red Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Dare i say the sabres shallow their pride,admit to Grier that he took alot of heart with him into the shark tank,and give him an offer sheet? 2.1 for 2 seasons? I dont think many people will disagree with this. Having Grier back for 2.1 a season is much better than giving that money to the general. I love the Grier talk! Sadly, his linemate Drury is gone. But I always thought Grier, McKee, and DuMont should have been kept. I know DuMont and McKee really wanted to stay. Instead, they kept Afinogenov, Kotalik, and Kalinin. Hindsight is 20/20, but I think it is apparent that Grier, McKee, and DuMont have all done better than the other 3. Ultimately, I don't know that going back is going to push the Sabres forward. But I sure love the idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 It's the typical Buffalo fan mindset of trying to bring back the past. Grier is fine, but the team would be much better trying to find someone else in that mold that isn't 34 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 He might indeed, however the point was that the poster would rather pay Grier 2.1 a year than paying MacArthur the same amount, and in that particular case I'm 100% certain Darcy would rather spend his free cash on the brat pack, before bringing anyone else in. Darcy loves the brat pack for some weird reason, and he seems to be just about the only one these days. Grier over MacArthur? You're serious? MacArthur is 10 years younger. Is a better scorer. Grier is a fine defensive player, and i loved him when he was here, but let's get over the past. If the Sabres want more defensive or more physical players theres plenty of guys out there who are better and younger then Grier at the same pay rate and would cost a MacArthur in return. I feel like Sabres miss two years of playoffs and people are ready to jump off a bridge. Holy cow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Grier over MacArthur? You're serious? MacArthur is 10 years younger. Is a better scorer. Grier is a fine defensive player, and i loved him when he was here, but let's get over the past. If the Sabres want more defensive or more physical players theres plenty of guys out there who are better and younger then Grier at the same pay rate and would cost a MacArthur in return. I feel like Sabres miss two years of playoffs and people are ready to jump off a bridge. Holy cow! I, for one, would gladly take Grier over MacArthur. I also don't agree w/ the above post that we should have kept McKee. He was my favorite player for years, but at $4M? And he's not doing very well in Saint Louis, either; he's spent a lot of time injured and a lot of time benched. Let's not forget that it wasn't the Sabres decision for Grier to walk, either. They matched; he wanted to move. That said, if he comes knocking, I hope the Sabres open the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I, for one, would gladly take Grier over MacArthur. I also don't agree w/ the above post that we should have kept McKee. He was my favorite player for years, but at $4M? And he's not doing very well in Saint Louis, either; he's spent a lot of time injured and a lot of time benched. Let's not forget that it wasn't the Sabres decision for Grier to walk, either. They matched; he wanted to move. That said, if he comes knocking, I hope the Sabres open the door. I'd take a guy like Grier over MacArthur too, but if age was similar.... but you'd take a 33 year old Grier over a 23 year old MacArthur? Interesting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I also don't agree w/ the above post that we should have kept McKee. He was my favorite player for years, but at $4M? And he's not doing very well in Saint Louis, either; he's spent a lot of time injured and a lot of time benched. McKee's durability was the major factor in all of that. It was going to be a tough call to give longterm money to a defenseman who was missing signficant time each year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I'd take a guy like Grier over MacArthur too, but if age was similar.... but you'd take a 33 year old Grier over a 23 year old MacArthur? Interesting.... Wait, do we want veteran leadership or not? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Grier over MacArthur? You're serious? MacArthur is 10 years younger. Is a better scorer. Grier is a fine defensive player, and i loved him when he was here, but let's get over the past. If the Sabres want more defensive or more physical players theres plenty of guys out there who are better and younger then Grier at the same pay rate and would cost a MacArthur in return. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I, for one, would gladly take Grier over MacArthur. Me too. 34 or not, he averaged 15 minutes per game for the best team in the NHL during the regular season. He knows how to play the game, he's tough, nobody runs the goalie when he's on the ice and he's the kind of veteran leader the Sabres are dying for. Mac showed some potential, and could turn into a 20-goal scorer, but could just as easily get 9 goals next year and be out of the NHL in a couple of years. The Sabres wouldn't miss him. With that said, there is virtually no chance that he would come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimiVbaby Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 This last string of Grier talk just screams that the D&B drum has been beaten waaaay too much around here and someone is trying to change it up. Grier was a nice player, but a difference maker he was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 i'll take macarthur over grier any day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Sorry, and I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see much in Clarke MacArthur. I really don't. So yeah, I'll take hard-nosed Grier over young Mac. Again, I really, really hope I turn out to be wrong (even better if I'm wrong while the kid is still a Sabre), but I don't see him as anything more than a roster-filler right now. EDIT: Jimi, what's the D&B drum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Sorry, and I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see much in Clarke MacArthur. I really don't. So yeah, I'll take hard-nosed Grier over young Mac. Again, I really, really hope I turn out to be wrong (even better if I'm wrong while the kid is still a Sabre), but I don't see him as anything more than a roster-filler right now. EDIT: Jimi, what's the D&B drum? +1 Sorry Blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimiVbaby Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Sorry, and I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see much in Clarke MacArthur. I really don't. So yeah, I'll take hard-nosed Grier over young Mac. Again, I really, really hope I turn out to be wrong (even better if I'm wrong while the kid is still a Sabre), but I don't see him as anything more than a roster-filler right now. EDIT: Jimi, what's the D&B drum? Drury & Briere.. I just really don't like typing their names anymore. Too many pointless arguments. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Sorry, and I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see much in Clarke MacArthur. I really don't. So yeah, I'll take hard-nosed Grier over young Mac. Again, I really, really hope I turn out to be wrong (even better if I'm wrong while the kid is still a Sabre), but I don't see him as anything more than a roster-filler right now. EDIT: Jimi, what's the D&B drum? I'm still confused as to why this MacArthur vs. Grier discussion has lasted this long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 I'd take a guy like Grier over MacArthur too, but if age was similar.... but you'd take a 33 year old Grier over a 23 year old MacArthur? Interesting.... What's the point of arguing Grier vs MacArthur. It's like arguing which pile of dog crap smells better. Neither one is close to being one of the many difference makers this team needs. It's great to see trade talk. I just wish I could believe for a second the Sabres were going to do something other than role out the party line about injuries and make significant changes. The Sabres believe that a healthy Tim Connolly and Ryan Miller will lead them to the playoffs and for the third consecutive year they will be proven wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 What's the point of arguing Grier vs MacArthur. It's like arguing which pile of dog crap smells better. Neither one is close to being one of the many difference makers this team needs. It's great to see trade talk. I just wish I could believe for a second the Sabres were going to do something other than role out the party line about injuries and make significant changes. The Sabres believe that a healthy Tim Connolly and Ryan Miller will lead them to the playoffs and for the third consecutive year they will be proven wrong. Proven wrong? I'm confused as to how there was a healthy Tim Connolly and Ryan Miller throughout the last two seasons. I'm not going to bother arguing with your belief here other than to say it makes little sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VansTheMans Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 Joe Thornton; worth taking a run at this summer? Big, powerful center that would add alot of size and grit to the Sabres upfront, and he's a hell of a playmaker to boot. He has two years remaining on his contract, at 7.2 million per season. If the Sabres surrendered a few players in the trade, cap space wouldn't be too much of an issue. The only issue with his game is that he tends to disappear in the playoffs. However, I'd be willing to take a chance on him. Hopefully with him on the team the Sabres could at least make the playoffs. Id imagine that he'd cost the Sabres something along the lines of Roy, Tallinder, Prospect and 1st round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 Proven wrong? I'm confused as to how there was a healthy Tim Connolly and Ryan Miller throughout the last two seasons. I'm not going to bother arguing with your belief here other than to say it makes little sense. Proven wrong? By betting Connolly would be healthy the past two seasons. By believing Miller is a strong enough goalie to cover up the flaws of a below average defense and a soft ineffective forward ranks. The front office desperately needed a outside presence to come in and point out the flaws of this roster Quinn and Regier refuse to admit are there. Anything short of a major overhaul will result in a another year without playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 Proven wrong? By betting Connolly would be healthy the past two seasons. By believing