Rumor mill

[inkman]

I know your point but I was just trying to put forth a "what-if" scenario. Maybe we can get a mathmetician in here and figure out some logrithmic possibilities of draft positions and free agent signings based on past desicions being different. Oh wait a minute, some one that smart is probably too busy working for NASA or Microsoft to be able to help us right now. ;)

[Taro T]

Ballard would probably be but I think Warrener signed a contract between the trade and now.  I doubt the Sabres would have offered it to him.  :huh:

Actually, with the lineup you proposed if you add Roy, McKee, and Ballard and remove Janik, the 22 man rostered team salary would be ~$28.3MM which is very close to the Sabres actual salary. Warrener would have pushed it up to $30MM.

 

The wild card becomes: is Dom still a Sabre? He likely would not have asked for a trade after '01, but very likely might have retired as I think the Sabres would have won the SC that season.

 

If Dom isn't a Sabre after '01, even with Peca signed, the team's record probably wouldn't have been significantly different than it was. They probably sneak into the playoffs in '02 and '04 and probably still stink in '03. If Dom is a Sabre prior to the lockout, then everything changes and the team definitely makes the playoffs at least 2 of those years and probably all 3.

 

As Shrader stated, it is all but impossible to predict how / who the Sabres would have drafted as their slot and needs would have been different than actual. That does not make the speculation of how the team would have looked / been built any less interesting. Also, while the lack of a Peca trade might have made Ballard and or Vanek unavailable to the Sabres it would not have significantly affected the Sabres drafting in '01 IMHO. Whether the Sabres had Peca or Connolly I think the Sabres would have still been trying to draft forwards that would not become scoring stars as the criminals still owned the team.

 

It also would have likely modified the trades the Sabres made from '01 forward. If Peca were signed, perhaps the Sabres don't trade for Gratton as they also picked up Gilmour that season and had Barnes and Brown who the season before finally broke the 20 goal barrier. His scoring went down significantly in '01, but he was now playing the checking center's role that Peca had filled. If the Sabres don't get Gratton, while they don't lose Sarich, they also don't get Briere.

[shrader]

Dave, there's one question that I'm sure everyone is dying to know: What about Bob Corkum?

[Taro T]

Dave, there's one question that I'm sure everyone is dying to know:  What about Bob Corkum?

I've heard he's selling Winnebegos in his hometown of Salisbury, MA but have not been able to confirm. I'm sure he'd be willing to give all that up if Darcy asked him to spearhead the Sabres playoff drive. :P

[Stoner]

MLH, it's always easy to point out the exception to the rule and insist it's the rule. People have loved to point out how the big-spending Rangers have been flops in recent seasons. Now it seems it's trendy to point to the Bruins and Penguins. What people like you won't explain is that the Stanley Cup almost always belongs to a team that isn't afraid to spend, not to a spendthrift like the Sabres. Since 1990, in fact, only one team has won the Cup and been significantly under the league average in payroll -- the 2003 Lightning, maybe a good omen for the Sabres.

 

So now I'm not a fan either, because I disagree with the approach to winning that you endorse? Because I criticize an approach that has produced a few wins after several seasons of abject failure? That's extremely immature, but if you must insist I root for the Sabres to lose, go ahead and make an ass of yourself. At least it's worth a laugh.

 

Do you work for the Sabres or something?

[deluca67]

MLH, it's always easy to point out the exception to the rule and insist it's the rule. People have loved to point out how the big-spending Rangers have been flops in recent seasons. Now it seems it's trendy to point to the Bruins and Penguins. What people like you won't explain is that the Stanley Cup almost always belongs to a team that isn't afraid to spend, not to a spendthrift like the Sabres. Since 1990, in fact, only one team has won the Cup and been significantly under the league average in payroll -- the 2003 Lightning, maybe a good omen for the Sabres.

 

So now I'm not a fan either, because I disagree with the approach to winning that you endorse? Because I criticize an approach that has produced a few wins after several seasons of abject failure? That's extremely immature, but if you must insist I root for the Sabres to lose, go ahead and make an ass of yourself. At least it's worth a laugh.

 

Do you work for the Sabres or something?

The point you are missing PA is that if you don't follow your team blindly and beleive everything they say or do then you're not a fan. From what I have been reading the past few months is that anyone with an opinion of their own drawn from their own expierences is a bad hockey fan. Unless you drink the Kool-Aid you shouldn't even bother watching or talking about the Sabres.

 

And for god's sake. Don't start any type of reasonable discussion. If you do they will jump on you like the Religous Right jumps on anyone who may question GW. You see these boards have a type of Sabres Taliban who attack anyone that goes the way of the free thinker.

[inkman]

Does that make you Bin Laden?

[deluca67]

Does that make you Bin Laden?

More like Al Frankin. Which guys like Limbeau, Bush and O'Riely will tell you are the same thing. :lol:

[mis3384]

what about trading...Marty and Grier and or a draft pick to NYI for Kvasha and Niinimaa or Dealing Marty and others to CHI for Vandermeer and Arnason....do somthing when miller is healthy, to add depth at D and a little more scoring...i love the wins...but how long can we keep coming from behind to win games...

[inkman]

I appreciate your ideas but who the @#$& is trading for Grier. I like the guy and he had a good game last night but I doubt many teams would be interested in him.

[MLH]

So now I'm not a fan either, because I disagree with the approach to winning that you endorse?

I don't think a fan would criticize a winning approach. If you don't think the Sabres will continue to win, then by all means express that however you want. DeLuca, for example, won't give Regier any credit as was evidenced by his 'does Lydman do this that and the other thing' post. I haven't seen you post, I have no idea where you stand.

 

DeLuca has been wrong about everything and won't admit to it. He thinks the Sabres best start since 1979 could be "better", but his plan would have failed miserably.

[Stoner]

What "winning" approach? What exactly have the Sabres won? The Late Fall Stanley Cup? They have won nothing yet, and they have won nothing using a shoestring budget approach the first three seasons of the post-Hasek era, during which, of course, the goal was also to win the Cup. Regier gets a pass only because the franchise went through such turmoil. And he gets the benefit of the doubt this season because it's the first season of a new era in the NHL. In fact, he probably gets next year, too, to prove that this plan you speak of can work. But one of these years, if the Sabres keep missing the playoffs, the #%^$#! is going to hit the plan. :) Certainly, so far, the Sabres are a huge hit and a big surprise and seem to be in a great position to make the playoffs. So far, so good.

 

MLH, we will get along fine, and we can argue until the cows come home, but I won't accept having my loyalty brought into question. That's just a ridiculous approach to debate, especially when you have so many good points to bring to the table. Ad hominem attack, they call it.

[deluca67]

I don't think a fan would criticize a winning approach. If you don't think the Sabres will continue to win, then by all means express that however you want. DeLuca, for example, won't give Regier any credit as was evidenced by his 'does Lydman do this that and the other thing' post. I haven't seen you post, I have no idea where you stand.

 

DeLuca has been wrong about everything and won't admit to it. He thinks the Sabres best start since 1979 could be "better", but his plan would have failed miserably.

You might want to try to read some of the posts before you come out here and make yourself look silly.

 

I'll give credit to Regier when he does something. Right now the Sabres don't have an 'X' next to their name in the standings which means Regier has yet to build a playoff team. When the 'X' is there he'll get his due. Double it if this team makes money. But if you read any of my posts you would have known that already.

 

As far as Lydman. He's a dime a dozen. He's not a difference maker. This team needs a solid #1 Defensemen.

 

also,

 

The Canucks are now in need of a goalie? Biron is hot? Make the deal.