buffaloaggie Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Well said. One question: what's the source for the 3 yrs/ $10 million? ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2510111 Love this move. Yes it does soften the blow of losing McKee, plus they're saving over $600 thousand per year, giving up some on defense, but gaining a great offensive asset on the blue line. I feel much better about this team again. GO SABRES!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 I'd like to see a policeman back there too, but I'll take what we have. Edmonton was a pretty physical team and also one that blocked a lot of shots -- I have to assume Spacek will pull his weight in those areas. Anyway, since we're predicting defense pairings, here are mine: Tallinder-Spacek Lydman-Campbell Teppo-Kalinin Go Sabres. This is awesome news. I hope Tallinder/Lydman isn't split up, though. If they stay together, Numminen/Campbell; Spacek/Kalinin makes the most sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickshaw Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Great signing. Better puck mover. Better shot. Better on the pp than McKee. He looked very solid in the playoffs. This is a very good trade off over McKee and we save money. Nice nice pickup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 This is awesome news. I hope Tallinder/Lydman isn't split up, though. If they stay together, Numminen/Campbell; Spacek/Kalinin makes the most sense to me. I didn't really pick up on this until our defensemen started dropping like flies in the playoffs, but I think Lindy's approach is to put his best 2 defensemen together. Based on what I'm reading (and the fact that he's now our highest-paid player, at least until Briere gets his fat extension), I think Spacek is one of our top 2. That puts Toni at #3 and, based on the playoffs last year, Campbell at #4. Kalinin is the wild card and could certainly shoot up the ladder -- or fall off the table again -- but I think at this point he's in the 3rd pair with Teppo. On paper anyway I'd think Teppo would be a good pairing with Dmitri. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound_n_Fury Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 YES!!!! Now my only question is: why couldn't they have brought him in last season when they were less than 20 minutes away from hosting the SCF's? Yep, I'm sure the Oil would have traded him at the deadline after getting him from the Hawks earlier in the year... :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 I guess the question now is, do you have a young guy like Paetsch hanging around as a #7 dman not getting much PT or do you leave Paetsch in Rochester and find someone for 500-600k who has some NHL experience but is best served in a role of playing 30-40 games filling in for guys who are injured. This got me thinking. I know most of us are down on Fitzpatrick, but if he doesn't get much interest around the league, would you bring him back as a depth defenseman, spending most of his time in Rochester? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Yep, I'm sure the Oil would have traded him at the deadline after getting him from the Hawks earlier in the year... :P Why do you say they had to go through Edmonton to get him? Chicago only received a prospect for him. The Sabres could very likely have offered a deal at least as good as Edmonton offered. (Obviously they didn't beat Edmonton's offer, but there is no reason to believe that had Darcy been a little less trigger shy that the Sabres couldn't have landed him.) Also, if they did have to go through Edmonton to get him, Spacek was the other D-man (besides Staois) that was rumored to have been offered for Marty. (I don't know if that rumor was true or not, but saw it / heard it from several sources.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottnc Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 This got me thinking. I know most of us are down on Fitzpatrick, but if he doesn't get much interest around the league, would you bring him back as a depth defenseman, spending most of his time in Rochester? I say no. Fitzpatrick is, I believe, 31 and he's not going to get any better. I know he played OK in the playoffs but I just keep thinking about how many times I said "Dammit Rory!!" as I was watching games this season. That's not to mention the nightmares I still have about seeing that puck next to his skate as Brind'Amour was skating to the crease. I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm more willing to give Paetsch or Janik (if he comes back) a shot instead of bringing him back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 I say no. Fitzpatrick is, I believe, 31 and he's not going to get any better. I know he played OK in the playoffs but I just keep thinking about how many times I said "Dammit Rory!!" as I was watching games this season. That's not to mention the nightmares I still have about seeing that puck next to his skate as Brind'Amour was skating to the crease. I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm more willing to give Paetsch or Janik (if he comes back) a shot instead of bringing him back. I think he comes back. He's cheap, he knows the system, and is used to being scratched, and I never liked him, which makes him a lock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Why do you say they had to go through Edmonton to get him? Chicago only received a prospect for him. The Sabres could very likely have offered a deal at least as good as Edmonton