PromoTheRobot Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 I love Marty and I'd hate to see him go, but he may be the only player the Sabres can deal that would get them what they need. I know the official line is that Ruff is resting Miller, but Biron is getting some more palying time as we near the trade deadline. His mask is still unpainted. The Sabres have to clear cap space to make a deal and Biron makes over $2mil. Any comments? PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 I don't see them trading Biron or any regulars on the roster at this point. The Connolly situation has really handcuffed the Sabres. The only way I see a deal getting done is if Connolly is declared unfit to play for the rest of the season. Then they can pick up a player or two without affecting the core of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 You both raise interesting points. A lot of circumstantial evidence (the mask and Marty's increased PT) suggests that the Sabres (and Biron) are gearing up for some sort of move to bolster the team at the deadline. OTOH, the Connolly situation really mucks things up. If TC isn't going to be back, or suffers some setback that throws his rteturn timetable into doubt, then they should be able to make a move without touching the current roster - as long as the new player or players fit into TC's injury exception. IF TC will be back, the Sabres' only chance to make a deal would have to include regular roster players, such as Marty, Dmitri, Big Al, etc. (just examples, don't anyone fly off the handle at their names being mentioned...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 I don't see them trading Biron or any regulars on the roster at this point. The Connolly situation has really handcuffed the Sabres. The only way I see a deal getting done is if Connolly is declared unfit to play for the rest of the season. Then they can pick up a player or two without affecting the core of the team. I think this is the reason that Connolly will be flying with the team this weekend. It will clarify his situation; if he can't fly without headaches, then I think it will clear up the team's situation for Regier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodfella25 Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 I love Marty and I'd hate to see him go, but he may be the only player the Sabres can deal that would get them what they need. I know the official line is that Ruff is resting Miller, but Biron is getting some more palying time as we near the trade deadline. His mask is still unpainted. The Sabres have to clear cap space to make a deal and Biron makes over $2mil. Any comments? PTR I also got the feeling that we were showcasing Biron when I heard earlier in the week that he would most likely play both Boston games. I understand how a case can be made that we truly are just "resting" Miller, but for some reason my instincts tell me Biron is being showcased. The real problem is that if Biron is going to be traded, we definitely need another goalie in return, and a cheap one at that. Plus, I doubt a non-playoff team would take Biron, a potential UFA at the end of the year, unless of course they are sending us an UFA in return... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 ...if he can't fly without headaches, then I think it will clear up the team's situation for Regier. Not trying to shoot the messenger here, but if Darcy is holding out hope for Timmy and the "flight" test is the trump card, we all should be really worried. Regier cames across as a cerebral guy, al beit a cautious one, but I would like to think he is approaching this situation with a lot of trepidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawerchuk Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 You need two goalies in the Playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Dump Kotalik. Someone like The Coyotes or The Hawks will be foolish enough to give something up for his one-timer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 You need two goalies in the Playoffs. Last time I looked the Sabres only needed one goalie in last years playoffs. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Last time I looked the Sabres only needed one goalie in last years playoffs. ;) Carolina used two.. :chris: Edmonton needed two.. :doh: Ottawa wished they had two... :oops: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyFan T Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 You need two goalies in the Playoffs. I agree. Carolina had two guys last year they could count on. Gerber (although struggling badly in Ottawa) was a gem for them during the season and when called upon in the playoffs. John Grahame has "replaced" Gerber and continues to show what a fool Laviolette was in choosing him over Ryan Miller for the Olympic team and then bringing him to Carolina. The Sabres know what they have with Biron, the team plays with confidence and there seems to be good communication between him and the skaters. I think trading Biron would be a dangerous thing to do and could cost the Sabres a run at the cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knightrider Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 1. Why wait till now? Shopping him ealier would have made more sense if that was what they wanted to do. 2. What playoff hopeful team out there needs a goalie? The only two I can think of are Toronto and Tampa, and they are hard against the cap, too. Maybe Biron and Kalinin to TO for Kaberle, and Kotalik for Guerin and Legace. Yeah, I think that would be OK with me. :D Edit: This would mean Timmy is held out till the playoffs, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 You need two goalies in the Playoffs. Last year was the first yr a team actually used 2 goalies in the playoffs and won a cup that I can remember. However had we traded Biron for a def LAST YR it wouldnt have matterd because the Sabres would have won the Cup not the canes..So lets stop the madness that we need two high paid goalies to win a cup..TRADE BIRON FOR A FREAKING TOUGH STAY AT HOME DEFENSMAN AND WE WIN THE CUP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! END OF STORY... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 You need two goalies in the Playoffs. ...and 10 defenseman. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawerchuk Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Carolina used two.. :chris: Edmonton needed two.. :doh: Ottawa wished they had two... :oops: RIGHT ON :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Last year was the first yr a team actually used 2 goalies in the playoffs and won a cup that I can remember. However had we traded Biron for a def LAST YR it wouldnt have matterd because the Sabres would have won the Cup not the canes..So lets stop the madness that we need two high paid goalies to win a cup..TRADE BIRON FOR A FREAKING TOUGH STAY AT HOME DEFENSMAN AND WE WIN THE CUP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! END OF STORY... But have there been times where a goalie was injured in the playoffs, killing his team's chances? I don't know the answer to that one, but it's something that should be mentioned. You go on to say that injuries killed us last year, so why ignore the possibility that it has happened in the past with a goalie? Oh, and adding one defenseman would've landed us the cup. That right there is madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 But have there been times where a goalie was injured in the playoffs, killing his team's chances? I don't know the answer to that one, but it's something that should be mentioned. You go on to say that injuries killed us last year, so why ignore the possibility that it has happened in the past with a goalie? Oh, and adding one defenseman would've landed us the cup. That right there is madness. Before we argue a point let me understand your opinion..Are you saying that if we had one more solid defenseman last yr we would not have won the cup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Before we argue a point let me understand your opinion..Are you saying that if we had one more solid defenseman last yr we would not have won the cup? No. One more healthy defenseman would not have won us the cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Before we argue a point let me understand your opinion..Are you saying that if we had one more solid defenseman last yr we would not have won the cup? We may have. We might not have. It's a ridiculous point to make because it's impossible to back up. Think it, that's fine, to argue it as an absolute fact is pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 But have there been times where a goalie was injured in the playoffs, killing his team's chances? I don't know the answer to that one, but it's something that should be mentioned. You go on to say that injuries killed us last year, so why ignore the possibility that it has happened in the past with a goalie? Oh, and adding one defenseman would've landed us the cup. That right there is madness. On to your next point..here are the last 15 Stanley Cup winners How many do you think used both goaltenders in the playoffs 91: Pittsburgh: Tom Barasso 92: PittsBurgh: Tom Barasso 93:Montreal Canadiens: Patrick Roy 94:NYR: Mike Richter 95:NJ Devils: Martin Brodeur 96:Col Avs: Pat Roy 97:Det Red Wings:Mike Vernon 98: Det Red Wings:Chris Osgood 99:Dallas Stars: Ed Belfour 2000:NJ Devs: Martin Brodeur 2001:Col Avs: Pat Roy 2002:Det Redwings: Dom Hasek 2003:NJ Devs: Martin Brodeur 2004:TB : Khabilun 2006: Cam Ward and Gerber for 1 game in the playoffs The Madness would be to keep an assett that is not going to play when it counts when you can use it to acquire what you need..Memorialise these words,"without a tough stay at home defensman the Sabres do not win the cup" They can use Biron to get that without dealoing away the youth and excitement No. One more healthy defenseman would not have won us the cup. I beg to differ..The only reason we lost to the Canes was we ran out of defenseman....They ran out of steam in the third...It is a pointless arguement but I will go to my grave arguing it..You only get so many chances to win it all and to keep something you are not gonna use when it counts when you can use it to profit when it does is senseless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 On to your next point..here are the last 15 Stanley Cup winners How many do you think used both goaltenders in the playoffs 91: Pittsburgh: Tom Barasso 92: PittsBurgh: Tom Barasso 93:Montreal Canadiens: Patrick Roy 94:NYR: Mike Richter 95:NJ Devils: Martin Brodeur 96:Col Avs: Pat Roy 97:Det Red Wings:Mike Vernon 98: Det Red Wings:Chris Osgood 99:Dallas Stars: Ed Belfour 2000:NJ Devs: Martin Brodeur 2001:Col Avs: Pat Roy 2002:Det Redwings: Dom Hasek 2003:NJ Devs: Martin Brodeur 2004:TB : Khabilun 2006: Cam Ward and Gerber for 1 game in the playoffs The Madness would be to keep an assett that is not going to play when it counts when you can use it to acquire what you need..Memorialise these words,"without a tough stay at home defensman the Sabres do not win the cup" They can use Biron to get that without dealoing away the youth