nfreeman Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 What a shallow load of monday morning quarterbacking in his "column" this morning. We should've gotten a defenseman, we didn't b/c Darcy is incompetent, and now we're done. How clever. How original. The examples Bucky cites are Ken Klee, traded from Toronto to NJ, and 2 others (Brendan Witt and Sean O'Donnell), traded from eastern conf. teams to western conf. teams. Those examples simply do not support his argument. Toronto wasn't going to make a trade to us, their heated rival, to help us remedy our biggest weakness. The other 2 trades went into the western conference -- like almost all of the trades, the teams didn't want to see the players they unloaded come back to haunt them. And to compare our lack of moves with Carolina's picking up Weight and Recchi is also pretty weak. Carolina picked up 2 forwards at the deadline. We added back Briere, Connolly, Dumont and Hecht at or around the deadline. I'd much rather have those 4 than Weight and Recchi. More to the point, Carolina lost ONE player, well before the playoffs. We have lost FOUR, right in the middle of the playoffs. Does Bucky think Carolina would still be "outclassing" us if, even after making their brilliant acquisitions, 3 of their top 4 defensemen, plus Staal or Brind'amour, were injured and unable to play? So Bucky's ready to give up on the Sabres. He thinks we look like we're finished. He's watched this team all year and he still hasn't learned the one key fact about the Sabres: WE DON'T QUIT. Go Sabres. Your fans are with you, thick and thin.
scottnc Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 I made a comment about him in another thread and I agree... way to have some faith in the team. It's very easy to look back now and say we should have picked someone up, but who honestly would have predicted we'd have 3 of our top 4 D-men go down within a 5-6 game span. We have a bad game against a very good Carolina team (there's a reason they're in the Conference finals) and Gleason is already looking to next season. Ridiculous. I know I for one will be in the RBC center on Sunday cheering the boys on and I'll be there for Game 7 if need be. I won't give up on them until it's over. Go Sabres!!
Stoner Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 Relax. This is Classic Gleason. He likes to bury players and teams right around Game 4 of a series. (See his column on Lemieux in 2001.) The good thing is... he's almost always wrong. I love him lumping Staahl in with Recchi and Weight as examples of "additions" that played a role in the win last night. Staahl, of course, because they got Weight to help the kid out. LOL.
X. Benedict Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 The trade deadline issue will probably come up again and again. There were pros and cons to going after more blueline depth. The worry was not the defense as it was, but the worry was that with an injury we would be forced to move Fitzpatrick into the lineup. There was really nobody out there better than the Sabres top 6 So what do you do? Overpay in a trade for somebody you are hoping you'll be able to scratch every night? Many of us wanted Spacek- but do you scratch Kalinen or Campbell if you go out and get him? In fairness to Darcy, he could have never forseen the depletion of this blueline. One injury in the playoffs is predictable, but 3. Hells bells.
mrjsbu96 Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 What a shallow load of monday morning quarterbacking in his "column" this morning. We should've gotten a defenseman, we didn't b/c Darcy is incompetent, and now we're done. How clever. How original. The examples Bucky cites are Ken Klee, traded from Toronto to NJ, and 2 others (Brendan Witt and Sean O'Donnell), traded from eastern conf. teams to western conf. teams. Those examples simply do not support his argument. Toronto wasn't going to make a trade to us, their heated rival, to help us remedy our biggest weakness. The other 2 trades went into the western conference -- like almost all of the trades, the teams didn't want to see the players they unloaded come back to haunt them. And to compare our lack of moves with Carolina's picking up Weight and Recchi is also pretty weak. Carolina picked up 2 forwards at the deadline. We added back Briere, Connolly, Dumont and Hecht at or around the deadline. I'd much rather have those 4 than Weight and Recchi. More to the point, Carolina lost ONE player, well before the playoffs. We have lost FOUR, right in the middle of the playoffs. Does Bucky think Carolina would still be "outclassing" us if, even after making their brilliant acquisitions, 3 of their top 4 defensemen, plus Staal or Brind'amour, were injured and unable to play? So Bucky's ready to give up on the Sabres. He thinks we look like we're finished. He's watched this team all year and he still hasn't learned the one key fact about the Sabres: WE DON'T QUIT. Go Sabres. Your fans are with you, thick and thin. I think Leo Roth wrote a similar article the day before in the D&C. These guys piss me off. I can't imagine Regier or anyone in the hockey office enjoys passing by Gleason after such a well-timed article. Nothing like 20/20 hindsight. There are times to bash the GM, etc, but this is not one of those times.
SabresfanDC Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 THis guy is a joke. You don't criticize a GM who has gotten 10 wins in the playoffs. I think the only franchise that is disappointed with such a post-season run would be Yankees fans...and who likes them. Lets face it, the season is already a success, and a Cup would be the icing on the cake. Gleason says losing three of five best defensemen "would be an easy excuse, the obvious out". I think a -5 between Jillson/Janik qualifies as a small part of the loss last night. With our luck, Brendan Witt, whose presence seems to rival the second coming of christ would be lined up next to Tallinder and Kalinin at Millard Fillmore. Sad that national guys have more insight than the local reporters. Sullivan already proclaimed himself to know little about hockey.
The Goat Posted May 27, 2006 Report Posted May 27, 2006 The man in question goes by the name 'Bucky'.... What more needs to be said? One of our local columnists, as many of you know now, is named 'Ned'. These two should form a club. The Goat
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.