Jump to content

Pimlach

Members
  • Posts

    20,541
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Pimlach

  1. 1 hour ago, Eleven said:

    Danault is what he is:  a good defensive forward who excels at faceoffs.  He's Gaustad.  I wouldn't mind him here but I wouldn't break the bank for him.

    That is what I see as well.  I don’t know what the hoopla is all about.  

  2. 1 hour ago, DarthEbriate said:

    This is really it. GMTM was a death by a bunch of paper cuts, not a single move. This trade was about clearing out softness for some grit. We all agreed then we needed it. It was successful in that regard. Bogo had something like 13 hits in his first game with the Sabres. Kane once fought 3 times (and won) in a single game, which was more than Myers or Stafford had done in the previous two years. (In later seasons, Stafford was always good for 1 fight a year so he could point out that he did, in fact, step up to protect his teammates.)

    If it isn't this trade, then we move Stafford for a 2nd at the deadline. Myers still has to go for some heaviness/grit because GMTM wanted to be the LA Kings east. Armia wasn't becoming the elite shot he'd been drafted as any time soon. Lemieux, whatever. The 1st could definitely have been useful. Roslovic, Beauvillier, Sebastian Aho (don't worry, GMTM would never have drafted Aho) were all soon to be taken.

    Agreed. The McNabb trade was bonkers for the "prize" of a 4th-round Fasching. And I liked Fasching's game a lot.

    An issue to keep in consideration was that we had acquired too many assets. You can only have 50 players under contract and so we were going to pool some larger quantities to get fewer items in return, but hopefully collectively of higher quality.

    Great post Darth 

  3. 1 hour ago, Weave said:

    Lemieux was never playing a game here.  Does Armia become a good bottom 6 player on a team with no centers?  Does he become a disappointing top 6 winger that isn't putting up numbers like his ceiling suggested?

    We didn't give up anything consequential in the grand scheme.

    Lemieux - rumor was his father wanted him out of Buffalo.  Tough beans for him would be my response.  

    Armia?   I don’t have a crystal ball.  We had Eichel and ROR as centers, not to bad.  He is pretty good player today.  Better than several on our team.  

    We gave up too much for the oft injured Bogo (which was a known problem in Winnipeg) and the troublesome Kane ( which a known problem in Winnipeg). 

    Despite Kane’s goal scoring and toughness we basically took Winnipeg’s trash. I liked Myers, Stafford (meh), Armia, and Roslovic (the draft pick) better than Bogo and Kane.  

    There were several Murray trades that didn’t give up much in the “grand scheme”, then you sum them up all up and look at the returns and it’s clear he gutted too deep and gave up too much - his grand scheme was a fast rebuild and he failed.  He put us in a huge hole.   

    This thread is not my passion.  I didn’t start it.  I tried to like that trade at the time, but looking back it was a rookie GM trading for skill and ignoring some important factors about the players he brought it.  Something he did consistently.   

  4. I missed the presser so thanks to PA and all for the comments.  You guys are a bunch of characters btw.   
     

    I wish Granato well.  He will have a lot of challenges with this roster if it comes less Eichel, Reinhart, and Risto.  He showed us last year that he can get them playing decent hockey at times.  
     

    I hope Adams can help him out  - start by getting him a dam goalie and a few players that hate losing.   

  5. 1 hour ago, Weave said:

    Given what was moved to get Kane and Bogo, I don’t expect the team’s fortunes would have been any different than what they are today.

    I don’t understand this but ok.  Move Stafford and Myers for better character players or picks.  Keep Lemieux, Armia, and that pick (Roslovic).   That is better than Bogo’s limited contributions (injury history) and Kane’s known negative influence. 
     

    This is about chemistry.  The whole point is the GM did not consider chemistry and leadership.  

    • Thanks (+1) 1
  6. 15 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

    This non interview thing means nothing to me.  Either Power is the pick, or he isn't.  The fact that he has not interviewed with the Sabres really should have nothing to do with it, IMO.

    Did @Pimlach interview @Eleven?  I don't think so.

    Gil was the consensus pick at 1, and Dale Tallon was a very good player ranked at 2.   There were no red flags on either of them.  
     

    The Sabres did their homework.  Gil was a shy and quiet kid with immense talent. He spoke French, almost no English,  so having veterans like Phil Goyette and Jean Guy Talbot on the roster that year helped him.  The biggest thing was getting wingers that could keep up with him, which was addressed in the next draft (Martin) and in the Shack-Robert trade.   Punch brought Robert into the Leafs organization.   He knew what he was getting with that trade.  
     

    The first season was focused on getting goaltending to avoid getting slaughtered, some solid veterans to help teach the young guys by example, and some tough guys to prevent teams from taking liberties.  
     

    Gil was an immediate impact, a potential superstar and one of the most exciting players in the league.  I can still hear the Aud crowds excitement build up everytime he had the puck.  It was Electric. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  7. 10 hours ago, Hoss said:

    I disagree wholeheartedly. I think this was a very good trade by a GM who knew exactly what he was doing. He also knocked the ROR trade out of the park.

    Yeah, it all worked out so great didn’t it?   

    Bogo collected a lot of money from his lofty position on IR.  Kane taught Eichel all the best things a young player needs to know,  couldn’t stay out of trouble, and departed with no effort to retain.  

    The trade to acquire ROR by itself was fine, but ROR and his drinking habits, in combination with everyone else was not good chemistry. 

    Murray left us with no depth and no assets in the pipeline due to his propensity to give up too much on his deals.  
     

    Murray knew exactly what he was doing, a “fast” rebuild.   Well haste makes waste.  

    He was a terrible GM and a rude person on top of it.   Pretty young guy to be out of the league?   I guess he can run his father’s auto repair shop since his uncle is not around to give him a job in hockey.    

    • Like (+1) 3
  8. 2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

    Due to the intangibles that came with the trade agree that it was bad. 

    But at the time & even in hindsight it was equivalent value. 

    But, thinking about how much differently things could have been in the next 1/2 dozen seasons had the intangibles that now seem to have come with that trade been avoided, ...

    I think we gave up too much to Winnipeg and too much for Lehner as well. 
     

    Murray is out of the NHL.  

    • Like (+1) 1
  9. 4 minutes ago, Norcal said:

    Love to have all three of those guys next year but I'd settle for atleast one. Goodrow, Coleman and Danault. All made great plays right there!! 

    I know he has played well in the post season, but Danault did not look good on that last goal.  A more determined effort in the neutral zone was needed to end the period.  

  10. 1 hour ago, Ruff Around The Edges said:

    I can see this being the year that Dahlin arrives more on the offensive side. To project it: 10G 45A type season perhaps?  Not sure if that is shooting too high for next year but we have to remember that Dahlin post Krueger and no Eichel was really showing some strides on that side of the ice.

    I don’t think your projection is bad with Eichel and Sam on the team.  He needs some people to bury the puck to get that many assists though. 

    • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...