apuszczalowski

Unless they decided to move Stafford up from the 4th line and Foligno down one to the 3rd.......

Good for you, but it wore on the Canucks enough to want to move himAssisted by his father, no problem. Having his father step into his business with a team can be a big problem. So far its been alright with Cody here, but whos to say how long that will last

So his dad is involved writing letters about the situation his sons in with the Avs? Great, another young C we are after who has a Daddy helping to run their career for them Anyone know any other player whos Dad is involved in their career that we can look at as another trade candidate?

He won't pass through waivers til tomorrow at noon so tonights out.........

Can Enroth go down on a Conditioning Stint if he hasn't been injured? Or was it announced he was hurt aside from those blistering sunburns on the back of his neck?

No one had a problem when they waived Ellis to send him down (he wasn't gifted talent wise, but he always played hard and knew his role on the 4th line)........... Maybe Pegs has decided its easier to win a championship in the AHL so he is trying to build them up for a run since the Sabres aren't going to make a Cup run this year?

Also this whining over a 4th liner? What has McCormick done this season that Scotts not here for or can do? Maybe this is so they can keep Grigs in the lineup (Hect C's the 4th line with grigs back on the 3rd)? Maybe they plan on using the roster spot to bring up one of the forwards from Rochester i left out a trade in the works because well, Its Darcy in charge and its highly unlikely he makes a move before the market has been set for trades.......

I would like to keep Darcy as far away as possible from this organisationWhat moves has he made in the draft that have been that much better then almost any other GM in the NHL? Was it all the guys who left here and went on to make big names for themselves in the NHL elsewhere? Was it picking Stafford? Zagrapan? Persson? Paille & Ballard? Novotny? Kryukov? Those are all first round picks since the late '90's C'mon, now this is even reaching for you. You are going to blame the coaching because no one responded to Miller getting run? You think thats something teams coach to their players? That has more to do with the kind of players who make up the team (guys that don't play physical and fight, they rely on their skill to play) then coaching. I don't care who the coach is, I would highly doubt you would have seen Vanek or Pomminstein attack Lucic after Miller was hit, they aren't that kind of player..... If you want to talk about confusion of players from coaching, you have Hours (maybe days) worth of footage of the defence standing around looking confused you could use and say that its coaching.....

Do you think Deer antler spray is really going to help this team?

Of course, they also made some radical changes to their roster last year with 2 big trades and almost missed the playoffsIf your going to bring up the Kings and coaching change, how about the Capitals? How are they doing with the change from Boudreau?

Yeah, Its helped the Oilers/Islanders/Blue Jackets/Jets (Thrashers)/etc become powerhouses by drafting at the top every season. Unlike teams that always get the late draft picks like the Red Wings/Devils/Canucks/etc. ITS NOT WHERE YOU DRAFT THATS IMPORTANT, ITS GETTING GREAT TALENT WHERE YOU DRAFT AND KNOWING HOW TO BUILD A TEAM THROUGH EVERY POSSIBLE AVENUE My biggest issue with the team and the way its built is that theres never any big changes to the roster. DR never takes chances to shake up the roster and try and aquire better talent. The good teams will move talented prospects to get players of value, they will make changes to the roster that are more then just moving a guy up from the minors. DR is always trying to get the "Diamonds in the Rough" instead of trying to get established guys because they might cost too much. His biggest move to shake up the roster in a while was moving Roy for Ott. The only reason I am not on the "Fire Ruff" bandwagon like everyone else is because I would like to see what he could do with real talent brough in here and serious changes to the roster. Most of his upgrades he is given to the roster are always guys from the minors that come in and start out great then fizzle out. Most would say its because they are being ruioned by the coach, but when these guys are moved elsewhere, to a different coach with a different system, none of them are becoming anything better then they were here. The last time he had serious talent, this team looked good (Briere and Drury). DR has had the excuse that he was shackled by an owner who wouldn't let him spend or add to payroll. Now that hes had that removed, all he has done is add to payroll and the team gets worse because he is overpaying for marginal talent. What I would have hoped is that he would be more active right now and start the trade market going instead of waiting for it to start and make some moves to shake up the roster. Instead we get typical Darcy telling us how he has had talks but the markets "soft" or he hasn't had an offer he likes, etc. Listening to Robi this morning, I have to agree with him, firing Ruff now isn't going to help because this is not a good time to be searching for a replacement, you might as well let him ride out the year and make a move in the offseason. The only guys available to come in and replace him are either on the staff, or have been out of hockey this year. You won't be able to hire someone off another teams staff, and I doubt any minor league teams will allow you to steal away their coaches just before they start the playoffs, so it does no good except making the fans happy til the next game is played and things are no better. Makes some roster moves now, and if the team shows no change, Ruff is shown the Door (hopefully with DR right behind him) at the end of the season when you have alot more options to find a better replacement.

