Darryl Shannon's +/-
-
Posts
345 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Darryl Shannon's +/-
-
-
29 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:
Why in the world would he sign here? He'll get $$ and term anywhere. Why not try to win too?
A fun game to play....how many teams give skinner 7 years at 8M per or greater.
Oddly enough, I think we backed into dealing from a position of strength.
-
59 minutes ago, klos1963 said:
They have a different coach, new #1 goalie, a couple rookies in the lineup. It's a different team and he is a leader on a playoff team. They also passed off some dead weight to the Sabres. All things aren't equal year to year , so if you don't give him credit for helping his team have success it just sounds like sour grapes. Would be be a better team with ROR and not having Sobotka , Tage and Berglund for that time, I think we would be. But ROR can't play goalie or as a defenseman so we likely still would have issues. He wasn't what was wrong with last years team.
Clawing into the playoffs is never something we should be jealous about. He's a decent player, but age, personality and cap hit made sense to move on. Do we really think O'Reilly at 31 would help us win a cup while making 7.5 per?
-
4 hours ago, Kruppstahl said:
There were also many people here who thought Dan Bylsma was a good coach and that it was exciting that we hired him. Some of us hated that move from the get go.
Some here said we would make the playoffs this year--as recently as a week or so ago!
There are many here who think Risto is a good defenseman.
I can go on.
Suggesting that the ROR deal was horrible is not just 20/20 hindsight. The deal was terrible when it was made, it is terrible now, and it will be terrible 20 years from now.
At least if you're a Sabres fan. St. Louis fans likely feel differently.
Hasek to Red Wings? LOL. His career was over at that point.
That's not even close.
Actually, Hasek year 1 with the wings is even better than O'Reilly this year. Reigning vezina winner pushes way out of town (totally justifiable given criminal element running team, in hindsight), and publically stated he wanted return back to be as small as possible.
Past vs present is a far different story given cap management though. After sobotka is off the books, we all might be singing a different tune.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, freester said:
Ok let’s hear 5 worse trades in Sabres history. I’m not sure it’s fair to count Hasek and trades done because the owner didn’t want to spend money
Ha...so we need to eliminate the first 40 years of team history where finances were an issue?
Hasek to red wings
Kane/Bogo
Fuhr to buffalo
Lehner/Legwand
Peca while holding out
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, freester said:
I’d settle for good players instead of trash. We have so much garbage on our lineup it’s absurd. Sobotka and Okposo are just as bad as Moulson. Thompson also plays a lot of minutes. He belongs in the AHL.
I believe Botterill was aiming for the next 3 years with that trade. Shedding O'Reilly's cap hit and adding assets was the point. I think this year was about (hopefully) coming close to the playoffs. I can't imagine he believed things would be this bleak.
That said...our outlook going forward is far more flexible. We don't have to worry about paying 30+ year old O'Reilly 7.5 per.
-
2 minutes ago, freester said:
It’s obvious that ROR recognized that we had incompetent coaching and GM. That’s why he wanted out. He wants to win. Unfortunately the future looks bleak here.
It's not like St. Louis is a wrecking crew. They are in the playoffs by a 5 point margin. Watching 90 last year, this wasn't a guy to build around going forward. Good player, but not a cornerstone.
-
What's odd about this - his decision to walk away was viewed by most as a positive if you are only looking at dollars and cents.
I wish him the best going forward, and admire someone who can walk away from more money than almost all of us would earn in a lifetime.
-
1 hour ago, inkman said:
Nathan chose to be a professional football player. It comes with associated risk as well as perks. Money, fame and the joys that come with it he can enjoy, suffering through a few fans being ***** hardly seems like undue pennance. I'm sure he'll be fine, he'll just toss an extra prayer to Jesus.
I'd argue this isn't close to "a few fans" anymore. McDermott's idiocy turned this poor guy into both a national punchline and a sympathetic figure at the same time. Of local media, only cappacio seems to be really classy about this.
