Hoss Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Define weak. He had 5 goals and 31 assists and -1 in 62 games. He missed alot of games and the playoffs because he was hurt. Whereas Pysyk had 4 goals and 14 assists and +8 in 57 games. I had heard McNabbs game had fallen off a bit but did Pysyk get the call because of that or because McNabb was hurt? There is absolutly no reason to keep him on the farm again. I think the "weak" comment comes from the fact that McNabb had a really rough start to the season. He ended up being a healthy scratch for like three straight games but then once that happened he woke up and had the best stretch he's had. What this tells me is that he already might be getting discourage but that wakeup call really changed things and he understands he'll have to fight to get back to the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro60 Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Smart move. He can be a mentor to the younger guys. A peer/coach approach will help guys like Myers. Defense is about confidence and thinking and Ruff's staff came up short in that area. I don't see him eating a lot of minutes and it is not a sexy move but it is the best DR has done so far in the past few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 :angel: Screw you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanny Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 McNabb started off last year terribly. With Foligno, Hodgson and Brennan he really seemed to take a back seat. When the NHL season started he played even worse but eventually played at a decent level. Kevin Oklubja (I know I hammered that) said they essentially put McNabb in the all-star game because Pysyk was in buffalo. thought part of the spin was also that he was named the prior season but couldn't play due to callup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 So I guess we won't be seeing a Myers trade any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 thought part of the spin was also that he was named the prior season but couldn't play due to callup. Sounds right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Screw you! Why hate on me? You obviously need to sacrifice more free time and/or neglect responsibilities to more thoroughly read these threads :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Wow. 2013 Tallinder. I am so. Excited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickshaw Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 I don't have a problem with Hank coming back. If it gets Myers feeling comfy again and playing like he can, then it's a win win for the team. They get a good veteran pro who is familiar with the club and it may jump start TM to where he should be. It's not the end of the world having experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 For starters, he was praising Edmonton, not Minnesota. Second, it is apparent that Pegula does in fact have a large amount of say in the extent to which the team goes through a rebuild process, which Darcy seemed to have no problem admitting and is apparently not bothered by. If Pegula's involvement was in any way unorthodox would he be mentioning it on the radio, or is this simply another case of taking standard league-wide procedure and trying to make it seem like internal sabotage? It almost seems like a no-brainer that the owners of these teams would have a lot of say in what their GMs are doing due to potential impact on entertainment potential and revenue generation. Would a team like Edmonton or Pittsburgh have begun an extensive overhaul and youth movement without at least discussing it within the organization? So you're right about Pegula having say about the extent to which he wants Darcy to conduct a rebuild. But why wouldn't that be the case everywhere else? Erg. It was Minny. Doesn't matter. Well, I think if every owner in the league is making decisions on that level (I doubt it; there have to be many absentee owners), then I'd have to say if we left it to the pros, it would give us a distinct advantage. Now, Mike Ilitch, who's won Cups and been around forever, and Mario, who's won Cups as an owner and player, I'd think of differently. But TPegs just fell off the fracking truck and makes so little sense when he speaks, they've basically Second-Term-Reaganed the guy. How does he, or any lightweight hockey fan who just bought a team, possibly attack a problem like "how much do we rebuild to win a Cup?" I understand the theory. Ownership is involved because of the business repercussions of rebuilding. Son, it was supposed to be different with this guy, remember? Wow. 2013 Tallinder. I am so. Excited. Is it still Ta-LEAN-der? Or will he return as Ta-LOOND-hear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Erg. It was Minny. Doesn't matter. Well, I think if every owner in the league is making decisions on that level (I doubt it; there have to be many absentee owners), then I'd have to say if we left it to the pros, it would give us a distinct advantage. Now, Mike Ilitch, who's won Cups and been around forever, and Mario, who's won Cups as an owner and player, I'd think of differently. But TPegs just fell off the fracking truck and makes so little sense when he speaks, they've basically Second-Term-Reaganed the guy. How does he, or any lightweight hockey fan who just bought a team, possibly attack a problem like "how much do we rebuild to win a Cup?" I understand the theory. Ownership is involved because of the business repercussions of rebuilding. Son, it was supposed to be different with this guy, remember? Remember Golisano? It is different. Open your eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 I don't have a problem with Hank coming back. If it gets Myers feeling comfy again and playing like he can, then it's a win win for the team. They get a good veteran pro who is familiar with the club and it may jump start TM to where he should be. It's not the end of the world having experience. Craig Rivet is a veteran who is familiar with the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 I think Myers, Grigs, and other assorted call-ups have spooked Regier. Other than being returned to the Sabres to get Myers going again, I think Tallinder is here as part of the "suffering" plan. They're going to keep as many kids down as long as they can next season to improve their game, and will only come up when necessary. Those expecting a follow up move are mistaken IMHO. The only possible follow up is to include McNabb in a trade. I agree with Trueblue that McNabb wasn't the stud he was projected to be. I can see Regier moving him using the same pitch he used to move Kassian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 maybe Stlouis rumours are true :P oshie + Pietrangelo for Myers , stafford and Ruhwedel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MILFHUNTER#518 Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 I think Myers, Grigs, and other assorted call-ups have spooked Regier. Other than being returned to the Sabres to get Myers going again, I think Tallinder is here as part of the "suffering" plan. They're going to keep as many kids down as long as they can next season to improve their game, and will only come up when necessary. Those expecting a follow up move are mistaken IMHO. The only possible follow up is to include McNabb in a trade. I agree with Trueblue that McNabb