HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Since the lockout....

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-21-2012, 03:27 PM
  #26
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 33,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
so you are equating Brown, Kopitar, Doughty with Vanek, Pominville, Myers?

Are you willing to trade assets like Ennis and Foligno to add a Mike Richards (Schenn+Simmonds)?

Are you willing to trade Tyler Myers (Jack Johnson+1st) to snag a high end player like Jeff Carter?

Do believe enough in the Pom/Van/Roy/Miller core... to sacrifice the assets it would take to add the pieces LA needed to add? They believed in their core enough to make those kind of moves.

Really. Take a minute and think about that.

I used Backes/St Louis and Brown/LA as examples of teams that groomed a good strong core, and added to it at the right time.

You and Regier are on the same page. You believe in this core. And want to add to it, like LA and St Louis did.

I think this core is fatally flawed, and think adding to it won't change much. Not to mention the assets necessary to make significant additions.

Im looking forward to 2014 when this core is finally gone entirely. At which point I expect Lindy Ruff would be fired after 2 more swings and nothing but a token playoff showing or 2.
I don't obssess over "cores". IMO they are nothing more than a way to group certain players to either praise or ***** about them.

Well built teams win Cups not "strong cores" or strong "core players". You need to fill holes on your team to have a chance at success. Thats why Cup teams that lose their depth but have their "core" players don't have the same success.

You're still not getting my point but I'm beginning to realize I'm not doing a great job of explaining it.

You feel the problem is Vanek/Roy/Pommer or whatever player you feel like chosing to add to what ever core you feel like complaining about. You said in another thread that we have 3 cores.

I'm arguing that we have holes that need filling to make us a contender. Filling those holes may include getting rid of one or more of the players you feel are part of the problem. Or it may not. But arguing that they're THE problem when we have a ton of holes on the roster IMO is missing the bigger picture.

As an example of my point. We've only had Roy as our only consistantly productive and healthy top 6 center since the captains left (up until he got hurt of course). Now is the problem that Roy is the only one we've had in that time frame? Or is the problem that we haven't another center to rely on, other than Roy, in the top 6? I would argue not having that other center is the bigger problem.

I'm not arguing that if we simply add depth we are instantly Cup contenders. I'm saying that singling out the top players on an undermanned team is unfair to those players.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 03:45 PM
  #27
CarlWinslow
@hiphopsicles
 
CarlWinslow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
So we carry on with our depth, miss the playoffs or get bounced in the first round again a couple more times, and Roy Vanek and Pomminville are all gone buy the time these "home runs" are NHL regulars anyway?



The reality is the only success we've had in the last decade was based on a core that isn't here... Drury, Briere, Campbell, Hank, McKee etc.... Once they turned the keys over to the current group we''ve done squat.

Its been 5 years, whats gonna change?
What is he alternative? Blow up the team? I think this group is too good to blow up.

They have been great when healthy and motivated.

Honestly, as much as I like Lindy Ruff, I would move him out before I completely changed the core.

I do think some core players are expendable though, notably Roy. If he could be exchanged for a bigger, more effort driven type of offensive C, we would be better off.

CarlWinslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 03:53 PM
  #28
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreddieBisco View Post
What makes me laugh is the thought process around here on Derek Roy.95% of you think he's garbage and should dump him for picks.
I don't think that's the thought process of 95% of folks on this board.

Three trades I've seen, just recently, involving Roy:

- Roy as part of a bigger deal to acquire Bobby Ryan
- Roy for Bolland
- Roy for McNeill (or Pirri, or Kruger) and a 2nd

There's a difference between dumping Roy, and trading Roy for value in return.

I'm not a Roy fan, but I'm also not interesting in dumping Roy for peanuts. I think most Sabres fans that don't like Roy would take that position as well.

Der Jaeger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 03:57 PM
  #29
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
I'm of the opinion that Roy and Vanek ARE the complimentary piece you put around a core.

We gotta establish a core.

Hopefully Myers, Foligno, Hodgson and Ennis is a start.

I like this idea... though I don't like the idea of "cores." It's unnecessary categorization.