offered. (Obviously they didn't beat Edmonton's offer, but there is no reason to believe that had Darcy been a little less trigger shy that the Sabres couldn't have landed him.) Also, if they did have to go through Edmonton to get him, Spacek was the other D-man (besides Staois) that was rumored to have been offered for Marty. (I don't know if that rumor was true or not, but saw it / heard it from several sources.) Dave, You've been banging the drum for Spacek for as long as I can remember. ;) I'm not sure why Golisano decided to cut into his HUGE profits of the sale of the team :P You lose a one way player and replace him with a solid two way player. I hope the Biron/Draper trade on another thread becomes true. The Sabres would be the chic pick for the 2006-07 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swedesessed Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 The Sabres would be the chic pick for the 2006-07 season. Why does that scare me? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 One positive that hasn't been mentioned about Spacek is that hopefully this will reduce the amount of time a forward needs to spend on the PP point. Here's to Teppo, Campbell, Kalinin & Spacek on the PP point and no more Kotalik, Pominville, etc... Way too many shorthanded goals last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 One positive that hasn't been mentioned about Spacek is that hopefully this will reduce the amount of time a forward needs to spend on the PP point. Here's to Teppo, Campbell, Kalinin & Spacek on the PP point and no more Kotalik, Pominville, etc... Way too many shorthanded goals last year. 14 GA when on the powerplay 5 on 4. It was high risk high reward. I thought it was fine in the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregkash Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Spacek is an excellent pickup. He's solid defensively and excellent offense. I'm actually not worried about a Policeman. I think our team showed last year, that historically non physical players can step up when the time is needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 14 GA when on the powerplay 5 on 4. It was high risk high reward. I thought it was fine in the regular season. My point is that this year there won't be as great a need to put a forward back on the point. PS 17 short handed goals total. Way too many in the regular season, 2nd highest total in the league and plenty of room for improvement. ;) http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/stats/byteam?c...type=0&sort=413 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 My point is that this year there won't be as great a need to put a forward back on the point. PS 17 short handed goals total. Way too many in the regular season, 2nd highest total in the league and plenty of room for improvement. ;) http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/stats/byteam?c...type=0&sort=413 Of course, when you have that good of a PP during the regular season, the reward might be greater than the risk. I was never a big fan of putting forwards on the point until this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 My point is that this year there won't be as great a need to put a forward back on the point. PS 17 short handed goals total. Way too many in the regular season, 2nd highest total in the league and plenty of room for improvement. ;) http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/stats/byteam?c...type=0&sort=413 17 sounds like a lot. But having the extra forward kept the PP conversion high. I don't know the math, but it would seem that having the extra forward gave the PP a significant punch. The strategy of having the extra forward should be compared to the league mean for SHGA which is about 11. If that is the standard then the extra forward strategy cost the Sabres an additional 6 SHGA while scoring about 15 PPG above the league mean. I liked it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apushms Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 :D I think the thought of playing Paestch frequently as a rest for Teppo has merit. He was injured last year and didn't make it through the playoffs so some nights off along the way makes sense. Some of the current solid Sabre defensemen (i.e. Campbell) went through such growing pains and I believe he is ready to be with the parent-club rather than languishing in Rochester. So much for my two cents ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregkash Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 I think Paetsch would make a good 7, on nights when we dress 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 Why do you say they had to go through Edmonton to get him? Chicago only received a prospect for him. The Sabres could very likely have offered a deal at least as good as Edmonton offered. (Obviously they didn't beat Edmonton's offer, but there is no reason to believe that had Darcy been a little less trigger shy that the Sabres couldn't have landed him.) Also, if they did have to go through Edmonton to get him, Spacek was the other D-man (besides Staois) that was rumored to have been offered for Marty. (I don't know if that rumor was true or not, but saw it / heard it from several sources.) This is an interesting question. Any info on how good the prospect was that Edmonton gave up? Was he one of their jewels? Or just a guy? If we would've had to give up, say, Vanek in order to beat Edmonton's offer then I can understand why we passed. If we could've gotten him for a 