RIVET WAS PLACED ON WAIVERS TODAY!!!!!!!

[Eleven]

Wednesday:

 

Rivet: "Honey, the Sabres are waiving me so I can catch on with a contender and get some playing time."

 

Mrs. Rivet: "That's great baby! At least now we won't have to live in that sh!thole of a city anymore."

 

 

Saturday:

 

Rivet: "Honey, I just got picked up by Columbus"

 

Mrs. Rivet: "Georgia?"

 

Rivet: "No, Ohio"

 

Mrs. Rivet: "#@*%!"

 

I heard reports that Rivet's family was staying in Buffalo and interested in settling down there after his career is over (in a month).

 

And don't talk about my city that way.

[BADMOFO518]

Let's break this down....

 

Who has left over the past 5 years? Help me if I miss some.

 

Dumont, McKee, Grier, Pyatt, Fitzpatrick, Zubrus, Briere, Drury, Campbell, Afinigenov, Kotalik, Kalinin, Paetch, Spacek, Bernier, Paille, MacArthur, Torres, Moore, Lydman, Tallinder, Biron, Kennedy.

 

Let's break it down by group. Push = played same after leaving lindy, Better = played better leaving Lindy, Worse = played worse after leaving lindy.

 

Established Vets from out of system:

 

Grier - Brought in for defense and leadership, did his job, left because organizational non-commitment, went on to play similar role elsewhere, PUSH

Fitzpatrick - Steady 6/7 in Buffalo after being typical journeyman. Left Buffalo and became All-star starter (haha!). In reality, another PUSH

Zubrus - Rental who played Lindy's system ok. Went on to play similar 3rd line roles elsewhere. PUSH

Spacek - Was an established 2/3 d-man coming in. Played fairly well but sometimes disinterested. Left and has played similar if not better at an advanced age P/B

Torres - Was confused by Lindy's system. Totally worthless and relegated to pressbox in weeks. Left and has played decent on a top 5 team. Better

Moore - See Torres. Took a bit but regained some of his mojo. Push/Slightly better

 

Established vets in system, or in system from pre-prime of career:

 

Dumont - Played well and was a top 6. Was let go for 2.5mil, then went on to become a leader on a rejuvinated Nashville, getting 4mil per. Better

McKee - Started young and progressed well. Left and didn't have same success. Worse

Briere - Came over struggling and turned into 1A center. Let go @5 mil, continued his success and cashed in while on a Stanley Cup team. Push/Better

Drury - Was established and seemed to thrive in system. Left for payday and hit the wall. Worse

Campbell - New rules made him an asset. Developed slowly but surely. Left and didn't improve. Push/Worse

Afinogenov - Much promise but stagnant in Buffalo. Left and had some success but never developed to potential. Push/Slightly worse

Kotalik - Had potential to develop into power forward. Mainly Pp and shootout specialist who upped grit in playoffs. Left and stagnated. Push/worse

Kalinin - Tons of potential but never developed nasty side. Left and was role player but never progressed. Push/worse

Lydman - Played steady. Nothing great, nothing horrible. Left and is defensive shutdown and top +/-. Better

Tallinder - Never progressed at great speed. Left and was lost on flailing team until recently. Push/TBD

Biron - OK. Steady lockeroom presence. Left and did fairly well in 1A gig, but didn't thrive. Better backup than ever replaced with. Push

 

Young guys when leaving system:

 

Pyatt - Frustraiting lack of physical play. Light went on in '06 playoffs. Let go and has turned into steady 2 way player. Never a minus and leads Phoenix in goals and consistantly top few in hits. Much Better

Paetch - Extra body pretty much everywhere. Push

Bernier - Showed flashes but was outcast in 2 weeks. Played fairly well in vancouver but faded in Fla. Slightly better

Paille - Became outcast in Buffalo slowly. Turned into nice 3/4 liner for Boston playoff team and has subsided. Push

MacArthur - Gritty and inconsistant. Dealt before arbitration could hit. Thriving as top forward and Toronto turned down 1st and 3rd for him. Much better

Kennedy - Extra body pushed into duty on young team. Seemed to progress but let go. Steady player used as extra body elsewhere. Push/TBD

 

 

I think this is a pretty fair assesment. What seems to be the trend is that Rentals haven't fared well in Buffalo, but they haven't thrived much more anywhere else. More a sign of poor talent assesment from up top.

 

Established vets seem to come in and play par for the course, and move on with no real acceleration or depreciation elsewhere. Can't praise or fault here.

 

Vets that developed in Buffalo....here is the most ambiguous data. On one hand you can argue that for the most part these players did the same or worse once leaving Buffalo, but on the other hand you can argue that they spent so much time in the system that they were damaged goods when leaving. There was a lot of young potential there at one time with the majority never fulfilling both their expectations or contracts. It seems that guys that were always Buffalo property totally fizzle out, but young guys that were brought in before their prime and then left either outplayed their time in Buffalo, or didn't regress, Drury being the exception.

 

Young players....here is the most damning data. Out of the 6 young guys let go, 4 didn't really matter, but 2 were obvious mistakes or were used the wrong way in Buffalo. Their value to current teams is much higher. While it isn't a huge sample, 33% burning you in the butt is not a great record.

 

 

It really looks like if you are a good player with your skills already developed, Lindy and the Sabres don't really help or hurt much.

 

If you are a young player in the system, either you progress elsewhere or are so burnt out by your extended stay in Buffalo that you never reach your potential. Other than Campbell....can you find a homegrown player that fully developed while in Buffalo and maintained a healthy level of play elsewhere? Lots of busts in my opinion.

 

very good, well thought out post.

 

 

i would have to disagree about afinogenov , though as i think he has been much better in atlanta since he left. otherwise very very good post! +3 :thumbsup:

[Robviously]

And I want to pretty much throw the Torres', Moore's, and Zubrus' of the world completely out of this analysis. They weren't around nearly enough to know what impact Buffalo had on them. I'd almost include Kennedy on that last too, but he did have 2 years in the organization, plus rookie camps.

Maybe it's not clear if Buffalo had an impact on them, but teams DO pick up rental players that make a difference. In the past, Buffalo has even been one of those teams. The fact that our recent rentals have all been train wrecks definitely should matter and raises another question mark about Ruff -- his role in building the roster.

 

He's been the coach since 1997 so he definitely has a say in who the team acquires or keeps. If anyone says he's done the best he could with the talent he has, they're basically admitting that he didn't do a good job building the team in the first place. The most egregious example (per Paul Hamilton) is that Ruff thought Afinogenov and Kotalik were more important to the team than Dumont.

