2 phrases I NEVER want to read again

[nfreeman]

1. "Goaltending controversy"

 

and you can include in this one the related "[XYZ playoff contending team] should trade us [high draft pick/XYZ top 4 defenseman] for Marty".

 

Give me a break with the Marty fan club BS already. How much evidence do we need? Why weren't the THREE YEARS of misery when he had every chance in the world to show his stuff enough? He's just not good enough. Yes, he made a nice save on the 3-on-0. However, he had already let the horse out of the barn -- just like every year of those 3 years, he had had a decent 2nd half of the season after he had an awful 1st half to put us out of playoff contention.

 

He's a good guy and a good #2 goalie. He had a great winning streak early in the year last year in a relief role -- but remember that his play, even then, wasn't good enough for Lindy not to give Mika a few shots in the middle of it. He's not a #1 goalie for a playoff team. There is NO WAY any decent team is going to give us anything good for him. It's not gonna happen. Didn't happen last year, not gonna happen this year.

 

2 nights in a row, 2 blown 2-goal leads in the 3rd period on 2 soft goals per game. If Miller can't go I'm ready for Dennis on Monday night.

 

2. "B-Rod".

 

I'm ready for a full retraction by the perpetrator of that offensive moniker. You know who you are.

 

I wanted Danny to sign a long-term deal with us too. He didn't, and it's quite likely he's gone after this year. But that doesn't mean he's not a really good/borderline great player, and more importantly a clutch player. He was our best forward last year and he's at least tied with Max and Vanek for that honor this year.

 

Yes, he didn't win game 7 vs. Carolina last year for us. But neither did Drury and I don't see anyone coming up with nasty nicknames for him. Briere has delivered in clutch situations repeatedly, both last year and this year. He doesn't fatten up his stats in blowouts. He is money.

 

Winning time is Briere time.

[inkman]

Winning time is Briere time.

 

It's hard to fault him ever really, and in particular after a game like that but he seems to go looooonnnngggg stretches in games where he is invisible. The truly dominant players in the league are a lot more noticeable. That being said, I'll take showing up when it matters.

[MBD]

2. "B-Rod".

 

I'm ready for a full retraction by the perpetrator of that offensive moniker. You know who you are.

You'll never get a crusader to retract anything. But then again, he IS smarter "then" a Bills fan. :lol:

[DR HOLLIDAY]

Danny is the man................. :beer:

[Screamin'Weasel]

1. "Goaltending controversy"

 

and you can include in this one the related "[XYZ playoff contending team] should trade us [high draft pick/XYZ top 4 defenseman] for Marty".

 

Give me a break with the Marty fan club BS already. How much evidence do we need? Why weren't the THREE YEARS of misery when he had every chance in the world to show his stuff enough? He's just not good enough. Yes, he made a nice save on the 3-on-0. However, he had already let the horse out of the barn -- just like every year of those 3 years, he had had a decent 2nd half of the season after he had an awful 1st half to put us out of playoff contention.

 

He's a good guy and a good #2 goalie. He had a great winning streak early in the year last year in a relief role -- but remember that his play, even then, wasn't good enough for Lindy not to give Mika a few shots in the middle of it. He's not a #1 goalie for a playoff team. There is NO WAY any decent team is going to give us anything good for him. It's not gonna happen. Didn't happen last year, not gonna happen this year.

 

2 nights in a row, 2 blown 2-goal leads in the 3rd period on 2 soft goals per game. If Miller can't go I'm ready for Dennis on Monday night.

 

2. "B-Rod".

 

I'm ready for a full retraction by the perpetrator of that offensive moniker. You know who you are.

 

I wanted Danny to sign a long-term deal with us too. He didn't, and it's quite likely he's gone after this year. But that doesn't mean he's not a really good/borderline great player, and more importantly a clutch player. He was our best forward last year and he's at least tied with Max and Vanek for that honor this year.

 

Yes, he didn't win game 7 vs. Carolina last year for us. But neither did Drury and I don't see anyone coming up with nasty nicknames for him. Briere has delivered in clutch situations repeatedly, both last year and this year. He doesn't fatten up his stats in blowouts. He is money.

 

Winning time is Briere time.

 

Let me first state that I like Marty and think he is a great back-up on this team. However, in his defence to some of your comments, he has good games and bad as much as any other player in the league. Those years we "suffered" with him in net were caused as much by the product on the ice in front of him. He is now playing with a great team in front of him now. Yes, he let in two softies yesterday and a few on Friday. Miller has done the same but both Biron and Miller keep getting the W and 2 points, both when they play well and when they play like crap.