2nd round pick -- eesh, I wish my time machine was working. The other point that bears mentioning is that I will assume that you're not holding the freaky stretch of injuries on defense against Darcy -- ie you're not blaming him for failing to plan for that possibility. At the time of the trading deadline we were in a pretty good groove and I didn't see the need to replace any of our top 6. We could've brought in a depth guy, but Spacek is obviously much more than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 Nice move by Darcy. Can everyone please back away from the panic button now? LOL! Yes, this is a good move! Very happy about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 A little more support for the proposition that Buffalo is in fact an attractive destination for free agents: we beat out 9 other bidders for Spacek. http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news...54-0cc0cc4b46f0 That's what a good playoff run and having the coach of the year will get ya! Go Sabres. Go Sabres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 YES!!!! Now my only question is: why couldn't they have brought him in last season when they were less than 20 minutes away from hosting the SCF's? Because the trade deadline is well before the last period of the ECF, duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 Because the trade deadline is well before the last period of the ECF, duh. Thanks for the newsflash. <_< He was definitely available in January and rumored to be available again at the trade deadline. DUH!! He was obtained in January for a 25 year old prospect winger playing in Finland. Gee, the Sabres didn't have too many prospect wingers in the system at the time. I'm certain they couldn't have beat that offer. /sarcasm He was then (supposedly) being offered for Marty Biron at the deadline prior to Edmonton picking up Roloson. Again, I'm certain that the Sabres couldn't have possibly hoped to pull that deal off either. Also, it would have been tragic for the Sabres to have a ~$700k backup heading into this season vs. a $2MM+ backup. /sarcasm This is an interesting question. Any info on how good the prospect was that Edmonton gave up? Was he one of their jewels? Or just a guy? If we would've had to give up, say, Vanek in order to beat Edmonton's offer then I can understand why we passed. If we could've gotten him for a 2nd round pick -- eesh, I wish my time machine was working. The other point that bears mentioning is that I will assume that you're not holding the freaky stretch of injuries on defense against Darcy -- ie you're not blaming him for failing to plan for that possibility. At the time of the trading deadline we were in a pretty good groove and I didn't see the need to replace any of our top 6. We could've brought in a depth guy, but Spacek is obviously much more than that. Salmaleinen had scored 46 pts in the AHL in '04-'05. He went back to Finland and was ~a point / game player there. I think with the glut of forwards the Sabres have in the system, they could have parted with 1 of similar or better quality and not messed up the team's future too badly (or at all). I'm not holding a run of 4 lost D-men and the team's most creative center on Darcy. No one could have forseen that. I am however not happy that Darcy didn't expect to have 2 injured D-men out at the same time based on the team's injury problems this season and Teppo's age. Especially when you consider that a guy with Spacek's ability was available for (IMHO) a very reasonable price, I wanted to see the Sabres bring him in last season. Unfortunately, that is water under the bridge, and on the plus side, they brought him in for this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 Thanks for the newsflash. <_< He was definitely available in January and rumored to be available again at the trade deadline. DUH!! He was obtained in January for a 25 year old prospect winger playing in Finland. Gee, the Sabres didn't have too many prospect wingers in the system at the time. I'm certain they couldn't have beat that offer. /sarcasm He was then (supposedly) being offered for Marty Biron at the deadline prior to Edmonton picking up Roloson. Again, I'm certain that the Sabres couldn't have possibly hoped to pull that deal off either. Also, it would have been tragic for the Sabres to have a ~$700k backup heading into this season vs. a $2MM+ backup. /sarcasm Salmaleinen had scored 46 pts in the AHL in '04-'05. He went back to Finland and was ~a point / game player there. I think with the glut of forwards the Sabres have in the system, they could have parted with 1 of similar or better quality and not messed up the team's future too badly (or at all). I'm not holding a run of 4 lost D-men and the team's most creative center on Darcy. No one could have forseen that. I am however not happy that Darcy didn't expect to have 2 injured D-men out at the same time based on the team's injury problems this season and Teppo's age. Especially when you consider that a guy with Spacek's ability was available for (IMHO) a very reasonable price, I wanted to see the Sabres bring him in last season. Unfortunately, that is water under the bridge, and on the plus side, they brought him in for this season. I was being sarcastic, I had hoped that the "Duh" would have led you to realize that. :P You would have had to sit someone though for Spacek. Who was it going to be? And how would you sit this person without making the players question management? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.