 

He has a role in who is on the team and he should be graded on that.

[X. Benedict]

Maybe it's not clear if Buffalo had an impact on them, but teams DO pick up rental players that make a difference. In the past, Buffalo has even been one of those teams. The fact that our recent rentals have all been train wrecks definitely should matter and raises another question mark about Ruff -- his role in building the roster.

 

He's been the coach since 1997 so he definitely has a say in who the team acquires or keeps. If anyone says he's done the best he could with the talent he has, they're basically admitting that he didn't do a good job building the team in the first place. The most egregious example (per Paul Hamilton) is that Ruff thought Afinogenov and Kotalik were more important to the team than Dumont.

 

He has a role in who is on the team and he should be graded on that.

Nice points.

 

If a rental is a bust, it is more the domain of the professional scouting department than anything else IMO. (Not Ruff coaching a player for 5-7 weeks)

[spndnchz]

very good, well thought out post.

 

 

i would have to disagree about afinogenov , though as i think he has been much better in atlanta since he left. otherwise very very good post! +3 :thumbsup:

U do realize he doesn't play 4 Atlanta anymore?

[Robviously]

Nice points.

 

If a rental is a bust, it is more the domain of the professional scouting department than anything else IMO. (Not Ruff coaching a player for 5-7 weeks)

It's on the scouts and GM too for sure, but you'd hope that since Ruff has been a head coach in the NHL for 15 years (and an assistant coach for a few years before that), he'd know enough about the league that there might be players on his radar that he wants on his team. Obviously he's busy and mostly concerned with his own team, but he'd know other players he likes from other teams (the same way we do as fans).

 

BTW, is anyone else really aggravated by the title of this thread? All capital letters and seven exclamation points?? That was necessary? It was one of the least exciting roster moves of all time and involved a guy we never played anymore.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Nice points.

 

If a rental is a bust, it is more the domain of the professional scouting department than anything else IMO. (Not Ruff coaching a player for 5-7 weeks)

 

I agree. Our rentals were really non-impact players in general.

 

I agree with Shrader that there is still plenty of TBD, but it seems as if the young guys (21-25) the Sabres give up on have done better on a whole somewhere else. Just the fact that Dreger had MacArthur fetching a 1st and 3rd at minnimum shows a short term misvalue by the Sabres. We got Torres for 2 weeks.

 

Look at the list of guys like Afinigenov, Kalinin, Kotalik, Tallinder......all these guys were Sabres from babies, and at one point were all expected to become all-stars. The fact is, they were all either over-valued by management, under developed, or both. When you add in MacArthur and Pyatt as league success stories, the question begs to be asked.....where is the failure coming from? Front office? Coaching? Development?

 

I may go back to pre lockout years and do the same here....but half the board would have no clue probably. What I am getting out of this is that Lindy is a decent coach for the most part, but may not develop young players to the top of their ability. Save McKee and Campbell....not much homegrown thriving. Is he a deserving NHL coach, sure. But "He ain't goin nowhere" is just another immediate overvaluation in my opinion.

 

More than anything the data is an indictment against Regier. Failure to identify proper trade assets.....Fear and loathing of Arbitration costing major production (loss of Briere, Dumont, MacArthur...overpriced signings of many who have left or are on the roster), and the 1-2 punch of either Darcy not giving Lindy the right players to develop, or Lindy's inability to properly develop the majority of them.

 

This is where status quo remains frustrating. Someone is heavily to blame besides just Golisano/Quinn. It looks like it is going to take an extra 2 years to figure it out for Pegula, when the prudent move would have been to send Darcy packing at the end of the year and letting Lindy prove his premium the next few years if the new GM agreed he is worth the shot.

[shrader]

You can argue what they were while they were here, but there is essentially nothing that can be learned about what their time here did to them as players. They were here for 1 second of their NHL careers, not nearly enough time to have a significant impact on them as players. If you look at the careers of Zubrus, Moore, and Torres (still a bit early with him), you'll see that they are essentially what they were before they came to Buffalo. Absolutely nothing changed other than the jersey they wear.

 

I think GoDD's point on those vet players was perfect. No change really happens there. They're the neutral group in this analysis, so ultimately they really aren't all that important to his overall point.

 

The driving point in his analysis seems to be the one about the younger guys who are sent packing. While there may be some truth there, I think most of it is way too premature. Ultimately, we're talking about 4 guys there, Pyatt, Bernier, Paille, and MacArthur. Paetsch, like he said is just an extra body, nothing to see there. It's way too early to say anything about Kennedy.

 

-Steve Bernier went 42-39-81 in 160 games before becoming a Sabre and 31-37-68 so far in his 191 post-Sabre career. I don't see any growth there. In fact, he put up more points per game with the Sabres than he did while with Vancouver. The entire praise he gets from his time there is due to a quick start that quickly faded, much like how GoDD described his season in Florida.

 

-Dan Paille looks to be exactly what he was while he was here. I have no problem with GoDD's analysis.

 

-Clarke MacArthur has obviously been a nice surprise this year for Toronto. So he has gotten better, but can he keep this up beyond this season? Only time will tell.

 

-Taylor Pyatt has improved. His first 2 seasons in Vancouver clearly stick out in his career stats. The rest of his career has been very similar to his Buffalo days statistically. I don't watch enough west coast hockey to know about that two-way and physical play aspect, but I'll accept that for now. I see a solid, serviceable hockey player, but not an "oh man, I wish I had that guy" kind of player.

 

 

So I don't see that damning data among the young guys that GoDD sees. That entire conclusion hinges on Pyatt, MacArthur, and Bernier and I just don't see it. And if there is some truth to it, I wonder how much hinges on the classic idea that they were someone who "just needed a change of scenery". I don't know how you measure that one, but I do know that it's a nearly universal idea that is in no way limited to just Lindy Ruff coached teams.

[X. Benedict]

 

 

Look at the list of guys like Afinigenov, Kalinin, Kotalik, Tallinder......all these guys were Sabres from babies, and at one point were all expected to become all-stars. The fact is, they were all either over-valued by management, under developed, or both. When you add in MacArthur and Pyatt as league success stories, the question begs to be asked.....where is the failure coming from? Front office? Coaching? Development?

 

 

Why frame it in terms of failure?

 

I think Buffalo did well to get the mileage out they did out of the players mentioned.

So I don't see any as being an organizational failure. You move on when you have talent that replaces them, or when the contract is an encumbrance (Tallinder perhaps)

 

Afinigenov and Kotalik were perhaps more indicative of where the organization thought the league was going in terms of open play then anything else.