I like the idea that Buffalo chooses to build around Myers, Hodgson, Ennis, and Foligno, with Vanek and Roy becoming complimentary players. I think that concept immediately changes the question (problem statement) from:

How can we add to Vanek, Roy, Pominville to become contenders?

to

How can we add to Hodgson, Ennis, Myers, and Foligno to become contenders?

I'd rather spend energy answering the second question if I were Regier.

Der Jaeger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 04:00 PM
  #30
enrothorne
A DJ saved my life
 
enrothorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Downtown Buffalo
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,523
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to enrothorne
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
so you are equating Brown, Kopitar, Doughty with Vanek, Pominville, Myers?

Are you willing to trade assets like Ennis and Foligno to add a Mike Richards (Schenn+Simmonds)?

Are you willing to trade Tyler Myers (Jack Johnson+1st) to snag a high end player like Jeff Carter?

Do believe enough in the Pom/Van/Roy/Miller core... to sacrifice the assets it would take to add the pieces LA needed to add? They believed in their core enough to make those kind of moves.

Really. Take a minute and think about that.

I used Backes/St Louis and Brown/LA as examples of teams that groomed a good strong core, and added to it at the right time.

You and Regier are on the same page. You believe in this core. And want to add to it, like LA and St Louis did.

I think this core is fatally flawed, and think adding to it won't change much. Not to mention the assets necessary to make significant additions.

Im looking forward to 2014 when this core is finally gone entirely. At which point I expect Lindy Ruff would be fired after 2 more swings and nothing but a token playoff showing or 2.
Hopefully it won't take that long, but yes.

enrothorne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 04:02 PM
  #31
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I don't obssess over "cores". IMO they are nothing more than a way to group certain players to either praise or ***** about them.
Or it's a way to avoid a decent debate. I think the bolded is a cop out to get out of the debate.

Or maybe you don't obsess over cores because Buffalo doesn't have one? How did you feel about cores when we had Briere, Drury, Lydman, Tallinder, Campbell... and the depth behind them was in its right place? (although I'd still argue that team was improperly built behind the core... too much skill, not enough playoff hockey types)

Quote:
Well built teams win Cups not "strong cores" or strong "core players". You need to fill holes on your team to have a chance at success. Thats why Cup teams that lose their depth but have their "core" players don't have the same success.
Well built teams start with a strong core: deep down the middle, excellent top 4 defense. Yes, you need to fill the holes around the blueprint/core. Yes, you need quality depth. Yes, you need holes filled with the "right" players. You need roles filled. depth of variety. etc.... but it ALL starts with the core.

if a Cup team lost their core (kane, toews, keith, seabrook, hossa), instead of their depth (Ladd, Buff, Versteeg, Fraser, etc)... the would go from a Cup winner to a Bottom Feeder, instead of a Cup Winner to a playoff team

Quote:
You're still not getting my point but I'm beginning to realize I'm not doing a great job of explaining it.
I get your point. It's incredibly simple. And generic. It allows you avoid trying to put your point "in play" with regards to the Sabres.

I'll waste my typing just to see if you give it an honest go...

Take the 2 big trades LA made, that took them from fringe playoff team, to a CUP.
Richards and Carter.

You say we need depth around our top talent (i call it core, whatever). You referenced what LA did. So I ask you, Do you believe enough in the 3 year window (2 yrs left) to add to our "top talent" (LA didn't move any of theirs) to acquire the pieces necessary to build the depth

Schenn = Hodgson/Ennis
Simmonds = Foligno
Johnson = Myers/McNabb
1st = #21

Are you making the moves from our youth/talent/pipeline to add to our top players/core, to build the depth that LA did to contend for a cup?

Do you think we are a piece or 2 away? Last year, you thought we were ONE top 6 center away from contending... so should we Trade Ennis+Foligno for Mike Richards? giving us Roy-Richards-Hodgson down the middle?

You use LA as an example of building depth... So I am asking you if you are willing to build that depth the way they did?

Or are we going to trade 2nd rounders for the Brad Boyes of the league, and sign another Ville Leino for depth?

Quote:
You feel the problem is Vanek/Roy/Pommer or whatever player you feel like chosing to add to what ever core you feel like complaining about. You said in another thread that we have 3 cores.
Van/Roy/Poms/Miller is the core i've been complaining about for years. They have been eating up top contracts for 3-5 years. It's been their team... is it not?

