sheltered. In the fifty years that I have been communicating and observing others as well, I don't think I have ever seen a conversation between more then two people stay on point.

But the battle does still persist.

Posted

If there is one thread where the BS should not be allowed, it is the trade thread. This is for NHL TRADE NEWS

Yeah and from the look of things, the thread would have been better placed in the "Around the NHL" section....tick, tock....
Posted

If you think its only a Sabres' fan trait, you are much too sheltered. In the fifty years that I have been communicating and observing others as well, I don't think I have ever seen a conversation between more then two people stay on point.

But the battle does still persist.

Fair point, cant argue there lol.

 

Fixed.

Lmfao.

Posted

Did you bother to read the article? Because it doesn't say that at all. If anything, it debunks the rumor that they are trying to resign him.

It does neither

It only says that a guy yesterday (Wednesday) on Yahoo Sports says the Sabres are trying to re-sign Gaustad, while they try and dispute that by bringing up a previous interview done on Monday where he says they haven't discussed a contract since the offseason. For all any of us know, Darcy could have made a call Monday night, or Tuesday, or early Wednesday to Gaustads agent to discuss re-signing him now before they get serious about listening to trade offers for him if he doesn't re-sign

Posted

Did you bother to read the article? Because it doesn't say that at all. If anything, it debunks the rumor that they are trying to resign him.

 

Some people have different views on how articles and stuff are written. Just what I thought.

Posted

I understand why LA did it, they already bet the farm on this group of players being contenders and can't score to save their lives. I still don't like it for them because I don't like Carter at all. Horrible contract aside, if the locker room stuff is true, I can't see putting him and Richards back together as a winning move. LA just doubled-down on their current group big time.

 

Good for Columbus though. They get a nice puck moving defenseman and a pick. Hell, I think it was worth it just to get rid of Carter alone when you consider his contract and that he was never going to give them 100%.

 

 

Carter was told during a fan event in Columbus. lol

 

Little awkward? :lol:

Posted

There is hope for us to move Stafford yet.

I'm not sure who said Stafford was untradeable but his contract is chump change compared to Carter, Gomez and the other stupid contracts that have been moved in the last 5 years.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...