As for the J Peterman clip....shame on that guy. Imagine taking that call. So you want me to mock a dude who just lost his dream job? When I'm personally a professional success? Sign me up, let's do this.
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but finding joy in mocking someone who appeared to give full effort but was woefully short on talent seems wrong.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, Brawndo said:
The thing is.....if we traded Risto for Hall we wouldn't have Dahlin.
-
32 minutes ago, SwampD said:
I think I've done a complete 180 on this topic. Rather than whine about these things, I really think we need to celebrate them. Sort of a The Tao of Sabres approach.
Someone mentioned in the GDT about looking back, fondly, on the memory of popping cups in the hallways as a youth. Someone else could easily complain about people littering in the hallways.
I think we really need to embrace this smalltown sh!tshow for what it is, and make it ours. Because when I think about it, all these things really are a part of the zeitgeist of being a Sabres fan.
I'd agree with you if it wasn't priced at the level it was. Give me a beer and a dog for five bucks and I'm okay with dive bar bathroom conditions. But they are charging premium levels, and the product, at least this night was awful. It makes you wonder where your money is going.
I think the Atlanta falcons lowered prices on all concessions and actually profited more. You don't even need to do this to be good to fans. You can help the bottom line. Win win for all parties.
Just seems like a tone deaf start. Sleep walking wasn't limited to the guys on the ice it seems. And if you have hung on as a STH through this, it seems as though your devotion is taken for granted.
-
3
-
-
$11 per beer, crowded hallways, bathrooms with standing "water" by urinals, a boring product on the ice leading to an arena as quiet as I've ever heard it. Yeah....that was no fun.
I've long held that Terry and Kim are great for the area. They have put money into our region leading to others (cough, paladino) finally rehabbing their vacant real estate holdings. Buffalonians are better off because of them.
All that said, multiple people were asleep at the wheel to lead to last night. Not raising season ticket prices but bumping concessions 20ish % is not a good look. I'm hearing arena renovations are coming before next year....but they may have waited one too long.
-
17 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
Because....yay, the right decision was made. Eventually the maker of bad ones, McDermott, is gone. What remains, is an owner that is continuing to think he has any idea how football works and doing things like vetoing coaching decisions.
Just because it would happen to be a good decision in one instance doesn't mean our owner has a clue about football. And an owner that thinks he does and acts on that thought can cause big problems.
Of course, this is why that would be bad, I'm not saying that's what's happening right now.Here is the bigger problem. Did the coach really want to give Peterman another shot?
If so, he should have walking papers. And that reflects on the owners who gave him the job as well.
Here is to hoping we get to see growth and Hope from Allen. It is the only logical call, but also may result in another 3 years in purgatory.
-
1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:
I'd agree with the result of the decision but reject the philosophy out of hand
I guess the question then is why? If it's the right answer, and is the best possible result....does it matter who did it? I'd argue this is what leadership is all about.
I guess I think of it as.....coach can be enamored with a player because he does absolutely everything right. Except in the game. Doesn't hurt to have outside counsel.
-
31 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
Would Terry ever veto a coach's roster decision?
If so, we have a problem.
If the coach's decision was to play Nate Peterman again, I'm cool with veto power.
-
1
-
-
The timing of this trade seems odd from the Carolina perspective. Are they having money issues?
-
It DOES matter.
Seriously.
I am f###ing tired of paying good money to watch s##### hockey. Berglund not being able to eat hard minutes will cause the on-ice product to be subpar. It also could very easily force Mittelstadt &/or Reinhart into tougher situations than they are prepared for, thus retarding their development.
This sucks.
Isn't O'Reilly responsible for a lot of this? If you are brought in to lead a team, effort and will don't need talent. I saw a soft, apathetic team at home going through the motions time and time again.
Then we would get to hear him talk about the need to be better, tougher, etc. Go out and do it!?!? Like Lindy used to preach, do things out of character. Try to hit someone, go in strong on a forecheck.
