Robviously Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Schopp and the Lapdog were adamant yesterday about the Sabres needing to keep Stafford, yet they push on getting rid of players such as Ennis, Foligno, Miller and even Hodgson. The dumb and dumber of sports radio. I only heard the first hour or so of yesterday's show, but Schopp has been saying for while that he wants the Sabres to play Stafford as much as possible to get his trade value up for the deadline. I'm not sure how he would have suddenly switched to "keep Stafford" yesterday. As for everyone else, they've been saying that everyone should be available for a while too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 With all the one goal games we've had this year, he wouldn't even have to wake up very much for us to be higher in the standings. I said something similar when the Sabres were in the Pit of Despair, but not just about Stafford. I said the whole team was pretty good, they just needed to get a little better in order to win. Take, for instance, the powerplay. Give them a PP goal every game (as they've been scoring lately) and those one-goal games start turning in the Sabres' favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kishoph Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 I only heard the first hour or so of yesterday's show, but Schopp has been saying for while that he wants the Sabres to play Stafford as much as possible to get his trade value up for the deadline. I'm not sure how he would have suddenly switched to "keep Stafford" yesterday. As for everyone else, they've been saying that everyone should be available for a while too. Honestly, Schoop may have talked about trading him, I only was able to listen for a couple of minutes once I heard Bulldog say he wanted to keep him, I couldn't take any more of it. It seems to me that every talking head on that station flip flops every few days. Unfortunately I can't get 1280 in my house for some reason, so I haven't much choice for sports talk radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Honestly, Schoop may have talked about trading him, I only was able to listen for a couple of minutes once I heard Bulldog say he wanted to keep him, I couldn't take any more of it. It seems to me that every talking head on that station flip flops every few days. Unfortunately I can't get 1280 in my house for some reason, so I haven't much choice for sports talk radio. How can you post this after your previous post? It's crap like this that ruins it for anyone with an ounce of integrity and a desire to use this site for some informed discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kishoph Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 How can you post this after your previous post? It's crap like this that ruins it for anyone with an ounce of integrity and a desire to use this site for some informed discussion. Wow, I'm sorry your Highness, at least I had the "integrity" to admit I may have been wrong, instead of coming up with some excuse or ignoring it. Maybe you should put me on ignore if I'm ruining the "integrity" of your message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Honestly, Schoop may have talked about trading him, I only was able to listen for a couple of minutes once I heard Bulldog say he wanted to keep him, I couldn't take any more of it. It seems to me that every talking head on that station flip flops every few days. Unfortunately I can't get 1280 in my house for some reason, so I haven't much choice for sports talk radio. Schopp has an article up now about how they shouldn't trade him now because his value is so low. I guess you heard right. I'm surprised he flipped on this. Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Wow, I'm sorry your Highness, at least I had the "integrity" to admit I may have been wrong, instead of coming up with some excuse or ignoring it. Maybe you should put me on ignore if I'm ruining the "integrity" of your message board. It's not about being wrong, it's about making something up just to be part of the conversation. Two very different things. This board was always different because it allowed intelligent discourse from people with a wide range of opinions but always held true to the truth and civility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 It pains me to listen to those two. You would think people in their positions would be required to have some sort of advanced knowledge of sports, alas they are barely at the level of a casual fan. I don't listen to them any more except for pre-game sometimes, it's bad enough they do that. I once had respect for Koziol and Hamilton, even those two have started to head down that road. WGR is taking a slight turn for the worse lately. It really is a shame what television and radio have become in the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 This board was always different because it allowed intelligent discourse from people with a wide range of opinions but always held true to the truth and civility. I hate to get drawn into this meta-thread, but I think every forum says this about itself and all are lying about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 With the best forward on the team being Austrian, and the best defender being German, I'm really surprised Hitler is mentioned more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaLaLaFontaine Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 i would not trade Stafford. Now we won't get anything for him. we should sell him when he is on a run again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 i would not trade Stafford. Now we won't get anything for him. we should sell him when he is on a run again. He's on the exercise bike right now. Does that count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Bruised ego? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 i would not trade Stafford. Now we won't get anything for him. we should sell him when he is on a run again. While we will probably get less, we'll still get more than nothing for him. Surely it would be a better negotiating position to have him currently on pace for another 20 goal 50 point season than trying to say "He's just slumping! He'll get it back, I promise!" But that doesn't make him worthless now. Some team will be willing to pay 50 cents on the dollar for a top-6 forward on a down year..so while 50 cents isn't full value, it's still more than nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kishoph Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 It's not about being wrong, it's about making something up just to be part of the conversation. Two very different things. This board was always different because it allowed intelligent discourse from people with a wide range of opinions but always held true to the truth and civility. If you'll look at the post above yours, you'll see I didn't make it up, when Robviously first posted that Schopp wanted to trade him, I said he may of said