 

As for Briere, he wanted more than the Sabres offered. Since we do not know the terms either side sought in that particular instance, we cannot point fingers. The arbiter ruling was way out of whack as well and I think that often gets dumped (erroneously) on Briere as being "his fault".

 

Going strictly by numbers, you cannot argue that he was "our best forward last year," either. Add in the non-tangible factors and I think Drury was a better leader and force on the ice. Briere came through at some important times during the season and in the play-offs, yes. But so did a whole bunch of guys. Pomms scorced the series clinching goal against Ottawa: is he worth 5 million too?

 

However, I do freely admit he has been doing what he needs to when the chips are down so far this year. I'd rather have him here for one year at $5 million with a strong cup contender than have let him go because his salary would have been too much for this team.

[deluca67]

1. "Goaltending controversy"

 

and you can include in this one the related "[XYZ playoff contending team] should trade us [high draft pick/XYZ top 4 defenseman] for Marty".

 

Give me a break with the Marty fan club BS already. How much evidence do we need? Why weren't the THREE YEARS of misery when he had every chance in the world to show his stuff enough? He's just not good enough. Yes, he made a nice save on the 3-on-0. However, he had already let the horse out of the barn -- just like every year of those 3 years, he had had a decent 2nd half of the season after he had an awful 1st half to put us out of playoff contention.

 

He's a good guy and a good #2 goalie. He had a great winning streak early in the year last year in a relief role -- but remember that his play, even then, wasn't good enough for Lindy not to give Mika a few shots in the middle of it. He's not a #1 goalie for a playoff team. There is NO WAY any decent team is going to give us anything good for him. It's not gonna happen. Didn't happen last year, not gonna happen this year.

 

2 nights in a row, 2 blown 2-goal leads in the 3rd period on 2 soft goals per game. If Miller can't go I'm ready for Dennis on Monday night.

 

2. "B-Rod".

 

I'm ready for a full retraction by the perpetrator of that offensive moniker. You know who you are.

 

I wanted Danny to sign a long-term deal with us too. He didn't, and it's quite likely he's gone after this year. But that doesn't mean he's not a really good/borderline great player, and more importantly a clutch player. He was our best forward last year and he's at least tied with Max and Vanek for that honor this year.

 

Yes, he didn't win game 7 vs. Carolina last year for us. But neither did Drury and I don't see anyone coming up with nasty nicknames for him. Briere has delivered in clutch situations repeatedly, both last year and this year. He doesn't fatten up his stats in blowouts. He is money.

 

Winning time is Briere time.

 

23 points in 16 games is really nice. But he has a ways to go to match the 48 games he played last year and and a much longer way to go to reach 82.

 

He is fifth on this team in goals. And when all are healthy he is the third best offensive player behind Max and Connolly. And doesn't have the two way game of a Drury. He's still not worth $5 million a year at this point.

 

Just like when he signed the contract. He has to prove it over 82 games. Not game #16 vs the worst team in hockey. B-)

[nfreeman]

23 points in 16 games is really nice. But he has a ways to go to match the 48 games he played last year and and a much longer way to go to reach 82.

 

He is fifth on this team in goals. And when all are healthy he is the third best offensive player behind Max and Connolly. And doesn't have the two way game of a Drury. He's still not worth $5 million a year at this point.

 

Just like when he signed the contract. He has to prove it over 82 games. Not game #16 vs the worst team in hockey. B-)

 

You are of course correct that he has a ways to go to prove that he can keep up this pace for a full season. However:

 

1. saying he is 5th on the team in goals is a bit misleading when you omit the fact that he is FIRST in scoring, with 23 points, 3 points ahead of #2 (Vanek with 20). Not to get political, but that was pretty Clintonian.

 

2. No one on this board likes Connolly more than I do, but I don't see how you can put him ahead of Briere as an offensive player. Connolly had 16-39-55 last year in 63 games -- 32% more games than Briere, who played 48 games and had 25-33-58. Now, Connolly is certainly a better 2-way player (as is Drury), but Briere is relentless, productive and better around the net.

 

3. He hasn't just produced vs. the worst team in hockey. The Rangers are pretty good and were coming off back-to-back wins vs. Anaheim and San Jose when we played them, on the road, last week. Briere took over that game (which I was at -- yeah, baby). We were down 3-1, when he scored a goal, set up Pominville for the tying goal, and scored again in OT. Extremely strong.