If they tried to sell me on the same team as last year plus dahlin, I'm not buying. I wanted movement, and people feeling uncomfortable. Because I don't want to be in the situation next February where I can't give tickets to a game away for free.
-
I'm absolutely picking Eichel over O'Reilly as well. I just quibble with the notion it was an either-or proposition while suggesting that if it had to be an either-or proposition, that probably doesn't speak well of leadership of the guy who remains.
For a really young leader, if he made mistakes in the past a clean slate (though maybe not deserved) might be best for all parties.
I could absolutely see a locker room dynamic significantly altered by a move like this.
-
Jack Eichel signed an 8-year, $80 million contract. He's ostensibly going to get the C. If he had to be told to be a leader, we're probably in bad shape on that front.
I view it as a leadership team. If O'Reilly didn't get along with jack then you need to choose one. And I'm picking the guy who actually produces 5 on 5.
-
The others who had the A are still here, though. If one guy was that big of an influence, does it really speak well to the others who wore the letters? Put differently, is somebody who has to be told "it's your turn" to lead much of a leader? Don't true leaders grab the bull by the horns?
Contract and term matter. Moving a guy like 90 should help let others know more is expected.
-
If O'Reilly sulked in the locker room and that actually helped crater the team on the ice...do we really think the remaining pieces have the mental toughness to fight through adversity? I don't really believe in this stuff impacting performance on the ice, but even if I did, this still wouldn't make me feel better. A moody teammate in the locker room sinks the team despite playing great on the ice? Talk about some mental weakness...
The 05-06 sabres took pride in getting rid of Miro. So it might matter a bit, but yes, you still need talent to win.
-
He clearly didn't want to raise the asking price. He wanted O'Reilly gone...
Just like Colorado...
How many great nhl centers have there been who played on three teams? Before the age of 30?
I understand the underlying stats may have said he was impressive, but the eye test was so far off. To me, his legacy is being completely invisible except on the score sheet. You wouldn't see him driving play, but he would have a sneaky tip for a goal and a power play assist.
Berglund with 19+13 EV goals the past 2 years. O'Reilly with 11+9. In more games. And while logging huge minutes. Let's see how this shakes out.
-
You thought last year's offense was bad? Just wait.
Will the offense really be impacted? O'Reilly did his damage with an extra man. And was pedestrian at 5 on 5.
Plug in 37 for his pp minutes, and we might be more dynamic. (that includes dahlin)
-
I think botterill is looking ahead 3 years in salary structure. If you view this through that lens, pominville, moulson, sobotka and bogosian are gone.where do you get cap flexibility in eating 4 years of Berglund who nobody will take and 2 years of Sobotka who nobody will take and 2 years of Hunwick who nobody will take to go along with 5 more years Okposo who nobody will take and2 more years of Bogosian who nobody will take?
I truly think he saw O'Reilly as a problem in the room, and on the payroll. 7.5M on the cap for 5 (I think) more years is more of an issue than sobotka and Berglund.
We got deeper as a lineup and more flexible to hopefully supplement the lineup in 2-3 years.
-
We gained 150K in cap savings. This is what is FRUSTRATING to me. I find it completely unacceptable. That's where I'm frustrated, I get taking on one of the two players. Berglund hasn't been a particularly strong players in 3-4 seasons. He's a bottom six forward and a terrible replacement on the wings. I'm hoping we trade him immediately.
Today, this is correct. Fast forward 2 and 3 years and it's a different story.
We got draft capital and cap flexibility, which is a theme with this new management
GDT:Blue Jackets at Sabres 3/31/19 6pm MSG
in The Aud Club
Posted
Not just that, but timing matters the same way it did with O'Reilly. Kane and his style of play makes an 8 year contract as foolish as the okposo deal. Trading him and lucking out with a first round pick is the best possible scenario.