wasn't the stud he was projected to be. I can see Regier moving him using the same pitch he used to move Kassian. Wow, so Regier is intentionally trying to make the sabres suck to punish the fans? I disagree, Tallinder is going to be a locker room guy, a mentor to Myers and possibly captain on D. He will be a second string Defenseman, a stabilizing force/mentor to our franchise defenseman (Myers), a great veteran locker room guy and anchor to all the young inexperienced rookie defenseman. Smart move IMHO. If we don't have these types of players, we are squandering our youth movement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Wow, so Regier is intentionally trying to make the sabres suck to punish the fans? I disagree, Tallinder is going to be a locker room guy, a mentor to Myers and possibly captain on D. He will be a second string Defenseman, a stabilizing force/mentor to our franchise defenseman (Myers), a great veteran locker room guy and anchor to all the young inexperienced rookie defenseman. Smart move IMHO. If we don't have these types of players, we are squandering our youth movement No, he's not saying he's going to make the Sabres suck to punish the fans. He's saying he's making this move to let the young guys develop as much as possible before a call up. Which might be what the suffering comment was about. He might be bringing in a bunch of guys who are older/not as capable than the young guys to let them develop. We'll see a lot of guys going in and out of the next two to three years as we let our young prospects develop. That might be the suffering. Watching a bunch of guys who have never really played much together try to figure it out while we wait until our future develops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotentPowerPlay22 Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Too many defense. Of course we had too many D last year too and I was certain we were going to make a move, and that never happened. What was the Sabres top 7 or 8 on defense not too long ago and what is it now? Where's Regehr? Where's Leoplold? Where's Brennan? Where's Pardy? Where's Sekera? A move never happened? Are you kidding? Maybe it's not the moves you want, but there have been moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Well who do we want from Colorado ? certainly a move coming with them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 McNabb has only played 25 games. Is that really enough to come to concrete conclusion as to how good he really is? Who said Pysyk went ahead of him on the charts just because he got called up first? Maybe they wanted to get him some playing time. Remember Golisano? It is different. Open your eyes. Thank you. If it were that easy, everybody would do it. It's only been two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 A move never happened? Are you kidding? Maybe it's not the moves you want, but there have been moves. This thought crossed my mind earlier today. Our team had ###### defense at the beginning of the season, and save for the player contracts we arguably and probably shouldn't move (Myers, Ehrhoff), we have changed, for better or worse, EVERYTHING (coach, defensive assistant coach, ridded Regehr, Leopold, Brennan, Pardy, Sekera, others, played Weber more, picked up and drafted and promoted replacements etc). Criticize the moves, but Regier has definitely changed the back end of this team, and Rolston will change how they play. While I'm not necessarily immediately expectant of success, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing a different look from last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullwinkle III Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 This thought crossed my mind earlier today. Our team had ###### defense at the beginning of the season, and save for the player contracts we arguably and probably shouldn't move (Myers, Ehrhoff), we have changed, for better or worse, EVERYTHING (coach, defensive assistant coach, ridded Regehr, Leopold, Brennan, Pardy, Sekera, others, played Weber more, picked up and drafted and promoted replacements etc). Criticize the moves, but Regier has definitely changed the back end of this team, and Rolston will change how they play. While I'm not necessarily immediately expectant of success, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing a different look from last season. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 :angel: It would ruin me. If I work hard and don't see a reward for my work, in fact I am indirectly told I'm not good enough (in this case by signing 9 more NHL defenseman) I will stop trying as hard - why bother being an AHL all star for te third year in a row if they trade for aging vets to mean I don't even have a shot at trying out for the spot? What did we get out of this trade? NJ got a roster space, we got an aging vet who was a healthy scratch. We did them a favour, yet got very little in return? Vets are always favorited over young guys because of contracts being 1 way and the money. So it isn't a case of beating the player out. A rookie can out play a vet and be sent down for financial reasons This is the issue with DR for me. I want a team that has a clearly defined roles. I want a few guys as scratches or in the A to fill in for injuries. But having 10 D for 6 places doesn't necessarily encourage competition. Competitive guys will compete if there are 5 D for 6 spaces. We have too many spare parts on this roster, trim the fat and get a competitive team with chemistry where the players know each night what they need tk bring to the table to wkn What was the Sabres top 7 or 8 on defense not too long ago and what is it now? Where's Regehr? Where's Leoplold? Where's Brennan? Where's Pardy? Where's Sekera? A move never happened? Are you kidding? Maybe it's not the moves you want, but there have been moves. Those moves happened from the deadline onwards. We played most of the season with 9D. Now we are going into next season with 10D and Miller and Vanek. Yet our forwards are still as rubbish as last year. This is more like moving food around your plate rather than eating it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Coming to this party late, don't know if anyone mentioned this even the Hank deal is fine imo, yet still no scoring and Stafford is still here and Miller and Vanek have not had anything done with their contracts or actually traded for prospects. The Sabres still need a center with some power and skating ability that isn't young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 What was the Sabres top 7 or 8 on defense not too long ago and what is it now? Where's Regehr? Where's Leoplold? Where's Brennan? Where's Pardy? Where's Sekera? A move never happened? Are you kidding? Maybe it's not the moves you want, but there have been moves. I'm pretty sure Greg is referring to all the posters insisting there would be moves PRIOR to last season as they went into camp with 11 NHL D. Well who do we want from Colorado ? certainly a move coming with them Certainly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 8, 2013 Report Share Posted July 8, 2013 Remember Golisano? It is different. Open your eyes. Wasn't it supposed to be "different" in a positive way? The success this team had under Golisano seems like the Golden Era compared to the mess we have today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.