 

Can't say I spend much time missing MacArthur or Pyatt. I think these are players you add to make your team better, not core players. The MacArthur valuation discussion is driving people crazy in Toronto this month. Do you really want to pay him top dollar? Pyatt was more the victim of numbers while he was here than anything else. They were loaded at forward. That is usually indicative of success, not failure.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Why frame it in terms of failure?

 

I think Buffalo did well to get the mileage out they did out of the players mentioned.

So I don't see any as being an organizational failure. You move on when you have talent that replaces them, or when the contract is an encumbrance (Tallinder perhaps)

 

Afinigenov and Kotalik were perhaps more indicative of where the organization thought the league was going in terms of open play then anything else.

 

Can't say I spend much time missing MacArthur or Pyatt. I think these are players you add to make your team better, not core players. The MacArthur valuation discussion is driving people crazy in Toronto this month. Do you really want to pay him top dollar? Pyatt was more the victim of numbers while he was here than anything else. They were loaded at forward. That is usually indicative of success, not failure.

 

Tallinder at one point was being mentioned as a Norris trophy candidate. Afinogenov was being compared to #11 and/or Mogilny in his early years. Kalinin had all the tools to be a top pairing and never developed an edge....possibly nobody to learn from? Kotalik was consistant for the most part, but was another panic signing after Regier balked at Briere and Dumont. To me this shows failure to develop an asset at the worst, or over-valuation at the least.

 

MacArthur is a work in progress, but he culminated a few of the points discusssed. A young player who had a bit of an edge, but was moved out early in his career for a failure of a rental player. Pyatt is the perfect example to me. No, he isn't a superstar, but he was one of the few people on the roster who was able to be strong on the puck, show a physical side, (again, who was here to teach him?), have some scoring touch, and was not yet near his physical peak. I was frustrated by his overall lack of physical play, but in my opinion he was the toughest player to move off the puck in that Carolina series. It was just another example of letting a guy go who showed a willingness to play with some edge and had ample skill to go with it. The Sedin factor is obviously now a myth, as Pyatt has played for 2 organizations who were nowhere before his arrival, but overachieved and succeeded afterwards. He leads the playoff Yotes in goals for heaven's sake. He also has never been a minus player since leaving. All for $1 million. That is EXACTALLY the type of guy the Sabres lack year in and year out.

 

Again, it comes back to a deficiency somewhere in the organization that can't be brushed off as "Bad Sugarpackets!!!". Which is all the more reason for critics not to feel ashamed by not buying the Bobby McFerrin attitude of the new owner. It looks to us as if he is making a mistake by his strong support of the same machine that has given us this byproduct discussed.

 

Are there worse scenarios in the league? Yes. Are there better? Absolutely.

 

But if you want me to believe that the sole existance of the Buffalo Sabres is to win the Stanley Cup.....then I have every right to say you sure as frack aren't going about it in the most efficient way possible by enabling the same decision makers. Would Pegula feel the way to solve the ills of the Post Office would be to give them an extra 10% in their budget?

[X. Benedict]

I think from an organizational standpoint the fault has been that they have strayed from their strategy of addressing needs in this order.

 

1. Goal (we are fine here) - 2. Defense (overestimated the soundness here, getting better but...) - 3. Center (very thin here) - 4. Wing (an organizational strength).

 

If teeth gnashing should happen - it needs to be focused on the middle of the ice mostly.

 

It is really hard for me to get up upset about losing a winger that wasn't top 6.

Or passing on wings (Kovulchuk, Kessle, etc) Although I really like Vanek's play, I don't think you build a winner from the outside in. You build up the middle.

 

I'm not claiming my perspective is correct, just my own.

[shrader]

Pyatt is the perfect example to me. No, he isn't a superstar, but he was one of the few people on the roster who was able to be strong on the puck, show a physical side, (again, who was here to teach him?), have some scoring touch, and was not yet near his physical peak. I was frustrated by his overall lack of physical play, but in my opinion he was the toughest player to move off the puck in that Carolina series. It was just another example of letting a guy go who showed a willingness to play with some edge and had ample skill to go with it. The Sedin factor is obviously now a myth, as Pyatt has played for 2 organizations who were nowhere before his arrival, but overachieved and succeeded afterwards. He leads the playoff Yotes in goals for heaven's sake. He also has never been a minus player since leaving. All for $1 million. That is EXACTALLY the type of guy the Sabres lack year in and year out.

 

He's tied with 3 guys at 16 goals on the season. That would be good for 3rd on the Sabres, but still, I'm not sure why we're drooling over that goal total. At $1 million? Ok, that's nice, but I'm not so sure how you frame your entire argument around this one guy.

[nfreeman]

Established vets in system, or in system from pre-prime of career:

 

Dumont - Played well and was a top 6. Was let go for 2.5mil, then went on to become a leader on a rejuvinated Nashville, getting 4mil per. Better

McKee - Started young and progressed well. Left and didn't have same success. Worse

Briere - Came over struggling and turned into 1A center. Let go @5 mil, continued his success and cashed in while on a Stanley Cup team. Push/Better

Drury - Was established and seemed to thrive in system. Left for payday and hit the wall. Worse

Campbell - New rules made him an asset. Developed slowly but surely. Left and didn't improve. Push/Worse

Afinogenov - Much promise but stagnant in Buffalo. Left and had some success but never developed to potential. Push/Slightly worse

Kotalik - Had potential to develop into power forward. Mainly Pp and shootout specialist who upped grit in playoffs. Left and stagnated. Push/worse

Kalinin - Tons of potential but never developed nasty side. Left and was role player but never progressed. Push/worse

Lydman - Played steady. Nothing great, nothing horrible. Left and is defensive shutdown and top +/-. Better

Tallinder - Never progressed at great speed. Left and was lost on flailing team until recently. Push/TBD

Biron - OK. Steady lockeroom presence. Left and did fairly well in 1A gig, but didn't thrive. Better backup than ever replaced with. Push

 

Young guys when leaving system:

 

Pyatt - Frustraiting lack of physical play. Light went on in '06 playoffs. Let go and has turned into steady 2 way player. Never a minus and leads Phoenix in goals and consistantly top few in hits. Much Better

Paetch - Extra body pretty much everywhere. Push

Bernier - Showed flashes but was outcast in 2 weeks. Played fairly well in vancouver but faded in Fla. Slightly better

Paille - Became outcast in Buffalo slowly. Turned into nice 3/4 liner for Boston playoff team and has subsided. Push

MacArthur - Gritty and inconsistant. Dealt before arbitration could hit. Thriving as top forward and Toronto turned down 1st and 3rd for him. Much better

Kennedy - Extra body pushed into duty on young team. Seemed to progress but let go. Steady player used as extra body elsewhere. Push/TBD

Interesting post. A few points:

 

1. Another guy for the "young guys when leaving system" would be Novotny. I would grade him at Push/worse.

 

2. I would grade Briere as a push. He still hasn't matched the 95 points he put up for the Sabres in 2006-07, although his playoff scoring, which is more important, has held up.

