Jump to content

Duchene to Sabres?

sweetlou

By sweetlou
in The Aud Club

 Share

Recommended Posts

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted (edited)

I agree with this as well, and don't see why many here are refusing to see the validity. 3rd line is quite relevant when it comes to TOI, and Reinhart - 2nd overall pick - will probably want more; a "larger role." Isn't that why ROR was happy to leave the Avs?

 

 

 

It was Vanek's 2nd season in the NHL, Jochen Hecht was one of the best/reliable 2-way centers we've ever had. Let's not compare our current roster to the one that won the President's trophy.

 

Vanek scored 40 goals on the third line. Hecht was a left winger.

Let's address the myth that hockey players have to be slotted on lines by their relative ability.

 

Why wouldn't Sam be happy if he was playing 12 ES minutes a game with, say Kane and Bailey, and another four on the first unit PP? Why wouldn't he be "bumped up" and be part of the two- or three-line rotation in a tight game late?

 

Players care about ice time and being put in a position to succeed.

Edited by dudacek
erickompositör72 Third Liner

erickompositör72

Posted
Posted (edited)

Vanek scored 40 goals on the third line. Hecht was a left winger.

 

 

Don't know what your point with these things is. Hecht played center a lot with us, and was a beast of a 2-way center. See here, and NHL.com's site, which list him as "C":

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BUF/2007.html

 

 

I would love Samson at 3rd center, to be clear. I hope playing 3C and PP1 will satisfy his TOI inclinations, because I think it could be really good for our team.

Edited by ericcomposer72
erickompositör72 Third Liner

erickompositör72

Posted
Posted

I don't remember Hetch ever playing center when Druey, Briere and Roy were here in 05-07

 

 

Hecht was a center because we lost all of our centers.

 

 

This all sounds right. None of it is relevant to the point that was being made, so...

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted (edited)

Don't know what your point with these things is. Hecht played center a lot with us, and was a beast of a 2-way center. See here, and NHL.com's site, which list him as "C":

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BUF/2007.html

 

 

I would love Samson at 3rd center, to be clear. I hope playing 3C and PP1 will satisfy his TOI inclinations, because I think it could be really good for our team.

 

Sorry, to clarify:

1) Talented, high draft picks can produce and score — and without grumbling — on the third line. Fifth-overall pick Thomas Vanek scored 40 goals on the third line when he was the same age Sam Reinhart is now.

2) Teams can have success while playing players on lines "above their stature." Witness the last great Sabres team, which used a 30-point grinder (Grier) and a 40-point two-way guy (Hecht) with their top two centres, rather than the more talented Vanek or Afinogenov, and still managed to win the President's Trophy.

 

Not to the point, but who usually played with Drury and Grier, was it Kotalik or Pominville?

Dumont was with Jochen and Danny. Gaustad and Mair and Peters rounded things out, right?

 

Damn, I liked that team.

Edited by dudacek
Pokey Jones Top Prospect

Pokey Jones

Posted
Posted

I don't think Reinhart will be happy on the 3rd line but I guarantee you if Kane is on the 3rd line he will pout and you'll have to trade him fast or that locker room will fall apart totally. There were already rumors about locker room issues last year, Kane is a prima donna. 


Salary cap will not allow you to keep 3 top lines. Remember that team couldn't keep Briere or Drury after they gave Vanek all that cash and that was before a real cap. 

Pokey Jones Top Prospect

Pokey Jones

Posted
Posted

I'm a troll now? Ok buddy whatever.

 

The rumors were reported by TSN hockey guys last year and a little on HNIC. If they got them from "trolls" I wouldn't know. Next you'll tell me Kane has never had off ice issues............

korab rules Second Liner

korab rules

Posted
Posted

I'm a troll now? Ok buddy whatever.

 

The rumors were reported by TSN hockey guys last year and a little on HNIC. If they got them from "trolls" I wouldn't know. Next you'll tell me Kane has never had off ice issues............

Links?
Pokey Jones Top Prospect

Pokey Jones

Posted
Posted

Wish I had them for you, I just remember them talking about these things on tv.  In the HNIC hot stove or whatever they call it these days the talk was about a division between some of the young players and the veterans. Bylsma had lost the room as well. You take it with a grain of salt, of course, but would it really surprise you to think that the locker room last year was a mess too? 

erickompositör72 Third Liner

erickompositör72

Posted
Posted

but would it really surprise you to think that the locker room last year was a mess too? 

 

No, it wouldn't surprise me. And from now on, it won't surprise me when you present unsubstantiated rumors and speculation on certain players, particularly Kane.

Pokey Jones Top Prospect

Pokey Jones

Posted
Posted

1. I never said Kane was the locker room problem. They didn't name names. But as for his off ice issues, that isn't exactly "news".

 

2. I know what I heard. It was last year, March or April, near the end of the season. They rarely talk about the Sabres at all so it caught my attention. Wasn't on this board or I would have brought it up then. 

erickompositör72 Third Liner

erickompositör72

Posted
Posted

1. I never said Kane was the locker room problem. They didn't name names. But as for his off ice issues, that isn't exactly "news".

 

2. I know what I heard. It was last year, March or April, near the end of the season. They rarely talk about the Sabres at all so it caught my attention. Wasn't on this board or I would have brought it up then. 

 

Off ice issues, if anything, are old news. Get over it.

 

Many people on the Sabres complained (publicly and reportedly) about things last year... none of whom were named "Kane." 