While I also agree that I think there are many here that would give up way too much for O'Reilly, I don't think giving up the #5-10 spot in the draft this year is something I wouldn't do for a guy who can step in now and play C on the 2nd or 3rd line. The drafts a crap shoot, you never know what kind of player your gonna get and what they might become and how long it will take them to become that. So if it would take the Sabres #1 pick this year to get him, I say why not, are they sure they will get a better player that can step right in drafting in that spot?

Hows that working for Boston against the Sabres this year?

I know that, I'm just saying thats a reason Ennis can be moved, its not the best move, but if it means an improvement at the position, then its an option. With O'Reilly and keeping Ennis as a C, you are forced to move Grigs down to the 4th line as a C or move either him or Ennis to Wing while keeping one to play C on the 3rd line (better choice, but again, you have to give something up to get something of value). Keeping Ennis out of the deal and moving him to wing with the option to fill in at C is the best choice, but who else are you going to deal to the Avs to get a deal done? Are you willing to give up a better prospect so that maybe the Avs will take a lesser roster player?

This game should be a must win, but of course around here there are many that will argue that the Sabres would struggle against their kids Pee Wee Team. The last 2 games they walked away with 2 points (almost atleast 3) against teams that should be destroying them and are at the top level in the NHL. Everyone says this team is not built for the playoffs, yet one of the teams they would use as the measuring stick for this (playing a series against Boston) they are 2-1 against (Bostons only 2 regulation loses are against the Sabres). The Pens are one of the leagues elite teams, and if it wasn't for a sloppy first 2 minutes of that game, they had a chance to atleast walk away with a point, maybe 2 in a game a team with their record should have been blown out against.

There is only 2 reasons to move Ennis in the deal and they kind of go together1) You have to give up something good to get something good 2) Not giving up Ennis creates a bit of a jam at Centre which would force one of the 2 to the 3rd line or force Ennis back to wing, trading him would free up this jam

You can Blame TG/LQ for the dismantling of that team, but if DR is such a good GM, he should have been able to rebuild it a few times by now. He isn't the only GM that has had to work within a budget, and it wasn't like he blew a budget to build that team prior to the lockout (Briere was being looked at as a Bust/change of scenery type guy until he came to Buffalo). A good GM can take what he is given and build a winner, DR seems to need a ton of luck and plenty of built in excuses to try and build a team to just make the playoffs. maybe he is still shackled by Ruff?

I understand that, but the big issue I have is that I am paying already for a service to watch NHL Hockey games (something that the Leafs and other teams are a part of). I can understand if the game is blacked out because its on basic cable and availabel to anyone with Cable TV, but if I am paying the NHL already for the ability to watch games, they shouldn't be blacked out cause another pay service is broadcasting an NHL product in the area. I have had a couple Sabres games blacked out here in Niagara when tehy played the Sens (and I think even the Habs) on Hockey night in Canada because it said its broadcast locally, whcih they were not because I am in the "Leafs region" and that game was on instead

I understand the Blackout part, I just think that if I am paying extra for the survice, I should still get the game As for the Hockey example, The "Leafs TV" is an additional channel I would have to pay extra for, above and behind paying for more then basic cable service. If it was broadcast on a station that was part of basic cable (TSN, CBC, Sportsnet) I could understand it a little more, but either way, I am paying for additional access to games, they shouldn't be blacked out just because I can catch them locally on TV somewhere. If I did not have TV, just a computer and wanted to watch hockey, I wouldn't be able to catch a team that broadcast locally