and excitement Congratulations, you completely missed the point. Who lost in the finals each of those years? Who lost in previous rounds? Is there any team who was a serious contender who lost their goalie, essentially killing their chances? Like I said, I don't know the answer to that one, but I'm not going to ignore the possibilty. It's also a bit strange that you're advocating taking out an insurance policy for one position while complaining about keeping insurance for another one. An 8th/9th defenseman vs. a backup goalie, which is more likely to make an impact in the playoffs? It's a tough question that can be argued either way. One other thing you completely ignored: was there at any point any tough stay at home defenseman available that could've been had for Marty Biron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Congratulations, you completely missed the point. Who lost in the finals each of those years? Who lost in previous rounds? Is there any team who was a serious contender who lost their goalie, essentially killing their chances? Like I said, I don't know the answer to that one, but I'm not going to ignore the possibilty. It's also a bit strange that you're advocating taking out an insurance policy for one position while complaining about keeping insurance for another one. An 8th/9th defenseman vs. a backup goalie, which is more likely to make an impact in the playoffs? It's a tough question that can be argued either way. One other thing you completely ignored: was there at any point any tough stay at home defenseman available that could've been had for Marty Biron? I guess i missed your point completely if you are wanting to be the runner up ...The fact is the winning Stanley cup team is one that went thru the Playoffs without an injury to their goaltender but had enuff depth in the areas where theyre players get hurt most often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 That's a pretty good list, and one tht proves you don't necessarily need two goalies to win the SC. I think shrader's point is how many teams, like the Oilers last year, saw their playoff hopes vanish because the starter went down the backup wasn't able to win it all. (Not making the argument of whetehr I think Marty is that type of goalie or not.) shrader, the question I have in response is this - how often has a backup goaltender stepped in for the injured starter (during the playoffs) and took his team to the Cup? (I honestly don't know, so if you have any examples...) One correction off the top of my head - Gerber actually played more than one game in LY's playoffs. EDIT: Here it is, he appeared in 6 games, but only played two full games - game 1 of the quarterfinals vs. NJD, and game 4 vs. Buffalo. The other four appearances were two starts, from which he was yanked early, and two appearances in relief of Conn Smythe winner Cam Ward. (<_<) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 I guess i missed your point completely if you are wanting to be the runner up ...The fact is the winning Stanley cup team is one that went thru the Playoffs without an injury to their goaltender but had enuff depth in the areas where theyre players get hurt most often. Funny, I don't see anything in that list that says those teams had the depth to bypass injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Congratulations, you completely missed the point. Who lost in the finals each of those years? Who lost in previous rounds? Is there any team who was a serious contender who lost their goalie, essentially killing their chances? Like I said, I don't know the answer to that one, but I'm not going to ignore the possibilty. It's also a bit strange that you're advocating taking out an insurance policy for one position while complaining about keeping insurance for another one. An 8th/9th defenseman vs. a backup goalie, which is more likely to make an impact in the playoffs? It's a tough question that can be argued either way. One other thing you completely ignored: was there at any point any tough stay at home defenseman available that could've been had for Marty Biron? The other thing i completley due to the fact if i did say who was offered I would be ridiculed as someone who noone would believe because there is no way to prove it.. That's a pretty good list, and one tht proves you don't necessarily need two goalies to win the SC. I think shrader's point is how many teams, like the Oilers last year, saw their playoff hopes vanish because the starter went down the backup wasn't able to win it all. (Not making the argument of whetehr I think Marty is that type of goalie or not.) shrader, the question I have in response is this - how often has a backup goaltender stepped in for the injured starter (during the playoffs) and took his team to the Cup? (I honestly don't know, so if you have any examples...) One correction off the top of my head - Gerber actually played more than one game in LY's playoffs. EDIT: Here it is, he appeared in 6 games, but only played two full games - game 1 of the quarterfinals vs. NJD, and game 4 vs. Buffalo. The other four appearances were two starts, from which he was yanked early, and two appearances in relief of Conn Smythe winner Cam Ward. (<_<) My point with the list is that at no time in the past 15 yrs has a team won the Stanley Cup with their backup...Case closed..You need no other proof..If your goalie goes down youre done....end of discussion..Martin Biron does not take this team to the cup....Get somebody who can help you as a regular not a parttimer..Its a nobrainer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.