7+6=13 Third Liner

7+6=13

Posted
Posted

I don't think Reinhart will be happy on the 3rd line but I guarantee you if Kane is on the 3rd line he will pout and you'll have to trade him fast or that locker room will fall apart totally. There were already rumors about locker room issues last year, Kane is a prima donna. 

Salary cap will not allow you to keep 3 top lines. Remember that team couldn't keep Briere or Drury after they gave Vanek all that cash and that was before a real cap. 

 

Kane doesn't have the ability to cause the room to fall apart.  He may alienate himself and get his rear end chewed out but he couldn't tear the team apart.

Pokey Jones Top Prospect

Pokey Jones

Posted
Posted (edited)

You misunderstand me here. Kane won't pull the room apart but I could see him pouting and quitting. His work ethic is already questionable and inconsistent. He has spurts but seems moody at best and can take a shift or a night off at any time. He'll just quit trying at all and the trade value will plummet.

 

Reinhart is a bigger problem and could be trouble to the room since he is close to ###### ice. 

 

 

(change that to Eichel off ice then, since I apparently can't say it the original way) lol

Edited by Pokey Jones
erickompositör72 Third Liner

erickompositör72

Posted
Posted

Wow, you're just really misunderstood around here. The whole bringing-up-Kane-out-of-nowhere on this thread, followed by unsubstantiated rumors, accusations, and again questioned his work ethic.... I don't know. I'm not going to label whatever it is you have against him, but it seems pretty deep-seated.

korab rules Second Liner

korab rules

Posted
Posted

You misunderstand me here. Kane won't pull the room apart but I could see him pouting and quitting. His work ethic is already questionable and inconsistent. He has spurts but seems moody at best and can take a shift or a night off at any time. He'll just quit trying at all and the trade value will plummet.

 

Reinhart is a bigger problem and could be trouble to the room since he is close to ###### ice.

 

 

(change that to Eichel off ice then, since I apparently can't say it the original way) lol

Lol! What? Kane has work ethic issues? GTFOOH. You need to put down the pipe.

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted

I don't think Reinhart will be happy on the 3rd line but I guarantee you if Kane is on the 3rd line he will pout and you'll have to trade him fast or that locker room will fall apart totally. There were already rumors about locker room issues last year, Kane is a prima donna.

 

Salary cap will not allow you to keep 3 top lines. Remember that team couldn't keep Briere or Drury after they gave Vanek all that cash and that was before a real cap.

Hold up, this is not correct. Drury and Briere had left b4 Vanek was offer sheeted. Also that was when there was a real cap. That entire 2nd paragraph is wrong.

Reinhart is a bigger problem and could be trouble to the room since he is close to ###### ice.

 

way) lol

What? Reinhart has never in his entire career been a complainer. He's literally known for being a leader from juniors.
LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted (edited)

Salary cap will not allow you to keep 3 top lines. Remember that team couldn't keep Briere or Drury after they gave Vanek all that cash and that was before a real cap. 

Now that I can fully respond, the highlighted and underlined. This entire sentence is false. The Salary cap came into existence with the 2005/2006 season. By July 1 2007 it was at the end of its second year. Further Briere and Drury were both inked to new deals by July 2. http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2922738(Drury). http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2922605 (Briere). However Thomas Vanek was not offer sheeted until July 7th and not matched until July 8th http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2927805.  

 

I'm pointing this out because what you posted is such a false statement we need to set the record straight. It tears apart your theory and also ignores the fact that Reinhart would be an RFA at the end of this season, meaning cost controlled to some extent. 

Edited by LGR4GM
korab rules Second Liner

korab rules

Posted
Posted

Now that I can fully respond, the highlighted and underlined. This entire sentence is false. The Salary cap came into existence with the 2005/2006 season. By July 1 2007 it was at the end of its second year. Further Briere and Drury were both inked to new deals by July 2. http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2922738(Drury). http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2922605 (Briere). However Thomas Vanek was not offer sheeted until July 7th and not matched until July 8th http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2927805.

 

I'm pointing this out because what you posted is such a false statement we need to set the record straight. It tears apart your theory and also ignores the fact that Reinhart would be an RFA at the end of this season, meaning cost controlled to some extent.

Theory? You are giving too much credit. All I see is a poopy wall.

nfreeman Hall of Famer

nfreeman

Posted
Posted

Now that I can fully respond, the highlighted and underlined. This entire sentence is false. The Salary cap came into existence with the 2005/2006 season. By July 1 2007 it was at the end of its second year. Further Briere and Drury were both inked to new deals by July 2. http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2922738(Drury). http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2922605 (Briere). However Thomas Vanek was not offer sheeted until July 7th and not matched until July 8th http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=2927805.  

 

I'm pointing this out because what you posted is such a false statement we need to set the record straight. It tears apart your theory and also ignores the fact that Reinhart would be an RFA at the end of this season, meaning cost controlled to some extent. 

 

You are right that Pokey is way off on his factual assertions -- which of course calls into question his assertions about what he heard on TSN about Kane -- but I don't agree that his mistakes on the facts tear apart his theory about the cap preventing teams from having 3 top lines.  Obviously a team can't give huge contracts to 9 forwards. 

 

OTOH, I think a reasonable response to his theory is that a team's top 3 lines don't need to be comprised of 9 expensive players.  You can have, say, 4 or 5 expensive guys, with the rest being cheap younger guys that you cycle through and let go when they get too expensive -- as Pittsburgh and Chicago have done successfully. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...