 

3. I would grade Soupy as a push. He's overpaid and not as good as Seabrook or Keith, but still a very good player and an important part of the Blackhawks.

 

4. I would grade Lydman as a push/slightly better. He's getting a bit more ice time out of necessity and Anaheim and is handling it well, but he was a solid player here too.

 

5. I would grade Kotalik as much worse. Lindy got 2 20-goal years, plus a bunch of shootout goals, out of him. Once he left here his career spiraled downward to the point where he can't stick in the NHL.

 

6. I think Dumont's production in Nashville can be credited to the teaching and development he got here. While his numbers improved in Nashville, he was also a good, productive forward here. He left because he was a victim of a numbers game at forward and, probably, a vindictive FO that was PO'd about being taken to arbitration.

 

7. I don't think Bernier really belongs on this list, as he was here for such a short period.

 

I agree with Shrader that there is still plenty of TBD, but it seems as if the young guys (21-25) the Sabres give up on have done better on a whole somewhere else. Just the fact that Dreger had MacArthur fetching a 1st and 3rd at minnimum shows a short term misvalue by the Sabres. We got Torres for 2 weeks.

 

Look at the list of guys like Afinigenov, Kalinin, Kotalik, Tallinder......all these guys were Sabres from babies, and at one point were all expected to become all-stars. The fact is, they were all either over-valued by management, under developed, or both. When you add in MacArthur and Pyatt as league success stories, the question begs to be asked.....where is the failure coming from? Front office? Coaching? Development?

 

I may go back to pre lockout years and do the same here....but half the board would have no clue probably. What I am getting out of this is that Lindy is a decent coach for the most part, but may not develop young players to the top of their ability. Save McKee and Campbell....not much homegrown thriving. Is he a deserving NHL coach, sure. But "He ain't goin nowhere" is just another immediate overvaluation in my opinion.

 

More than anything the data is an indictment against Regier. Failure to identify proper trade assets.....Fear and loathing of Arbitration costing major production (loss of Briere, Dumont, MacArthur...overpriced signings of many who have left or are on the roster), and the 1-2 punch of either Darcy not giving Lindy the right players to develop, or Lindy's inability to properly develop the majority of them.

 

This is where status quo remains frustrating. Someone is heavily to blame besides just Golisano/Quinn. It looks like it is going to take an extra 2 years to figure it out for Pegula, when the prudent move would have been to send Darcy packing at the end of the year and letting Lindy prove his premium the next few years if the new GM agreed he is worth the shot.

As Shrader notes, you are basing your entire conclusion regarding young players on Mac and Pyatt -- and I cannot agree with the characterization of those 2 as "league success stories." Tim Thomas is a league success story, as are Zetterberg and Datsyuk (i.e. unheralded guys who became stars). Mac is having a good season on a team with probably the worst group of forwards in the NHL. He'll probably end up with 23-24 goals this year, with average ice time over 17 minutes per game. Pretty good, but is it really a quantum leap from the 17 goals in 71 games, with average ice time under 14 minutes per game, he had for the Sabres in '08-'09? Probably not.

 

As for Pyatt, he is a serviceable NHL third-line forward, which is pretty much what we saw in 2005-06. We can certainly go back and say that in the Summer of 2006, the Sabres should've extended Briere and kept Dumont, Grier and Pyatt instead of TC, Max and Kotalik, but this is old news.

 

Bottom line with the "discarded young players" group is that it's not like they gave up on Crosby and Stamkos.

 

As for homegrown talent that has developed well -- you can't just look at the guys who are no longer here. What about Miller, Myers, Pommer, Vanek, Gaustad, Weber, etc.?

 

As for Max, Al, Hank and Kalinin being "expected to become all-stars" -- by whom? None of them were high draft picks. Kalinin was the only first-rounder, and he was #18 in the draft. Moreover, how many NHL first-round picks (to say nothing of the lower rounds) become all-stars? How many never make it to the show? How many come through for a few years and then drift away? There is no "fact" that they were over-valued by management or under-developed. That is a theory.

 

It's clear that you're unhappy that TP decided to keep LR and DR, and you may be right about this. I also agree that the Sabres have made far too many poor personnel decisions since 2005, and the result has been the unintentional dismantling of a great team. However, I think most of the fault for that debacle lies with TG and LQ, and that DR and LR will be vindicated.

[PASabreFan]

It's clear that you're unhappy that TP decided to keep LR and DR, and you may be right about this. I also agree that the Sabres have made far too many poor personnel decisions since 2005, and the result has been the unintentional dismantling of a great team. However, I think most of the fault for that debacle lies with TG and LQ, and that DR and LR will be vindicated.

 

Here's what intrigues me. The difference between strategy and tactics. What if the previous ownership's strategy is the correct approach but Darcy didn't carry it out properly?

 

Pegula takes his veiled shots at OSP while still defending the team's performance in recent seasons -- "it's not as bad as everyone says."

 

Well then, why approach the Sabres in such a dramatically different way than OSP did?

 

What if the next three years are worse than the last three? What is TP's fallback position? Turn into OSP?

 

I still can't get beyond the idea that deep down Darcy doesn't want to get into free agency on July 1, even if he has the green light to do so.

 

Rambling...

[LabattBlue]

I still can't get beyond the idea that deep down Darcy doesn't want to get into free agency on July 1, even if he has the green light to do so.

 

Rambling...

Me too.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Interesting post. A few points:

As Shrader notes, you are basing your entire conclusion regarding young players on Mac and Pyatt -- and I cannot agree with the characterization of those 2 as "league success stories." Tim Thomas is a league success story, as are Zetterberg and Datsyuk (i.e. unheralded guys who became stars). Mac is having a good season on a team with probably the worst group of forwards in the NHL. He'll probably end up with 23-24 goals this year, with average ice time over 17 minutes per game. Pretty good, but is it really a quantum leap from the 17 goals in 71 games, with average ice time under 14 minutes per game, he had for the Sabres in '08-'09? Probably not.