Miller is a strong enough goalie to cover up the flaws of a below average defense and a soft ineffective forward ranks. The front office desperately needed a outside presence to come in and point out the flaws of this roster Quinn and Regier refuse to admit are there. Anything short of a major overhaul will result in a another year without playoffs. Fair enough. The wording was a bit off, but now I see your point. It's probably just a matter of semantics, but I don't believe a major overhaul is needed to make it back to the playoffs. The right pieces here and there should be enough to make up that 2 point gap the team missed out by. Now, if they want to seriously compete, then your major overhaul becomes more of a necessity. And that's really what we all want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Fair enough. The wording was a bit off, but now I see your point. It's probably just a matter of semantics, but I don't believe a major overhaul is needed to make it back to the playoffs. The right pieces here and there should be enough to make up that 2 point gap the team missed out by. Now, if they want to seriously compete, then your major overhaul becomes more of a necessity. And that's really what we all want. I guess I may be jumping the gun a little. I want the Sabres to be a Cup contender. Can they stand pat and maybe sneak into the 8th spot. It is possible. I don't want to go through another season hoping that other teams falter and the Sabres can back into the playoffs. The front office should be working to grab a playoff spot, not hope one falls to them. Aggression throughout the organIzation is a priority. On the ice and in the front office. If Larry Quinn's "evaluation" comes to any other conclusion then it is as useless as TO's key to the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Fair enough. The wording was a bit off, but now I see your point. It's probably just a matter of semantics, but I don't believe a major overhaul is needed to make it back to the playoffs. The right pieces here and there should be enough to make up that 2 point gap the team missed out by. Now, if they want to seriously compete, then your major overhaul becomes more of a necessity. And that's really what we all want. shifting a couple of pieces around might be enough to get us into the playoffs - not a Cup contender, but more a one-and-done type team. does it make more sense to get big FAs and compete for championships now, at the cost of futility after 1-2 years? or does it make more sense to develop the younger guys, make the playoffs now, and become major contenders after 2-3 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 shifting a couple of pieces around might be enough to get us into the playoffs - not a Cup contender, but more a one-and-done type team. does it make more sense to get big FAs and compete for championships now, at the cost of futility after 1-2 years? or does it make more sense to develop the younger guys, make the playoffs now, and become major contenders after 2-3 years? Why does it have to be one or the other? Especially with the success of the Red Wings who draft & develop well and also fill holes via free agency. By excluding themselves from free agency the Sabres are in effect handicapping themselves. Free agency is as important of a tool in building a franchise as the draft and trading is. It hurts the Sabres that after each free agency period all the Sabres have to offer is Regier with that bewildered look saying how he didn't anticipate the market place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Joe Thornton; worth taking a run at this summer? Big, powerful center that would add alot of size and grit to the Sabres upfront, and he's a hell of a playmaker to boot. He has two years remaining on his contract, at 7.2 million per season. If the Sabres surrendered a few players in the trade, cap space wouldn't be too much of an issue. The only issue with his game is that he tends to disappear in the playoffs. However, I'd be willing to take a chance on him. Hopefully with him on the team the Sabres could at least make the playoffs. Id imagine that he'd cost the Sabres something along the lines of Roy, Tallinder, Prospect and 1st round. Thornton is size without the grit. He is a hellava play-maker though. He would not make the Sabres tougher. Agree they would make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 shifting a couple of pieces around might be enough to get us into the playoffs - not a Cup contender, but more a one-and-done type team. does it make more sense to get big FAs and compete for championships now, at the cost of futility after 1-2 years? or does it make more sense to develop the younger guys, make the playoffs now, and become major contenders after 2-3 years? I don't think the overhaul anyone is talking about here would change much for the younger guys. The one's we're talking about here are the now vets, the Roy's and Pominville's of this team. Sure, you'd have to move a young guy here or there, but the majority would still stay in place. The better question would be whether or not our younger guys are the types that would lead this team to being major contenders in your 2-3 year window. We have an interesting group on the blue line, but there's nothing dynamic among the forwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.