carpandean Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 it sounds as though Buffalo has just as good of a shot as anyone else. So, 1-in-30? :nana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 So, 1-in-30? :nana: Well we know Dallas is out...so 1-29 and he said he wants to win a cup, so discount NYI, TO, PHX, EDM,and Columbus so now we're at 1-24 :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 So, 1-in-30? :nana: I would say 1 out of 3 or 4..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROC Sabres Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 Well we know Dallas is out...so 1-29 and he said he wants to win a cup, so discount NYI, TO, PHX, EDM,and Columbus so now we're at 1-24 :doh: That's the short list I'm guessing. I would throw in OTT,LA,STL,FLA also. 1-20 Numbers are getting better by the minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I would say 1 out of 3 or 4..... That's the short list I'm guessing. I would throw in OTT,LA,STL,FLA also. 1-20 Numbers are getting better by the minute. yeah, no kidding...we went from 1-30 -> 1-20 -> 1-3 or 1-4... :blink: Come on Friday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 So, 1-in-30? :nana: This would be correct. Not to discredit OP's information but I just don't think anybody other than Brad Richards knows who he is going to sign with. Pegula said he was going to open his wallet, and his ownership is building a tremendous reputation around the league. The team, though not necessarily a "cup contender", have played well and are certainly on the right path. Not to mention, having Ryan Miller in net probably bodes well. And BR is the only noteworthy UFA forward available so... anybody can conclude that "Yes, Buffalo will be in on Brad Richards." Right now no team has a better chance than another... I suppose contenders have a higher likelihood of signing him, but money talks, so we'll find out July 1st. Basically what I'm saying is just because somebody associated with the NHL gave his opinion doesn't make it any more likely to happen. He doesn't have any "inside knowledge" on what is going on in Brad Richards head just because he works for the league-- he's basing it off the same common sense knowledge that we as Sabres fans have been excited about. So unless there's been some tampering going on that the league decided to let slide... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 yeah, no kidding...we went from 1-30 -> 1-20 -> 1-3 or 1-4... :blink: Come on Friday! But that list always includes Pitt & Det. Probably NYR and Phil now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 10 pages of hopeful comments for a player not coming to Buffalo. Carry on... And for a guy who is a career -72. Gotta be better options out there I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 But that list always includes Pitt & Det. Probably NYR and Phil now. You would have to think Chicago might be in the bidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I've lived in the DFW area for quite a while now. I can remember hearing in the summer of 1998 that Bret Hull had been signed by the Dallas Stars. At the time, they were okay, slightly above average. The addition of Hull made a big difference to the team. Not just his ability on the ice, but the fact that the management went out and got him, demonstrating the commitment to win. Okay, we all know what happened (sorry to dredge up the memories). My point is that if the Sabres can land Richards, it will be at least as big, possibly bigger, for the Sabres. Bringing in a quality D-man, a rangy sniper in Ales, and capping it off with Richards, could put this team over the top. I hope so. It would be a delicious irony if the Sabres got the player that put them over the top from the Stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I've lived in the DFW area for quite a while now. I can remember hearing in the summer of 1998 that Bret Hull had been signed by the Dallas Stars. At the time, they were okay, slightly above average. The addition of Hull made a big difference to the team. Not just his ability on the ice, but the fact that the management went out and got him, demonstrating the commitment to win. Okay, we all know what happened (sorry to dredge up the memories). My point is that if the Sabres can land Richards, it will be at least as big, possibly bigger, for the Sabres. Bringing in a quality D-man, a rangy sniper in Ales, and capping it off with Richards, could put this team over the top. Let's not get goofy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 You can be as disgusted as you'd like to be, but you are mixing and matching '05, '06, & '07 in your post & the prior. You also blame DR for not signing Drury to a $5.3MM/yr deal, but DR is the one that negotiated that deal. It wasn't HIS desk that the deal sat on. What is there to mix and match? It was a progression of poor decision making, disgust, and cowardess. Briere and Dumont win arbitration, Dumont walks, Briere gets 1 year and would have taken 5 for 25....which Darcy went on to offer him anyway as a LOWBALL. McKee wanted 4 for 10...turned down, and I can't remember if they came back at him later or not. The BS about long term contracts is moot because he handed out tons of them at inflated prices to marginal players. They said that Briere wasn't going to be in their plans and didn't make a move at the '07 deadline when HE KNEW they had their best chance at a Cup EVER and would likely not be there again for years to come. Instead of going at getting a reasonable difference maker in Roberts, or give up Paille and a few picks for Guerin...he promises a guy who missed the last 10 months with unresolved head injuries