 

As for Pyatt, he is a serviceable NHL third-line forward, which is pretty much what we saw in 2005-06. We can certainly go back and say that in the Summer of 2006, the Sabres should've extended Briere and kept Dumont, Grier and Pyatt instead of TC, Max and Kotalik, but this is old news.

 

Bottom line with the "discarded young players" group is that it's not like they gave up on Crosby and Stamkos.

 

As for homegrown talent that has developed well -- you can't just look at the guys who are no longer here. What about Miller, Myers, Pommer, Vanek, Gaustad, Weber, etc.?

 

As for Max, Al, Hank and Kalinin being "expected to become all-stars" -- by whom? None of them were high draft picks. Kalinin was the only first-rounder, and he was #18 in the draft. Moreover, how many NHL first-round picks (to say nothing of the lower rounds) become all-stars? How many never make it to the show? How many come through for a few years and then drift away? There is no "fact" that they were over-valued by management or under-developed. That is a theory.

 

It's clear that you're unhappy that TP decided to keep LR and DR, and you may be right about this. I also agree that the Sabres have made far too many poor personnel decisions since 2005, and the result has been the unintentional dismantling of a great team. However, I think most of the fault for that debacle lies with TG and LQ, and that DR and LR will be vindicated.

 

I will not nitpick your numbered points. Everything is close enough to not effect the big picture much.

 

If you want to take Miller-ok, Myers-we sure about this right now?, Pominville -5.3mil, Vanek 7mil, Gaustad -2.5 mil..holy cow we just got to 40% of the salary on a non-playoff team!.....then we must also look at acquisitions, salary, production and playtime of Lalime,Niedermayer,Connolly,Hecht,Morrisson,etc. I don't think arguing a roster that is on pace to miss the playoffs for 3 times in 4 years as a plus is very prudent.

 

 

Unintentional Dismantling??????

 

YIKES!!!!

[nfreeman]

Here's what intrigues me. The difference between strategy and tactics. What if the previous ownership's strategy is the correct approach but Darcy didn't carry it out properly?

 

Pegula takes his veiled shots at OSP while still defending the team's performance in recent seasons -- "it's not as bad as everyone says."

 

Well then, why approach the Sabres in such a dramatically different way than OSP did?

 

What if the next three years are worse than the last three? What is TP's fallback position? Turn into OSP?

 

I still can't get beyond the idea that deep down Darcy doesn't want to get into free agency on July 1, even if he has the green light to do so.

 

Rambling...

I think he's defending his team because he believes in loyalty and defending his team. He probably also believes that despite the constraints and missteps imposed by TG/LQ, the team doesn't need a compete teardown -- just a few key pieces, which he is determined to help acquire.

 

If the next 3 years are worse than the last 3 -- I expect his fallback position is to go out and hire the best GM and coach he can find. I don't think he'll wait 3 years, either.

 

As for July 1, did Monday's acquisition not move the needle for you? Picking up an expensive player at the deadline who is under contract for another season is a major departure from the prior MO. Also, TP has said definitively that they will be active in free agency.

 

I will not nitpick your numbered points. Everything is close enough to not effect the big picture much.

 

If you want to take Miller-ok, Myers-we sure about this right now?, Pominville -5.3mil, Vanek 7mil, Gaustad -2.5 mil..holy cow we just got to 40% of the salary on a non-playoff team!.....then we must also look at acquisitions, salary, production and playtime of Lalime,Niedermayer,Connolly,Hecht,Morrisson,etc. I don't think arguing a roster that is on pace to miss the playoffs for 3 times in 4 years as a plus is very prudent.

I mentioned Miller, Myers, Pommer, etc. as regards development of homegrown talent. Not sure how that relates to Lalime, Niedermayer, etc. I didn't say anything about the overall roster. (Although I think Hecht has been very good for most of the year and Morrisson has been good since he returned from his last injury).

[Taro T]

Let's break this down....

 

Who has left over the past 5 years? Help me if I miss some.

 

Dumont, McKee, Grier, Pyatt, Fitzpatrick, Zubrus, Briere, Drury, Campbell, Afinigenov, Kotalik, Kalinin, Paetch, Spacek, Bernier, Paille, MacArthur, Torres, Moore, Lydman, Tallinder, Biron, Kennedy.

 

Let's break it down by group. Push = played same after leaving lindy, Better = played better leaving Lindy, Worse = played worse after leaving lindy.

 

Established Vets from out of system:

 

Grier - Brought in for defense and leadership, did his job, left because organizational non-commitment, went on to play similar role elsewhere, PUSH

Fitzpatrick - Steady 6/7 in Buffalo after being typical journeyman. Left Buffalo and became All-star starter (haha!). In reality, another PUSH

Zubrus - Rental who played Lindy's system ok. Went on to play similar 3rd line roles elsewhere. PUSH

Spacek - Was an established 2/3 d-man coming in. Played fairly well but sometimes disinterested. Left and has played similar if not better at an advanced age P/B

Torres - Was confused by Lindy's system. Totally worthless and relegated to pressbox in weeks. Left and has played decent on a top 5 team. Better

Moore - See Torres. Took a bit but regained some of his mojo. Push/Slightly better

 

Established vets in system, or in system from pre-prime of career:

 

Dumont - Played well and was a top 6. Was let go for 2.5mil, then went on to become a leader on a rejuvinated Nashville, getting 4mil per. Better

McKee - Started young and progressed well. Left and didn't have same success. Worse

Briere - Came over struggling and turned into 1A center. Let go @5 mil, continued his success and cashed in while on a Stanley Cup team. Push/Better

Drury - Was established and seemed to thrive in system. Left for payday and hit the wall. Worse

Campbell - New rules made him an asset. Developed slowly but surely. Left and didn't improve. Push/Worse

Afinogenov - Much promise but stagnant in Buffalo. Left and had some success but never developed to potential. Push/Slightly worse

Kotalik - Had potential to develop into power forward. Mainly Pp and shootout specialist who upped grit in playoffs. Left and stagnated. Push/worse

Kalinin - Tons of potential but never developed nasty side. Left and was role player but never progressed. Push/worse

Lydman - Played steady. Nothing great, nothing horrible. Left and is defensive shutdown and top +/-. Better

Tallinder - Never progressed at great speed. Left and was lost on flailing team until recently. Push/TBD

Biron - OK. Steady lockeroom presence. Left and did fairly well in 1A gig, but didn't thrive. Better backup than ever replaced with. Push

 

Young guys when leaving system:

 

Pyatt - Frustraiting lack of physical play. Light went on in '06 playoffs. Let go and has turned into steady 2 way player. Never a minus and leads Phoenix in goals and consistantly top few in hits. Much Better

Paetch - Extra body pretty much everywhere. Push

Bernier - Showed flashes but was outcast in 2 weeks. Played fairly well in vancouver but faded in Fla. Slightly better

Paille - Became outcast in Buffalo slowly. Turned into nice 3/4 liner for Boston playoff team and has subsided. Push

MacArthur - Gritty and inconsistant. Dealt before arbitration could hit. Thriving as top forward and Toronto turned down 1st and 3rd for him. Much better

Kennedy - Extra body pushed into duty on young team. Seemed to progress but let go. Steady player used as extra body elsewhere. Push/TBD

 

 

I think this is a pretty fair assesment. What seems to be the trend is that Rentals haven't fared well in Buffalo, but they haven't thrived much more anywhere else. More a sign of poor talent assesment from up top.

 

Established vets seem to come in and play par for the course, and move on with no real acceleration or depreciation elsewhere. Can't praise or fault here.

 

Vets that developed in Buffalo....here is the most ambiguous data. On one hand you can argue that for the most part these players did the same or worse once leaving Buffalo, but on the other hand you can argue that they spent so much time in the system that they were damaged goods when leaving. There was a lot of young potential there at one time with the majority never fulfilling both their expectations or contracts. It seems that guys that were always Buffalo property totally fizzle out, but young guys that were brought in before their prime and then left either outplayed their time in Buffalo, or didn't regress, Drury being the exception.

 

Young players....here is the most damning data. Out of the 6 young guys let go, 4 didn't really matter, but 2 were obvious mistakes or were used the wrong way in Buffalo. Their value to current teams is much higher. While it isn't a huge sample, 33% burning you in the butt is not a great record.

 

 

It really looks like if you are a good player with your skills already developed, Lindy and the Sabres don't really help or hurt much.

 

If you are a young player in the system, either you progress elsewhere or are so burnt out by your extended stay in Buffalo that you never reach your potential. Other than Campbell....can you find a homegrown player that fully developed while in Buffalo and maintained a healthy level of play elsewhere? Lots of busts in my opinion.

On the external free agents, I'd agree w/ your evaluation except for Moore - he was here way too short of a time w/ a broken wrist to say for certain what he did or would have done under Lindy.

 

Of the established vets, I'd say Briere is a push and Kotalik is worse.

 

Of the young guys, I'd say Pyatt is basically a push and don't know how you say Bernier is better. Paille and Kennedy aren't playing regularly in the NHL, if MacArthur getting top ice time with a bad TO team puts him in the much better category wouldn't their not playing put them in the worse category?

 

I'd probably differ w/ you on some of the other ones, but those are the major differences in our opinion.

 

In addition to Novotny that someone else brought up, I notice that Mair, Ryan, Peters, and Janik aren't on your list. I'm pretty certain none of them have done better since leaving Buffalo. The same could be said for 3 of the other 4 goalies that have left (Mika, Thibault, & Tellqvist); though Conklin did pick up his play after getting out of Lindy's backup goalie mental wringer.

 

I don't really see Pyatt and MacArthur as being terribly indicting of LR. Both were young guys that got caught in a numbers game here. Mac so impressed Atlanta that they walked away from his arbitration award.

 

You want a name of a "homegrown" player that maintained his level of play elsewhere besides Campbell. Off the top of my head, I'd say Tallinder and Biron. Dumont was here early enough in his career that a case could be made that he was "home grown" as well. That is a kind of loaded question though as the Sabres still have a lot of their recent homegrown talent at home.

 

It's an interesting analysis, but I think the constraints of the questions have been set such to give yourself the answers you were expecting to find.

 

And as for your premise in a later post, are you serious that people were comparing Max to #11? How did Max, Kalinin, Tallinder, & Kotalik all play below expectations? They came in the 3rd, 1st (18th overall), 2nd, and 6th rounds of the draft. They all had reasonable careers and Tallinder is still having a reasonable career. Yeah, Tallinder was showing some serious promise until he broke his arm; but Denis Hamel was showing signs of becoming the power forward the Sabres had been lacking since forever before he broke his leg. (Heck for that matter, TC was showing some signs of becoming a top liner before he was Schaefered.)

[korab rules]

Let's break this down....

 

Who has left over the past 5 years? Help me if I miss some.

 

Dumont, McKee, Grier, Pyatt, Fitzpatrick, Zubrus, Briere, Drury, Campbell, Afinigenov, Kotalik, Kalinin, Paetch, Spacek, Bernier, Paille, MacArthur, Torres, Moore, Lydman, Tallinder, Biron, Kennedy.

 

Let's break it down by group. Push = played same after leaving lindy, Better = played better leaving Lindy, Worse = played worse after leaving lindy.

 

Established Vets from out of system:

 

Grier - Brought in for defense and leadership, did his job, left because organizational non-commitment, went on to play similar role elsewhere, PUSH

Fitzpatrick - Steady 6/7 in Buffalo after being typical journeyman. Left Buffalo and became All-star starter (haha!). In reality, another PUSH

Zubrus - Rental who played Lindy's system ok. Went on to play similar 3rd line roles elsewhere. PUSH

Spacek - Was an established 2/3 d-man coming in. Played fairly well but sometimes disinterested. Left and has played similar if not better at an advanced age P/B

Torres - Was confused by Lindy's system. Totally worthless and relegated to pressbox in weeks. Left and has played decent on a top 5 team. Better

Moore - See Torres. Took a bit but regained some of his mojo. Push/Slightly better

 

Established vets in system, or in system from pre-prime of career:

 

Dumont - Played well and was a top 6. Was let go for 2.5mil, then went on to become a leader on a rejuvinated Nashville, getting 4mil per. Better

McKee - Started young and progressed well. Left and didn't have same success. Worse

Briere - Came over struggling and turned into 1A center. Let go @5 mil, continued his success and cashed in while on a Stanley Cup team. Push/Better

Drury - Was established and seemed to thrive in system. Left for payday and hit the wall. Worse

Campbell - New rules made him an asset. Developed slowly but surely. Left and didn't improve. Push/Worse

Afinogenov - Much promise but stagnant in Buffalo. Left and had some success but never developed to potential. Push/Slightly worse

Kotalik - Had potential to develop into power forward. Mainly Pp and shootout specialist who upped grit in playoffs. Left and stagnated. Push/worse

