carpandean
-
Posts
9,180 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by carpandean
-
-
A) Pittsburgh is successful because they won a lottery to get 89
He was already two in 1989. ;)
-
Really think this kid is going to be a great player, so I feel we should have a thread about him.
:P
-
For the record, Roy didn't wear 9 on either team he played for last year either. 11 in Dallas, 15 in Vancouver. 9 is retired in Dallas and it's taken by Kassian in Vancouver. Jaden Schwartz (a guy I really like) wears it in St. Louis.
He also wore 14 in Kitchener and 21 in Rochester.
-
You. Disassemble me.
No disassemble! Number five ... is alive!
-
Rolston was 1-1 in OT and 6-4 in the shootout. He was 8-11 in regulation.
The 6-4 is irrelevant when it comes to playoffs, so you're left with 9-12.
And the Sabres have been playing that style the past 16 years........their holes have been revealed and only 50% have been potentially plugged. For every 1 year of Chicago or Pittsburgh winning the Cup by getting multiple top draft picks.....there is 10 years of the Florida Panthers....or 6 years of the Edmonton Oilers....or 10 years of the NY Islanders....or 7 years of the Columbus Blue Jackets....or 10 years of the Atlanta Thrashers/ Winnipeg Jets..........How are those 35 top 10 picks doing for them????So ... we'll talk again once Darcy is gone? Top picks don't guarantee anything if you have a GM who can't draft or manage a roster well. But, neither does anything else when that's the case. Darcy's latest, and as far as I can see last, excuse was that they haven't picked high enough to get top-level talent. If we keep picking in the 10-20 spots, then he will continue to have that excuse. Take a real chance, fail if the talent is not there, and let him draft high-tier talent. If the picks and/or roster don't work out, then he has no more excuses. If they do, then we're Pittsburgh or Chicago.
For the record, I don't think Ron did a terrible job and I do think some players improved. I simply think that much of what was perceived as an improved record was simply the result of exploiting rules that don't help us achieve the long-term goal.
-
:blink:
Um, that's the point system they use.
Yeah, but if you rely on the stupid part ("loser points") to get a big portion of your points, then when it comes to the post season, where that all goes away, you won't do well. The point is that just making the playoffs is no longer a major goal; winning the Cup is. So, playing a style that covers for deficiencies and, at best, allows them to squeak into and subsequently make an early departure from the playoffs, does not help, but rather hinders achieving the real goal. It perpetuates a cycle that they've been stuck in for six seasons: barely make/miss the playoffs, exiting early if they make it, and then drafting middling talent. I'd rather that they play a style that will allow them to win if they have a contending team, but reveals holes if they don't.
-
And I know you are WAAAAYYYYY too sharp to say "His record was not significantly better than Ruff's"
Rolston put up 35 points in 31 games
Lindy put up 13 points in 17 games.
That's 47% more points!!!!!!! That's 93 points over a full season vs. 63 for Ruff.
Rolston is just smart enough to exploit the NHL system.
No, I do think that his record (at least, how it really matters) wasn't significantly better, and only looked that way because of the stupid point system in the NHL that has nothing to do with the post season. Good for him that he exploited that system, but as I said, it's a recipe for the worst possible finish. In other words, it was bad for the Sabres in the long run. If they had kept up Lindy's pace, they would have drafted in the top 5, if not top 3. Some players did perform better, but as others have pointed out, the best predictive statistics (puck possession) for success show that as a team, they weren't much better.
-
I don't find it boring though. If the guys buy into it, it gives you a shot to get to the playoffs, and that type of battle is what can get you along once there.
Unfortunately, all that it did last year was cost us a top-5 pick. His record was not significantly better than Ruff's. The big difference was that he pushed more games to SO's, where they performed pretty well. I don't feel like going back and finding my post with the breakdown, but they had a ridiculously low number of regulation (or even OT, if remember correctly) wins. Basically, it was a recipe for getting points in the regular season and not much else. Good for that same 8-10 (in conference) finish that they've been getting recently, which I consider to be the absolute worst season that a team can have.
-
And if the Sabres D is doo-doo....they are bringing back the same 4 at $15 million, swapping Tallinder for Sekera. What is the Rangers cap hit on their D?
I think you are missing his point. He's admitting that the Sabres' D was and likely will be overpriced doo-doo, so using them to measure the Rangers' D is a poor choice of measuring stick. Compare them to a real defense - which, again, the Sabres don't have - and he feels that you find them less impressive.
Oh, and side note: using the Rangers' hit statistics is always misleading. Whoever counts hits at MSG clearly wants to prove to someone that they are working hard.
-
Getting him out of Russia at 18 is better than 2 years of KHL if the kid is ever going to be a two way player.
I agree with that, but I'm still not sure why posters here thinks it's a big deal that the Stars just signed him. I don't believe that will affect his chances of not ending up back in Russia, since (I believe) his contract would be on hold if he doesn't make the NHL roster and goes back. So, I figured either people were implying that Darcy was taking too long to sign our top prospects or that we should have drafted him instead.
-
What am I missing about Dallas signing a draft pick to an entry-level contract? There's no big rush to do that. Grigorenko signed his last year on 7/18 ... was anyone worried? Nichushkin will either be in the NHL or the KHL next year, so might as well sign him. I believe that if he goes back to Russia, his contract won't kick in (anyone confirm?)