I agree that the Cnaucks wanted Kassian, and you have to give up something of value to get something, but I disagree that just because they got Hodgson, it made Roy expendable. They got rid of Roy for Ott (to fill a void left by getting rid of Kassian basically) it ends up being more shuffling of the chairs around here. Now, I have no problems with them getting rid of roy, the biggest issue was not trying to get someone else in here to replace him. I would rather have Hodgson fighting for the #1 C job on a team with someone else who could be a #1 C, then him given the spot. you don't get any better by just re-shuffling, this team needed upgrades, Whats the point in bringing in a Vet like Ott when your plan is to go young and let youth learn on the job at the NHL level. The team would be much better if the decision to keep Grigs in the NHL was made because they have too much talent at C to keep him up, rather then him being the best/only option

I think he is a good player, and people here would have less of a problem with him if he were taller, I think the biggest issue for most is that they think that someone his size can't succeed. Right now I will give him some time because he is coming off a serious injury and may still need time to recover. He is hardly whats wrong with this team, if they had him on the top line though, then those saying he is a problem would have a point............. I figured there had to be something going on for a response like that and I have no issues with Ott getting into a verbal discussion with Fleury, or any goalie. I also noticed during the game that Fleurys net is knocked out of place alot during a game. The one that pissed me off the most was where it came off after he hit in when the puck came out to a Sabres who was almost all alone in front of the net. I think he gets himself into a position where he gets it loose so it will come off more often and the play can be whistled dead.

I really think one of the biggest issues with this team is that Darcy has no direction for building a team, just look at it starting last season. The team is lacking C's and toughness, so he trades away one of the "tougher" forwards in Kassian for a potential #1 C in Hodgson. (Not a bad move on its own, Hodgson has his faults but you have to give something of value to get something of value) So now in the offseason, he trades away a veteran 1-2 line C for a forward with "toughness" for the 3rd line and a depth defencemen (I had no problem with moving Roy, he was proving to be an actual cancer in the lockerroom). He drafts 2 C's, and is now forced to have to keep one up on the active roster because they are desperate for C's (along with re-signing Hecht). Looking at the moves, he just seems to be spinning his wheels/reshuffling chairs. Instead of improving and filling holes, he is re-shuffling holes to fill spots. If these moves were done with a few quality additions to upgrade the roster then things would more then likely be different. The issues were that when taking into account what was gained to what was lost, you would have to say the moves were a wash at best. Would this team be any more worse with Roy/Kassian over Hodgson/Ott? Instead of looking to the future AGAIN, and continuing a rebuild (This team always seems to be in a continuous rebuild, moving out veterans and replacing with guys from Rochester), maybe its time to use some of these assetts/prospects in Rochester to obtain some talent that can help them win now, instead of following the usual plan of continuing to look to Rochester hoping your improvements are only a few years away.

He sure proved that opening day..... Man, what happened to the Flyers this year? They have looked even worse then Buffalo considering the talent that team is supposed to have on it. I watched them against Toronto and it was laughable how bad they looked, then they beat the Islanders yesterday 7-0 IIRC? (BTW, there were times where Nabokov looked like he was a fan dressed in Nabokovs gear out there in yesterdays game)

You haven't lived til you watched old shows from the 60's & 70's in HD........... My issue is with the fact that they block out games that are available "locally" even if they are on a specialty channel, or with football how the blackout rule stretches to the NFl Sunday package. If I am paying extra for the service, why does it matter if the game is a local broadcast game? For example, if this Thursdays game against Toronto is broadcast on Leafs TV here, I can't get it on the NHL live (internet CI from NHL.com) because its considered to be on locally, when I have to pay extra to get Leafs TV here. My wife gets pissed being a Leafs fan now because they have started moving more games to that channel and playing less on the usual sportsnet channel, and she can't watch them on the internet because it says its being broadcast locally. As for the NFL and the blackout rule, I am paying extra for the service to catch games, why can't I get local blacked out ones too since I am paying for the game (just not as much if I went to see it in person)

I think they let it go because they thought it was passed back in by the Preds, when it was actually deflected off one of their players which appears like it could have been difficult for the linesman to see if it defelected or was "passed" off of his stick. Either way, it would ahve been better to call it offside then to let it go. There would be alot less arguing over the linesmen calling that offside then screwing it up because of some small part of the offside rule.