 

4. You may not think he's worth $5 million a year, but do you not believe that if he suddenly became a UFA right now, someone would give him that much (assuming they could make room under the cap)? I think he'd get multiple offers above $5 million and end up close to $6 million.

 

5. Lastly: my point was not that he's worth $5 million. My point is that it's not cool to give one of our own guys a derogatory nickname, especially when (i) it's totally and completely untrue, (ii) he busts his butt to try to help us win games for us and (iii) he does in fact take over and win games for us.

 

Just my opinion.

[Doohickie]

I hadn't seen the B-Rod remark, and I like Briere just fine, but jeez, if someone wants to call him B-Rod, what do you care?

[deluca67]

You are of course correct that he has a ways to go to prove that he can keep up this pace for a full season. However:

 

1. saying he is 5th on the team in goals is a bit misleading when you omit the fact that he is FIRST in scoring, with 23 points, 3 points ahead of #2 (Vanek with 20). Not to get political, but that was pretty Clintonian.

 

2. No one on this board likes Connolly more than I do, but I don't see how you can put him ahead of Briere as an offensive player. Connolly had 16-39-55 last year in 63 games -- 32% more games than Briere, who played 48 games and had 25-33-58. Now, Connolly is certainly a better 2-way player (as is Drury), but Briere is relentless, productive and better around the net.

 

3. He hasn't just produced vs. the worst team in hockey. The Rangers are pretty good and were coming off back-to-back wins vs. Anaheim and San Jose when we played them, on the road, last week. Briere took over that game (which I was at -- yeah, baby). We were down 3-1, when he scored a goal, set up Pominville for the tying goal, and scored again in OT. Extremely strong.

 

4. You may not think he's worth $5 million a year, but do you not believe that if he suddenly became a UFA right now, someone would give him that much (assuming they could make room under the cap)? I think he'd get multiple offers above $5 million and end up close to $6 million.

 

5. Lastly: my point was not that he's worth $5 million. My point is that it's not cool to give one of our own guys a derogatory nickname, especially when (i) it's totally and completely untrue, (ii) he busts his butt to try to help us win games for us and (iii) he does in fact take over and win games for us.

 

Just my opinion.

 

I don't hate Briere or B-Rod.

 

He could have signed a long term contract and made a nice amount of money.

 

The fact is he has never had a 100 point season. And he is not the best player on his team.

 

That said.

 

I want him on the Sabres. just lower the price tag.

[inkman]

I want him on the Sabres. just lower the price tag.

 

I think we both can come to the conclusion that will not happen, so in essence you don't want him on the team (at least next year when someone will pay him 6 mil a year).

[wjag]

I think we both can come to the conclusion that will not happen, so in essence you don't want him on the team (at least next year when someone will pay him 6 mil a year).

I know we are early in the whole CAP process, but many times in the NFL a star will restructure a contract to stay on the team and to keep enough talent there to make the team competitive. Judging by the responses over all the posts when it comes to Drury and Briere, my sense is people don't believe that this will take place on the Sabres.

[inkman]

I know we are early in the whole CAP process, but many times in the NFL a star will restructure a contract to stay on the team and to keep enough talent there to make the team competitive. Judging by the responses over all the posts when it comes to Drury and Briere, my sense is people don't believe that this will take place on the Sabres.

 

In the NFL there is more leeway and precedent when it comes to backend loading of contracts. I'm pretty sure there are pretty strict guidelines as far as how much more a player can receive from year to year in the same contract(in the NHL).

[Eleven]

I know we are early in the whole CAP process, but many times in the NFL a star will restructure a contract to stay on the team and to keep enough talent there to make the team competitive. Judging by the responses over all the posts when it comes to Drury and Briere, my sense is people don't believe that this will take place on the Sabres.

 

I'm willing to be optimistic.

[scottnc]

I know we are early in the whole CAP process, but many times in the NFL a star will restructure a contract to stay on the team and to keep enough talent there to make the team competitive. Judging by the responses over all the posts when it comes to Drury and Briere, my sense is people don't believe that this will take place on the Sabres.

 

Comparing the NHL cap to the NFL cap is like apples and oranges. The NFL cap hit is not the average salary of the contract like the NHL, it is only what they are making that year plus their pro-rated signing bonus. So guys who sign huge NFL deals usually have a backloaded contract which you can't do in the NHL.