Kalinin - Tons of potential but never developed nasty side. Left and was role player but never progressed. Push/worse

Lydman - Played steady. Nothing great, nothing horrible. Left and is defensive shutdown and top +/-. Better

Tallinder - Never progressed at great speed. Left and was lost on flailing team until recently. Push/TBD

Biron - OK. Steady lockeroom presence. Left and did fairly well in 1A gig, but didn't thrive. Better backup than ever replaced with. Push

 

Young guys when leaving system:

 

Pyatt - Frustraiting lack of physical play. Light went on in '06 playoffs. Let go and has turned into steady 2 way player. Never a minus and leads Phoenix in goals and consistantly top few in hits. Much Better

Paetch - Extra body pretty much everywhere. Push

Bernier - Showed flashes but was outcast in 2 weeks. Played fairly well in vancouver but faded in Fla. Slightly better

Paille - Became outcast in Buffalo slowly. Turned into nice 3/4 liner for Boston playoff team and has subsided. Push

MacArthur - Gritty and inconsistant. Dealt before arbitration could hit. Thriving as top forward and Toronto turned down 1st and 3rd for him. Much better

Kennedy - Extra body pushed into duty on young team. Seemed to progress but let go. Steady player used as extra body elsewhere. Push/TBD

 

 

I think this is a pretty fair assesment. What seems to be the trend is that Rentals haven't fared well in Buffalo, but they haven't thrived much more anywhere else. More a sign of poor talent assesment from up top.

 

Established vets seem to come in and play par for the course, and move on with no real acceleration or depreciation elsewhere. Can't praise or fault here.

 

Vets that developed in Buffalo....here is the most ambiguous data. On one hand you can argue that for the most part these players did the same or worse once leaving Buffalo, but on the other hand you can argue that they spent so much time in the system that they were damaged goods when leaving. There was a lot of young potential there at one time with the majority never fulfilling both their expectations or contracts. It seems that guys that were always Buffalo property totally fizzle out, but young guys that were brought in before their prime and then left either outplayed their time in Buffalo, or didn't regress, Drury being the exception.

 

Young players....here is the most damning data. Out of the 6 young guys let go, 4 didn't really matter, but 2 were obvious mistakes or were used the wrong way in Buffalo. Their value to current teams is much higher. While it isn't a huge sample, 33% burning you in the butt is not a great record.

 

 

It really looks like if you are a good player with your skills already developed, Lindy and the Sabres don't really help or hurt much.

 

If you are a young player in the system, either you progress elsewhere or are so burnt out by your extended stay in Buffalo that you never reach your potential. Other than Campbell....can you find a homegrown player that fully developed while in Buffalo and maintained a healthy level of play elsewhere? Lots of busts in my opinion.

 

Wow - good work, a lot to wade through, but a lot of stretching to make your point. Fitz a push? In the 5 seasons since he left Buffalo he has played 77 games in the NHL. 59 of them were in Vancouver in the first season post buffalo. He is now out of hockey. Be fore Buffalo, he played 2 games in the NHL.

 

Spacek - playing better? based on what? he's a straight push.

 

Moore and Zubrus (and other rentals) - as others have said, rentals can't fairly be included in this.

 

Dumont - as NFreeman said, I think you can credit his numbers in Nashville with what he learned here - he came here as a 22 year old kid, and other than Briere, was the biggest fish that got away during a very poor period of decision making by this franchise.

 

Briere is a push, as NFreeman has stated.

 

Afinogenov a push? After accepting a tryout contract for the league minimum because NO ONE would offer him a regular contract he had one season that matched his second best season with Buffalo. He is now in the KHL.

 

Kotalik a push? Ruff got him a ridiculous contract that noo one wants and he recently went unclaimed through waivers and re-entry waivers. No one wants him at even half the contract ruff got for him.

 

Kalininan a push? He spent one year in the NHL split between NY and Phoenix and is now in the KHL.

 

Lydman was great here, should have been resigned, I will give you a push/better on this one.

 

Tallinder is TBD, but it didn't start out very well. Where on earth are you coming up with Tallinder as a Norris Candidate? Until being paired with the natural, he hadn't done a damn thing since breaking his arm. The first time.

 

Pyatt - you and your uncle just can't get over his eyes, can you? He had one good season where he played with the sedin twins for most of the year. BFD. Other than that he has been a journeyman 3rd liner.

 

Paetch was nothing before he got here, and left as the chief SGM in chz's photo. That's not a push, its a tug.

 

Bernier falls in with the other rentals, but this is a huge stretch to say he is playing better. He was just waived. Again. The guy just doesn't give a ######. At least ruff got one good game out of him.

 

Paille's a push, Kennedy's TBD, but the fact he can't sniff an NHL player's jock at this point speaks volumes.

 

Mac is Mac - he's not doing anything differently than he did here, but he is doing it with more ice time. He's a frustrating player, soft, undersized and not very responsible defensively, but he manages to score goals regularly. The problem is his stats say he is worth more than his play, which is why he can't stick with a team.

 

So your indictment of Ruff as a coach is that two guys who left here (Mac and Pyatt)are doing as well as they did while here, or maybe a little better than they did while they were here? Your characterization of them as obvious mistakes is a bit of an exaggeration, in fact, they may have been calculated decisions (see below).

 

As you note, the six guys who left is a pretty small sample size. You mentioned going back to the pre-lockout days, and that would seem appropriate. Lets add in Sabres roster stalwarts from that era who did nothing once they left like holzinger, curtis brown, grosek, Satan, Varada, Dixon Ward, Rasmussen, Denis Hamel, Dominic Pittis, Norm Milley, Milan Bartovic, Derek Plante, Darryl Shannon and Mike wilson. That will give us a larger sample size to work with, making the result statistically significant.

 

This conversation grew out of a premise that Ruff did a good job maximizing the play of the players he was given to coach. Because of cash flow problems and financial mandates, he and Regier didn't have any choice but to use the assets within the organization, because assets from outside the organization cost too much money unless Regier could steal them. When Ruff did too good a job of developing those assets they could price themselves right out of Buffalo, as it was cheaper to fill those positions with younger, cheaper players than try to re-sign those players with the limited dollars available. From that perspective, it makes it difficult to fault Ruff for young players who did well who the organization chose not to keep. Dumont, Briere, Drury, Campbell and to a leeser extent even precious Taylor Pyatt) are such internal cap casualties. Players like this leaving the organization would be a result of financial mandates, not poor decision making. And when those players are still young (like your beloved Pyatt and even Macarthur) we should expect that they would improve as they mature and reach their prime. From that perspective, a young player that leaves and fails to improve could be considered a Ruff success.

 

There is a new Sheriff in own, and this sheriff has deep pockets. It will be really interesting to see whether Regier can adjust to the LACK of financial constraints and do what makes the team best. Is regier a tightwad by nature or was it simply forced on him? Time will tell, but I think he may have a hard time adjusting after 14 years of financial responsibility being jammed down his throat.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

It's an interesting analysis, but I think the constraints of the questions have been set such to give yourself the answers you were expecting to find.

 

It's funny. That's what you've said since '06-07 about any of my multi-paragraph analysis.

 

Sooner or later, maybe it's time to admit they're one and the same? ;)

[nfreeman]

Wow - good work, a lot to wade through, but a lot of stretching to make your point. Fitz a push? In the 5 seasons since he left Buffalo he has played 77 games in the NHL. 59 of them were in Vancouver in the first season post buffalo. He is now out of hockey. Be fore Buffalo, he played 2 games in the NHL.

 

Spacek - playing better? based on what? he's a straight push.

 

Moore and Zubrus (and other rentals) - as others have said, rentals can't fairly be included in this.

 

Dumont - as NFreeman said, I think you can credit his numbers in Nashville with what he learned here - he came here as a 22 year old kid, and other than Briere, was the biggest fish that got away during a very poor period of decision making by this franchise.

 

Briere is a push, as NFreeman has stated.

 

Afinogenov a push? After accepting a tryout contract for the league minimum because NO ONE would offer him a regular contract he had one season that matched his second best season with Buffalo. He is now in the KHL.

 

Kotalik a push? Ruff got him a ridiculous contract that noo one wants and he recently went unclaimed through waivers and re-entry waivers. No one wants him at even half the contract ruff got for him.

 

Kalininan a push? He spent one year in the NHL split between NY and Phoenix and is now in the KHL.

 

Lydman was great here, should have been resigned, I will give you a push/better on this one.

 

Tallinder is TBD, but it didn't start out very well. Where on earth are you coming up with Tallinder as a Norris Candidate? Until being paired with the natural, he hadn't done a damn thing since breaking his arm. The first time.

 

Pyatt - you and your uncle just can't get over his eyes, can you? He had one good season where he played with the sedin twins for most of the year. BFD. Other than that he has been a journeyman 3rd liner.

 

Paetch was nothing before he got here, and left as the chief SGM in chz's photo. That's not a push, its a tug.

 

Bernier falls in with the other rentals, but this is a huge stretch to say he is playing better. He was just waived. Again. The guy just doesn't give a ######. At least ruff got one good game out of him.

 

Paille's a push, Kennedy's TBD, but the fact he can't sniff an NHL player's jock at this point speaks volumes.

 

Mac is Mac - he's not doing anything differently than he did here, but he is doing it with more ice time. He's a frustrating player, soft, undersized and not very responsible defensively, but he manages to score goals regularly. The problem is his stats say he is worth more than his play, which is why he can't stick with a team.

 

So your indictment of Ruff as a coach is that two guys who left here (Mac and Pyatt)are doing as well as they did while here, or maybe a little better than they did while they were here? Your characterization of them as obvious mistakes is a bit of an exaggeration, in fact, they may have been calculated decisions (see below).

 

As you note, the six guys who left is a pretty small sample size. You mentioned going back to the pre-lockout days, and that would seem appropriate. Lets add in Sabres roster stalwarts from that era who did nothing once they left like holzinger, curtis brown, grosek, Satan, Varada, Dixon Ward, Rasmussen, Denis Hamel, Dominic Pittis, Norm Milley, Milan Bartovic, Derek Plante, Darryl Shannon and Mike wilson. That will give us a larger sample size to work with, making the result statistically significant.

 

This conversation grew out of a premise that Ruff did a good job maximizing the play of the players he was given to coach. Because of cash flow problems and financial mandates, he and Regier didn't have any choice but to use the assets within the organization, because assets from outside the organization cost too much money unless Regier could steal them. When Ruff did too good a job of developing those assets they could price themselves right out of Buffalo, as it was cheaper to fill those positions with younger, cheaper players than try to re-sign those players with the limited dollars available. From that perspective, it makes it difficult to fault Ruff for young players who did well who the organization chose not to keep. Dumont, Briere, Drury, Campbell and to a leeser extent even precious Taylor Pyatt) are such internal cap casualties. Players like this leaving the organization would be a result of financial mandates, not poor decision making. And when those players are still young (like your beloved Pyatt and even Macarthur) we should expect that they would improve as they mature and reach their prime. From that perspective, a young player that leaves and fails to improve could be considered a Ruff success.

 

There is a new Sheriff in own, and this sheriff has deep pockets. It will be really interesting to see whether Regier can adjust to the LACK of financial constraints and do what makes the team best. Is regier a tightwad by nature or was it simply forced on him? Time will tell, but I think he may have a hard time adjusting after 14 years of financial responsibility being jammed down his throat.

Excellent post, although I think that despite the financial mandates, it is fair to blame the losses of Drury, Briere, Dumont and Soupy on poor decision making. The Sabres chose not to sign 3 of those 4 guys at contracts that were much more affordable than what they ultimately got as UFAs, and they chose to re-sign Max, TC and Kotalik instead of Dumont (possibly because TG and LQ got their dander up over being taken to arbitration).

[korab rules]

Excellent post, although I think that despite the financial mandates, it is fair to blame the losses of Drury, Briere, Dumont and Soupy on poor decision making. The Sabres chose not to sign 3 of those 4 guys at contracts that were much more affordable than what they ultimately got as UFAs, and they chose to re-sign Max, TC and Kotalik instead of Dumont (possibly because TG and LQ got their dander up over being taken to arbitration).

The drury re-signing was bungled, not a poor decision. By then it was too late to sign briere. There were a lot of poor choices made in a two or three year period, made out of a mistaken belief that they could continue to restock their roster from within and maintain their internal budget. They might have been right if they had chosen the right players.

[korab rules]

Why did this conversation die off?

[Weave]

Why did this conversation die off?

 

Because you won, thilly.

[X. Benedict]

The drury re-signing was bungled, not a poor decision. By then it was too late to sign briere. There were a lot of poor choices made in a two or three year period, made out of a mistaken belief that they could continue to restock their roster from within and maintain their internal budget. They might have been right if they had chosen the right players.

 

Incidentally, ya gotta wonder what the Rangers will do with Drury should he be healthy next season. He's still signed for 7M.