would be back and a guy who just broke his wrist and was diagnosed out into the playoffs would be back. That was a pure coward move to throw his hands up in the air to the fans and say, "Hey, would love to make a move but we can't." Again.....for $1 million more on average, you could have had Briere, Drury, Dumont, Campbell and McKee locked up long term over Connolly, Kotalik, Kalinin, Afinogenov, Tallinder and Hecht. You also probably would have Vanek under contract for $2 million less per season give or take. Penny Wise.....Pound Foolish...... Either Regier was inept at his job....or a TOTAL PUPPET!!! I don't have much respect for him either way. And again....I LOVE the Regehr trade and am happy to see the upbeat atmosphere these last few weeks. I can forgive in the name of progress, but I don't forget both history and obvious less than forthright behavior in dealing with the fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 Let's not get goofy... I gotta say I laughed at Rangy Sniper....its sounds a little too cowboy for big Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 [1] My preferred option would be to front-load those clauses, too. Give him a NMC for the first four years, then a limited NTC for two, then nothing after that. Not sure if he'd accept it, but that would be how I'd prefer it. He'll get a lot of money up front and a guarantee that he'll be staying for a long while, but in the latter years, the team has some flexibility. [2] Also, I don't necessarily expect him to take the biggest offer, especially if there are similar offers from competitive teams. For example, I wouldn't expect him to take a 8yr, $60M deal from Florida over an 8yr, $50M from a contender. I also wouldn't necessarily expect a couple million to be a deciding point. If he likes one team more, he'd probably take $51M vs. $54M. In other words, I believe that they'll be enough really big deals, that it won't come down to money only. 1. This is just about the way it has to be done. 2. I think a lot of the offers will be similar. He's going to go where he thinks he can win in a hockey-lovin' town with a solid, committed ownership. Which is why... 10 pages of hopeful comments for a player not coming to Buffalo. Carry on... Don't be so sure. Take it for what it's worth, but I just spoke with my friend and I asked him if he thought (or heard) if Buffalo had a chance or a legit chance.....his response was "a VERY legit chance". Personally, I am really starting to think Richards might be coming here. If Buffalo can somehow make this happen while keeping Connolly as a 3rd line Center, Sabres will be a contender THIS year.... I think so too. Hey, if they don't land him, they don't land him. But everything his agent said this morning, and everything Richards has said about the type of place he wants to be, points to Buffalo being a serious part of the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I think it plays out like this.... Rangers - very public about wanting him but does NY fall in contender status? Didn't someone say something about not wanting to play in a large market (or was that made up) Philly - lost Richards and Carter and have to be considered a favorite to land him (unless they are going heavy on goalie and defense) Buffalo - from everything that has been said, it seems like a great fit......who knows. Would Buffalo be considered a contender if Richards signs? I think with a shutdown pair of D (who they have), Miller in net, very talented wingers and a big boost in Center.....they could make a run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 What is there to mix and match? It was a progression of poor decision making, disgust, and cowardess. Briere and Dumont win arbitration, Dumont walks, Briere gets 1 year and would have taken 5 for 25....which Darcy went on to offer him anyway as a LOWBALL. McKee wanted 4 for 10...turned down, and I can't remember if they came back at him later or not. The BS about long term contracts is moot because he handed out tons of them at inflated prices to marginal players. They said that Briere wasn't going to be in their plans and didn't make a move at the '07 deadline when HE KNEW they had their best chance at a Cup EVER and would likely not be there again for years to come. Instead of going at getting a reasonable difference maker in Roberts, or give up Paille and a few picks for Guerin...he promises a guy who missed the last 10 months with unresolved head injuries would be back and a guy who just broke his wrist and was diagnosed out into the playoffs would be back. That was a pure coward move to throw his hands up in the air to the fans and say, "Hey, would love to make a move but we can't." Again.....for $1 million more on average, you could have had Briere, Drury, Dumont, Campbell and McKee locked up long term over Connolly, Kotalik, Kalinin, Afinogenov, Tallinder and Hecht. You also probably would have Vanek under contract for $2 million less per season give or take. Penny Wise.....Pound Foolish...... Either Regier was inept at his job....or a TOTAL PUPPET!!! I don't have much respect for him either way. And again....I LOVE the Regehr trade and am happy to see the upbeat atmosphere these last few weeks. I can forgive in the name of progress, but I don't forget both history and obvious less than forthright behavior in dealing with the fans. McKee wanted ~$10/4 in '05 - NOT in '06. At the time that Briere asked for $25/5 they were still in talks leading up to his arbitration hearing, and NOBODY except possibly Danny and his agent expected him to get a $5MM award. The "BS about long term contracts" is NOT moot. Because it was the CAUSE of them finding themselves in the position where they'd