that, but I didn't listen long enough, but now it seems that he has it in an article (which I didn't or won't bother reading) he has up. So maybe before you accuse people of "making something up," check all the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 (edited) While we will probably get less, we'll still get more than nothing for him. Surely it would be a better negotiating position to have him currently on pace for another 20 goal 50 point season than trying to say "He's just slumping! He'll get it back, I promise!" But that doesn't make him worthless now. Some team will be willing to pay 50 cents on the dollar for a top-6 forward on a down year..so while 50 cents isn't full value, it's still more than nothing. If he were on that pace chances are he wouldn't be on the trading block. If he were on that pace chances are we wouldn't be on the outside looking in. Edited March 26, 2013 by JJFIVEOH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 If he were on that pace chances are he wouldn't be on the trading block. If he were on that pace chances are we wouldn't be on the outside looking in. And therein lies one of the problems with Regier, no? He appears to never be willing to trade a guy while his value is at a maximum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 I'm going to be honest.....if I'm a GM I think I can turn this kid around a bit. He has the tools, I've seen him drive to the net with semi regularity when he feels like it, and I've seen him stick up for teammates in crucial situations...although irregular, more than most on the Sabres. You put him on a team with plenty of leaders and he gets caught up in the feeling of being on a "real" team again......he is not worthless by far. His contract is nasty at this point, but if you want a guy capable of being a 2/3 winger with just enough skill and just enough presence.....he is worth a gamble. He is a product of Lindy in this toxic mold of a team culture, and 1 Steve Ott wasn't enough to get him regular. Put him on a team with 4 or 5 real leaders and consistant work ethic, and he is a 20 goal guy who won't embarass himself defensively. That's what I'm thinking if I'm a GM. I think that's exactly the type of thought process some GM will have. The only question is what they're willing to give to take that flyer, and whether Regier will accept it or insist on a price worthy of a 30 goal scorer, which he's not going to sniff. While we will probably get less, we'll still get more than nothing for him. Surely it would be a better negotiating position to have him currently on pace for another 20 goal 50 point season than trying to say "He's just slumping! He'll get it back, I promise!" But that doesn't make him worthless now. Some team will be willing to pay 50 cents on the dollar for a top-6 forward on a down year..so while 50 cents isn't full value, it's still more than nothing. It's not a question of whether another GM will give him a shot, or what that GM will give the Sabres for him. It's whether any other team will be willing to take on another 2 years after this one at $4MM per year for a guy who has fallen off the table. I don't think anyone will unless the Sabres sweeten the pot. I don't think the Sabres will sweeten the pot. Therefore, I think the most likely outcomes are either compliance buyout this summer or Stafford returns as whipping boy #1 next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 And therein lies one of the problems with Regier, no? He appears to never be willing to trade a guy while his value is at a maximum. Let's see, he had a career year 2 years ago and amidst speculation that he had serious personal issues last year he still went on a tear to almost get us into the playoffs. Now why would anybody at that point trade him? You know what they say about hindsight........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Let's see, he had a career year 2 years ago and amidst speculation that he had serious personal issues last year he still went on a tear to almost get us into the playoffs. Now why would anybody at that point trade him? You know what they say about hindsight........... Has he ever traded anyone at peak value? This isn't about only Stafford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted March 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 Has he ever traded anyone at peak value? This isn't about only Stafford. It has happened a couple of times, but not often. Biron and Warrener come to mind. Not nearly often enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 It has happened a couple of times, but not often. Biron and Warrener come to mind. Not nearly often enough. Warrener for sure. But hadn't Biron lost his starting job to Miller? Not sure that's peak value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 So Darcy gets chastised for not making moves to improve the team. Then Darcy gets chastised for not trading for draft picks to plan for the future. Now Darcy gets chastised for not trading players who are/were putting out and playing up to their potential? Wow, you've got all basis covered don't you? Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Do you work for FOX News? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 I feel for Drew, and I've had high hopes for him ever since his 30 goal season (my first season of watching hockey with an obsession), but it's definitely time for a change for him. I'd think about hanging on to him and seeing who we hire if/when RR gets canned. Our next guy might be able to motivate drew and put him into the position to succeed (ie not being the biggest man on his line and actually playing with a center who dishes the puck and creates space). Unfortunately we're not really in the position to make him useful any time in the future because we already have too many complimentary pieces. That's why I think he'll ultimately be traded. Drew Stafford = Brad Boyes So Darcy gets chastised for not making moves to improve the team. Then Darcy gets chastised for not trading for draft picks to plan for the future. Now Darcy gets chastised for not trading players who are/were putting out and playing up to their potential? Wow, you've got all basis covered don't you? Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Do you work for FOX News? What are you, new here? The team sucks and Darcy is to blame. So he'll get blamed. A lot. For everything. And mentioning Hitler is less disruptive than mentioning politics. Remember the election thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 So Darcy gets chastised for not making moves to improve the team. Then Darcy gets chastised for not trading for draft picks to plan for the future. Now Darcy gets chastised for not trading players who are/were putting out and playing up to their potential? Wow, you've got all basis covered don't you? Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Do you work for FOX News? Straw men are fun :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts