stenbaro Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Fucale is a possibility at 16 it sounds like. And away we go!!! @JeremyWGR They might lose their depth and be set back? Oh no! Anything but the depth! Don't take away their DEPTH!!! Last time we had depth we traded Paille to the Bruins for a bag of Pucks...Cant have that now can we...LOL.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Last time we had depth we traded Paille to the Bruins for a bag of Pucks...Cant have that now can we...LOL.... Surplus of 4th liners is not depth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 The reason I think everybody gets worried is because of Darcy's tone. He always sounds so defeated. So it makes you believe everything he's saying. I'd say that's probably a good negotiating tactic but Darcy is, well, Darcy. I think it has more to do with confirmation bias. I'd say the majority of us always thought trading into the top-3 was nigh impossible, so when Darcy says it, we're naturally inclined to take it at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Surplus of 4th liners is not depth He was better than the ones we kept....Even back then..So yes it is depth...Darcy's reasoning for trading him was they had too much depth at forward..I was just using his words not mine..He was in and out of the lineup losing time to Kaleta and Kennedy.....He was a solid penalty killer and good in the corners... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 He was better than the ones we kept....Even back then..So yes it is depth...Darcy's reasoning for trading him was they had too much depth at forward..I was just using his words not mine..He was in and out of the lineup losing time to Kaleta and Kennedy.....He was a solid penalty killer and good in the corners... This has been discussed before, but it's pretty hard for a player to go from being a 1st round pick and supposed top-6 player to being a 4th line PKer in the same organization. Just a bad situation all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 This has been discussed before, but it's pretty hard for a player to go from being a 1st round pick and supposed top-6 player to being a 4th line PKer in the same organization. Just a bad situation all around. Rhetorical Questons: Do you think anybody in Buffalo would be happy if Paille, a first round pick, was potting 10-15 goals a year? Do you think he'd be admired for his PK ability, or the solid 10 minutes a game he was giving on the bottom 6 if he stayed? My migraine with this topic says there is no way in hell fans here would. He'd be one of Darcy's mistakes if he stayed, but now that he's really doing the same thing on a Cup contender, he's one of Darcy's mistakes because he was moved. Some roster attrition has to happen or you never find out what you have in the organization. Furthermore, IIRC.... Buffalo was against the cap in 2008 - Kennedy put up the same numbers at half the price. In fact, Paille signed for less money in Boston than what Buffalo payed him the previous year. I always liked Paille - he just needed to move on. There wasn't a market for him in 2009 - he just happened to fit in Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Rhetorical Questons: Do you think anybody in Buffalo would be happy if Paille, a first round pick, was potting 10-15 goals a year? Do you think he'd be admired for his PK ability, or the solid 10 minutes a game he was giving on the bottom 6 if he stayed? My migraine with this topic says there is no way in hell fans here would. He'd be one of Darcy's mistakes if he stayed, but now that he's really doing the same thing on a Cup contender, he's one of Darcy's mistakes because he was moved. Some roster attrition has to happen or you never find out what you have in the organization. Furthermore, IIRC.... Buffalo was against the cap in 2008 - Kennedy put up the same numbers at half the price. In fact, Paille signed for less money in Boston than what Buffalo payed him the previous year. I always liked Paille - he just needed to move on. There wasn't a market for him in 2009 - he just happened to fit in Boston. Darcy has that down at least..We all have our feelings on this team and what players we should keep or not and who we should have kept and who we did not. Darcy has been keeping the wrong players for along time. I saw a very good 4th line player at the least in Paille, I was kinda pissed when they traded him. And of course now that he is getting solid time on a Stanley Cup finalist again it just brings it back...Regardless if he was a first rd pick or not he had a place on the team and for whatever reason the Sabres couldnt find it for him. The Bruins did, good for them..Oh well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Surplus of 4th liners is not depth Thank god somebody said it. Sick of Paille being paraded as a mistake by Regier. He's made a lot, Paille wasn't one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Rhetorical Questons: Do you think anybody in Buffalo would be happy if Paille, a first round pick, was potting 10-15 goals a year? Do you think he'd be admired for his PK ability, or the solid 10 minutes a game he was giving on the bottom 6 if he stayed? My migraine with this topic says there is no way in hell fans here would. He'd be one of Darcy's mistakes if he stayed, but now that he's really doing the same thing on a Cup contender, he's one of Darcy's mistakes because he was moved. Some roster attrition has to happen or you never find out what you have in the organization. Furthermore, IIRC.... Buffalo was against the cap in 2008 - Kennedy put up the same numbers at half the price. In fact, Paille signed for less money in Boston than what Buffalo payed him the previous year. I always liked Paille - he just needed to move on. There wasn't a market for him in 2009 - he just happened to fit in Boston. I'll tell you, since it's been put out there that mid-to-late 1st round picks are coin flips to make the NHL, my expectations for our draft picks have really changed. Any player after about low teens that makes a roster and contributes is a success. I didn't think that way back when Paille was toiling on the "character" lines, but I appreciate it more now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Thank god somebody said it. Sick of Paille being paraded as a mistake by Regier. He's made a lot, Paille wasn't one of them. He wasnt a huge mistake but he was definitely not a smart transaction being moved out for pretty much nothing..Darcy has made a lot worse than that one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted June 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Rhetorical Questons: Do you think anybody in Buffalo would be happy if Paille, a first round pick, was potting 10-15 goals a year? Do you think he'd be admired for his PK ability, or the solid 10 minutes a game he was giving on the bottom 6 if he stayed? My migraine with this topic says there is no way in hell fans here would. He'd be one of Darcy's mistakes if he stayed, but now that he's really doing the same thing on a Cup contender, he's one of Darcy's mistakes because he was moved. Some roster attrition has to happen or you never find out what you have in the organization. Furthermore, IIRC.... Buffalo was against the cap in 2008 - Kennedy put up the same numbers at half the price. In fact, Paille signed for less money in Boston than what Buffalo payed him the previous year. I always liked Paille - he just needed to move on. There wasn't a market for him in 2009 - he just happened to fit in Boston. At 1.3 million? Yes. Kaleta makes the same money. I'll take Danny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 At 1.3 million? Yes. Kaleta makes the same money. I'll take Danny. I'm not sure on this one. Obviously Paille has had a great playoff but Kaleta adds some things that Paille doesn't. I'm not sure that Kaleta doesn't produce the same results if he is on Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 I'll tell you, since it's been put out there that mid-to-late 1st round picks are coin flips to make the NHL, my expectations for our draft picks have really changed. Any player after about low teens that makes a roster and contributes is a success. I didn't think that way back when Paille was toiling on the "character" lines, but I appreciate it more now. This is precisely where I'm at. New information has caused my thinking to evolve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 He wasnt a huge mistake but he was definitely not a smart transaction being moved out for pretty much nothing..Darcy has made a lot worse than that one We got a third rounder out of him. That's a pretty solid pick. (Turned into Foligno, but I don't think it's fair to ever talk about what the pick turned into, just to talk about what the pick normally entails). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Thank god somebody said it. Sick of Paille being paraded as a mistake by Regier. He's made a lot, Paille wasn't one of them. The mistake was that he chose Kennedy over Paille and a year later walked away from Kennedy. While Paille in and of himself wasn't the mistake and walking away from Kennedy wasn't a mistake but this was just another example of the aimless meandering that is DR's m.o. What a shock to again hear him say that the terrain has changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 The mistake was that he chose Kennedy over Paille and a year later walked away from Kennedy. While Paille in and of himself wasn't the mistake and walking away from Kennedy wasn't a mistake but this was just another example of the aimless meandering that is DR's m.o. What a shock to again hear him say that the terrain has changed. This will be Darcy's legacy. Hitching his wagon to the wrong players. He's made good trades and even drafted ok but not identifying the dogs (stafford, Roy, Connolly) will stay with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 The mistake was that he chose Kennedy over Paille and a year later walked away from Kennedy. While Paille in and of himself wasn't the mistake and walking away from Kennedy wasn't a mistake but this was just another example of the aimless meandering that is DR's m.o. What a shock to again hear him say that the terrain has changed. This I can agree with. I just don't think trading Paille in itself was a mistake, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 Darcy has generally done a good job building depth, but I have yet to see him use that depth to good advantage. Just once I'd like to see him parlay it into a good player. Where was that Stafford, Paille and McArthur trade for PAtrick Sharp? The Stafford, Brennan, Sekera and for Dion Phaneuf? I mean, id rather have Sekera than Phaneuf, but goddmait, take a risk for once. You have to package your depth for good players and open a place for another young guy to grab. But we are never willing to risk our young Staffords. Instead, we wait for them to find their ceilings, and trade them for third rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 So we're talking about Darcy jumping the gun by dealing Paille on the same page we're talking about him not dealing enough of them and taking bigger risks. Do I have that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 So we're talking about Darcy jumping the gun by dealing Paille on the same page we're talking about him not dealing enough of them and taking bigger risks. Do I have that right? Talking about the GM who has missed the playoffs 4 of the last 6 years, whose teams have won more then 1 playoff series twice since 2001 so yeah, I think you got it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 So we're talking about Darcy jumping the gun by dealing Paille on the same page we're talking about him not dealing enough of them and taking bigger risks. Do I have that right? So we're talking about Darcy jumping the gun by dealing Paille on the same page we're talking about him not dealing enough of them and taking bigger risks. Do I have that right? The problem with Paille wasnt jumping the gun. Darcy's solution for "too much depth" was giving a part of that depth away for a small return. Depth should be used to acquire better talent. Has Darcy ever packaged three players to get one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 So we're talking about Darcy jumping the gun by dealing Paille on the same page we're talking about him not dealing enough of them and taking bigger risks. Do I have that right? Not me...I just think he is a bad decision maker when it comes time to keep the right players...He has made some good picks and some crappy ones..That happens..But when it is time to keep a player he has made the wrong choice more often than the right one for the team at that time he made the choice. He has had enuff time to prove it..When he first came here he made some amazing trades, but for the past 6 years he has been horrible, and the record shows it. He can trade whomever he wants now it wont change the fact we are going to be horrible next year.It could take 3 to 4 yrs to get out of the mess he created....The Sabres will be taking a page from Joe Namaths vocabulary....S T R U G G L I N G..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koomkie Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 The problem with Paille wasnt jumping the gun. Darcy's solution for "too much depth" was giving a part of that depth away for a small return. Depth should be used to acquire better talent. Has Darcy ever packaged three players to get one? i seem to remember lindy saying something very odd about paille after he was traded. something along the lines of him needing to be hugged or that some guys you can yell at and other guys you have to talk to differently. the way he said it and the expressions that he made while doing so made it seem like paille was a mess of a player in the locker room. possibly always negative on himself? it was odd whatever it was. i remember being really mad when darcy traded paille, i thought he had good size and that he was a solid grinder. im glad he is doing well and clutch in this years finals. does anyone else remember lindys comments? i would love to hear it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 At 1.3 million? Yes. Kaleta makes the same money. I'll take Danny. Today, yes. Then - Kaleta was 500,000 against Paille's 1.2M. (and the paradigm was slightly different - Tom Gollisano was owner). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 The problem with Paille wasnt jumping the gun. Darcy's solution for "too much depth" was giving a part of that depth away for a small return. Depth should be used to acquire better talent. Has Darcy ever packaged three players to get one? Point taken, but most teams aren't going to give up one to get three. How many 3 for 1 trades have you seen in recent years? Not me...I just think he is a bad decision maker when it comes time to keep the right players...He has made some good picks and some crappy ones..That happens..But when it is time to keep a player he has made the wrong choice more often than the right one for the team at that time he made the choice. He has had enuff time to prove it..When he first came here he made some amazing trades, but for the past 6 years he has been horrible, and the record shows it. He can trade whomever he wants now it wont change the fact we are going to be horrible next year.It could take 3 to 4 yrs to get out of the mess he created....The Sabres will be taking a page from Joe Namaths vocabulary....S T R U G G L I N G..... He's made some bad trades. But I'm not going to hold the Golisano days against him. So far he got the better of the Hodgson trade. He got the better of the Ott trade, He got a first for Gaustad and I think he made out in the P-Ville trade. I think his moves since Pegula came in have been pretty decent. He didn't address the center situation right away, but now we've go three young centers looking towards the future and possibly THREE first rounders this year. Aside from the Leino contract (I need to see this year to give my final judgement on Myers, he did piss me off last year), I think he's done pretty well the last two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.