have to walk away from Dumont's arbitration award. Had the Sabres even so much as gave Danny and Jay 3 year deals back in '05, EVERYTHING else goes differently in the summer of '06. While '07 was one of their best chances ever at a SC run, they thought they were going to get Drury back the following year. The ONLY players they expected to lose off the '07 squad were Briere and Zubrus. Roberts would have been a nice pickup but I didn't want Guerin at the time. I also would like to have seen them send Briere out to get Morrison and some other parts, but understand why they didn't pull the trigger on that. And he DID make a move (and a good 1 at that if he doesn't get injured during the playoffs) by bringing in Zubrus. With expecting Drury back the next year, I don't see where they expected (nor should have expected) '07 to be their only kick at the can. Look, like I stated in an earlier post, be as disgusted as you want. I'm not going to go re-living how ticked I was that they didn't keep Peca or convert him into anything of comparable value as that WAS their best ever chance at winning the SC heading INTO the season / playoffs. I am going to enjoy watching how this off-season unfolds, and depending upon how that goes I am either going to be anticipating watching a fun team that isn't quite a contender or watching a team that truly is a contender. As to the bolded, you clearly don't forget history, you simply make it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I'll say it again. We know you will. Do you like Brad Richards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 We know you will. Do you like Brad Richards? I don't know. If I could trust Regier to keep remolding with some grit and identify the correct players....then for the price it will take...no. If Darcy is going to go after some soft skill....and we have a legit shot at Richards...then go ahead and sign him. Richards has some character. I thought he was older because he played ahead of his years in Tampa. At least it's fun not to scoff at every rumor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 McKee wanted ~$10/4 in '05 - NOT in '06. At the time that Briere asked for $25/5 they were still in talks leading up to his arbitration hearing, and NOBODY except possibly Danny and his agent expected him to get a $5MM award. The "BS about long term contracts" is NOT moot. Because it was the CAUSE of them finding themselves in the position where they'd have to walk away from Dumont's arbitration award. Had the Sabres even so much as gave Danny and Jay 3 year deals back in '05, EVERYTHING else goes differently in the summer of '06. While '07 was one of their best chances ever at a SC run, they thought they were going to get Drury back the following year. The ONLY players they expected to lose off the '07 squad were Briere and Zubrus. Roberts would have been a nice pickup but I didn't want Guerin at the time. I also would like to have seen them send Briere out to get Morrison and some other parts, but understand why they didn't pull the trigger on that. And he DID make a move (and a good 1 at that if he doesn't get injured during the playoffs) by bringing in Zubrus. With expecting Drury back the next year, I don't see where they expected (nor should have expected) '07 to be their only kick at the can. Look, like I stated in an earlier post, be as disgusted as you want. I'm not going to go re-living how ticked I was that they didn't keep Peca or convert him into anything of comparable value as that WAS their best ever chance at winning the SC heading INTO the season / playoffs. I am going to enjoy watching how this off-season unfolds, and depending upon how that goes I am either going to be anticipating watching a fun team that isn't quite a contender or watching a team that truly is a contender. As to the bolded, you clearly don't forget history, you simply make it up. I suggested they trade away the captain they weren't going to keep and was torched. I don't remember you coming to my defense at the time....or anyone. I am not making up history....I am showing you how the snowball of being cheap cost them exponentially. Each deal that could have been done the year before would have been great long term. Whatever. You are way too defensive about Darcy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabres1970 Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 Here's my take on the Richards situation: I may be biased but I'm sure most of you will agree that the Sabres are closer to a Stanley Cup than the Rangers are. Brad Richards, although he is a very good player, may be slightly overrated due to the weak UFA market this summer. I believe the Sabres, with the help of Pegula's lure, can out bid the Rangers because our FO may be willing to spend more money because of how close we are to the cup. Especially when they're guys like Sharp and Semin in next year's UFA market. For the Rangers, they may be better off saving some money and getting their Brad Richards next year when they're closer to a cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I suggested they trade away the captain they weren't going to keep and was torched. I don't remember you coming to my defense at the time....or anyone. I am not making up history....I am showing you how the snowball of being cheap cost them exponentially. Each deal that could have been done the year before would have been great long term. Whatever. You are way too defensive about Darcy. I was proposing bringing in Morrison+ for Briere far earlier in the year. Just out of curiosity so I can follow you, are you upset that they didn't trade Briere away and get something for him or are you upset that they didn't 'go for it.' I'm not certain how the 2 concepts full mesh w/ each other. Nobody here is disputing that making a deal the prior year (when possible, Drury couldn't have been done in '05) would have been better in most cases, that is an interesting strawman. (Heck, I believe they SHOULD have given Briere & McKee 3 year deals in '05.) But the Sabres were not about to ink any long term deals back in '05. And I am not "defensive" about Darcy, though you could probably state that I am "defensive" about getting the chronology correct. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I was proposing bringing in Morrison+ for Briere far earlier in the year. Just out of curiosity so I can follow you, are you upset that they didn't trade Briere away and get something for him or are you upset that they didn't 'go for it.' I'm not certain how the 2 concepts full mesh w/ each other. Nobody here is disputing that making a deal the prior year (when possible, Drury couldn't have been done in '05) would have been better in most cases, that is an interesting strawman. (Heck, I believe they SHOULD have given Briere & McKee 3 year deals in '05.) But the Sabres were not about to ink any long term deals back in '05. And I am not "defensive" about Darcy, though you could probably state that I am "defensive" about getting the chronology correct. ;) I think the concept is that the Sabres needed to be bold and decisive in those situations, but weren't and paid dearly for it. Summer 2006 would have been a great time to decide which captain they could afford to keep, sign him long term, and then trade the other one and improve the team that way. They could have landed just about anything they wanted for either Briere or Drury after the 2006 run, but they were more concerned with potential fan backlash. At the same time, they weren't motivated enough to re-sign either guy (or both guys) long term. So they did nothing and ended up imploding their franchise for a few years. Summer 2006 also would have been a great time to trade Afinogenov. He was coming off a career year, his trade value would never be higher, his game still didn't seem to work that well in the playoffs, and we had cap issues already. But, again, the Sabres were terrified of ever doing anything decisive and they let that opportunity pass them by as well. In general, if you want to win a championship (in any sport), you have to be willing to make some bold moves. Golisano definitely wasn't. I have every reason to think Terry Pegula is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 I think the concept is that the Sabres needed to be bold and decisive in those situations, but weren't and paid dearly for it. Summer 2006 would have been a great time to decide which captain they could afford to keep, sign him long term, and then trade the other one and improve the team that way. They could have landed just about anything they wanted for either Briere or Drury after the 2006 run, but they were more concerned with potential fan backlash. At the same time, they weren't motivated enough to re-sign either guy (or both guys) long term. So they did nothing and ended up imploding their franchise for a few years. Sigh. It has been hashed and re-hashed over and over that Chris and Darcy/Larry agreed on a contract in Oct, but TG sat on it and spoiled the deal. So, when you say "they" be careful who you are referring to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 Sigh. It has been hashed and re-hashed over and over that Chris and Darcy/Larry agreed on a contract in Oct, but TG sat on it and spoiled the deal. So, when you say "they" be careful who you are referring to. Pretty sure I was. In general, if you want to win a championship (in any sport), you have to be willing to make some bold moves. Golisano definitely wasn't. I have every reason to think Terry Pegula is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 I think the concept is that the Sabres needed to be bold and decisive in those situations, but weren't and paid dearly for it. Summer 2006 would have been a great time to decide which captain they could afford to keep, sign him long term, and then trade the other one and improve the team that way. They could have landed just about anything they wanted for either Briere or Drury after the 2006 run, but they were more concerned with potential fan backlash. At the same time, they weren't motivated enough to re-sign either guy (or both guys) long term. So they did nothing and ended up imploding their franchise for a few years. Summer 2006 also would have been a great time to trade Afinogenov. He was coming off a career year, his trade value would never be higher, his game still didn't seem to work that well in the playoffs, and we had cap issues already. But, again, the Sabres were terrified of ever doing anything decisive and they let that opportunity pass them by as well. In general, if you want to win a championship (in any sport), you have to be willing to make some bold moves. Golisano definitely wasn't. I have every reason to think Terry Pegula is. Sorry, I was trying to get out the door quickly and thought the context of the conversation was clear. Apparently it wasn't, so let me clarify the particular question in question. I was asking for clarification as to him being displeased about not trading Briere away at the trade deadline for something and with being displeased that DR 'didn't go for it.' And though I did use the pronoun 'they' in my post (again, trying to post in haste, please forgive the faux pas), it was pretty clear that DD and I were discussing DR and that his complaint was w/ DR and not TG (at least in this particular discussion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.