Or, is it because we passed on Nichushkin? The Sabres already have one Russian that they can't develop outside of their NHL roster (Grigs would go back to junior; Nich would go back KHL), and I'd be far more worried about "the Russian factor" from a player who actually stated that it's the NHL or back to Russia. If they didn't already have Grigs, I might have said take the chance, but if we had come out with both after the draft, I would have been even more uneasy about our position.
-
Who wants to work for the Sabres?
I do ... but Ted Black is still filling my position.
-
Darcy: "It seems to be moving toward a bigger man's league ... I do think that there's a shift in that general direction over what we saw coming out of ... you know, maybe ... not this lockout, but the previous lockout."
Moving toward? A shift? Since the last lockout ... eight years ago?!
Hey Darcy ...
-
It was only a matter of time. The big question is: who really ran the draft, Nix or Whaley?
-
UPDATE:
Kassian 5G/1A/6 PTS (+1) & Gragnani (AHL)
(Daniel Sedin 2 Goals, Henrik Sedin 0 Goals= TOTAL 2)
Hodgson 5G/4A/9 PTS (even) & Sulzer 2G/1A/3PTS (+5)
(Vanek 8 Goals, Pominville 5 Goals = TOTAL 13)
Sabres are definitely the top-heavier team:
Sabres:
#1 Line: 18G
Bottom 9: 5G
Defense: 4G
Total: 27G
Canucks:
#1 Line: 7G
Bottom 9: 8G
Defense: 7G
Total: 22G
-
I'm pretty sure that is the comparison being made. And all that goes with it, especially the lack of an edge to their games, although Stafford has been pretty surprising in that regard so far. At least to me.
Stafford isn't Kassian big, but he's big enough that he should (and on rare occasions does) play a more power game. He's wasted his size and skill.
Hodgson is definitely smaller than Drew, but also works very hard on and off of the ice.
They are very different players with different skills and different shortcomings. Again, it just seems like an odd choice.
-
They have a player like Hodgson on the team now, he's called Drew Stafford.
That's a strange comparison. I don't see much similarity at all.
I understood where you were coming from with the small skill forward claim, but not where this comparison comes from.
-
As of today Vanek and Pominville are in the top four in scoring in the NHL. Neither Sedin are currently in the top 50 in scoring.
So, do you think that Vanek and Pominville are better than the Sedins? I think that I know your answer, but I'm legitimately asking.
If your answer is no, then does that mean that adding Hodgson to a weaker pair (or, at least, not a better one) has thus far been more productive, as a line, than adding Kassian to a stronger pair? 33 points in 20 man games vs. 17 points in 21 man games.
-
Is Hodgson benefiting from being with Vanek/Pommer more than, less than or the same as Kassian is benefiting from being with Sedin/Sedin?
Remember, if you answer "same as" or "more than", then you are acknowledging that Vanek/Pommer are as good as or better than Sedin/Sedin at making their teammates better.
-
Hodgson is also averaging almost 4 minutes more of ice time a game 19:44 to 15:57.
For what it's worth:
Hodgson TOI/GP
5on5: 15.25
PP: 2.86
SH: 1.63
Kassian TOI/GP
5on5: 12.69
PP: 3.27
SH: 0.00
-
Yeah, I heard on WGR yesterday that there was a pre-season game originally scheduled this week (don't remember when exactly), so they should be deep in to player/team discussion at this point. I was surprised that they started it so early in the off-season, but they had Steve Ott on right after the trade and the prospects during the camp, so there was stuff to cover. It's just too bad that everything died as soon as it became clear that they weren't getting the new CBA done in time.
-
This is my first chance to listen to the show. Does Sylvester spend the entire two hours defending/apologizing for the Sabres?
I've listened to several shows over the past week. This morning has been, by far, his biggest homer moment. He's certainly biased, as expected, but not normally to the level you heard.
-
Really? That's what you read into that?
If you're trolling, fine.
If you're sarcastic, okay.
If you're serious, well, you have work to do on the inside. It was a passing remark during a lunch speech.
I actually thought that it was a funny joke.
-
I'm wondering if Hodgson and Kassian were too young, inexperienced and immature to be dealt at deadline in this supposed "blockbuster" trade between two teams. I'm not sure they are mature enough to psychologically adjust to the situation and do their thing. I'm not expecting too much this season frankly.
And you can add the fact that going out and banging bodies takes far less adjustment or figuring out of teammates or systems than trying to center a scoring line.
I thought Ennis was moved to LW immediately in Portland. Kennedy was the one who started out at center there even though he was a LW at Michigan State.
I was actually thinking that after I posted. Regardless, it's a common move around the league, not just in Buffalo.
Sabres Prospect Zemgus Girgensons
in The Aud Club
Posted · Edited by carpandean
I don't know about everyone else, but for me, that had as much to do with Kuilikov as it did with Kassian. I wasn't and am not that high on him. Yes, he looked like he would be a good defenseman and is progressing that way, but he wasn't/isn't exciting enough for me to pass up what Kassian might have (and still might) become. Fast forward several years, I wouldn't trade Hodgson for Kuilikov, so it's still not a problem for me.