I made a joke about cores... the rochester core is the players who played in Roch during the lockout... the ruff core included the roch core+ hecht, and in the past lydallinder/grier.

its an irrelevant point.

Quote:
I'm arguing that we have holes that need filling to make us a contender. Filling those holes may include getting rid of one or more of the players you feel are part of the problem. Or it may not. But arguing that they're THE problem when we have a ton of holes on the roster IMO is missing the bigger picture.
I want to hear what you are willing to part with to fill those rather large holes.

and if we trade from the "core" to fill those holes, doesn't that create another hole?
Quote:
As an example of my point. We've only had Roy as our only consistantly productive and healthy top 6 center since the captains left (up until he got hurt of course). Now is the problem that Roy is the only one we've had in that time frame? Or is the problem that we haven't another center to rely on, other than Roy, in the top 6? I would argue not having that other center is the bigger problem.
what's the difference between those 2 questions?
I think you mean, is Roy the problem? or is not having another top 6 center the problem?

My answer is BOTH.

Quote:
I'm not arguing that if we simply add depth we are instantly Cup contenders. I'm saying that singling out the top players on an undermanned team is unfair to those players.
that's a good excuse. I think patching them all up with letters means leave your excuses at the door.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 04:12 PM
  #32
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlWinslow View Post
What is he alternative? Blow up the team? I think this group is too good to blow up.

They have been great when healthy and motivated.

Honestly, as much as I like Lindy Ruff, I would move him out before I completely changed the core.

I do think some core players are expendable though, notably Roy. If he could be exchanged for a bigger, more effort driven type of offensive C, we would be better off.
I think the last 5 years has proven that they aren't very good.

Motivation being an issue is a huge red flag.... pros in their late 20's shouldn't need rah rah coaching.

Karate Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 04:16 PM
  #33
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,107
vCash: 500
I would pay good money to have the word 'core' auto-replaced with 'wang-doodler' in every post.

It's getting rather annoying to see the damn word in every 3rd post, yet 45 definitions of it at the same time.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 06:42 PM
  #34
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Something else to contemplate regarding Roy/Vanek/Poms/Miller....

All of their contracts are going to be done after 1, 2, 2 and 2 seasons respectively....

So... Who we gonna pay big money to keep out of that group?

Do you mortgage the future (Armia, Pysyk, Foligno, Draft picks) to build around those 3 for the next 2 years, or trade them for prospects and picks and build around the future?

Karate Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 07:09 PM
  #35
dma0034
Registered User
 
dma0034's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Doesn't matter at all because of "Since the Lockout".... playing extra seasons when you're helps with that....

dma0034 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 08:15 PM
  #36
enrothorne
A DJ saved my life
 
enrothorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Downtown Buffalo
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,523
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to enrothorne
Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0034 View Post
Doesn't matter at all because of "Since the Lockout".... playing extra seasons when you're helps with that....
I... don't understand this.

enrothorne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 09:21 PM
  #37
kirby11
Registered User
 
kirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
Something else to contemplate regarding Roy/Vanek/Poms/Miller....

All of their contracts are going to be done after 1, 2, 2 and 2 seasons respectively....

So... Who we gonna pay big money to keep out of that group?

Do you mortgage the future (Armia, Pysyk, Foligno, Draft picks) to build around those 3 for the next 2 years, or trade them for prospects and picks and build around the future?
I hope it's the bolded section...how many more pieces need to be added to the core before they can win? keep pominville as veteran leadership (yes, as Jame will say, he hasn't won anything, but he stepped up as captain this past year and is a solid all around player. I also think that, for this particular team, he's more important than, say, a Justin Williams was to LA since he's the only one out of the "core" or "Rochester group" or whatever you want to call them that did not struggle last year), maybe miller too depending on the goalie situation w/ enroth and how those 2 are doing at that point in their careers.

kirby11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2012, 09:24 PM
  #38
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Karate Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirby11 View Post
I hope it's the bolded section...how many more pieces need to be added to the core before they can win? keep pominville as veteran leadership (yes, as Jame will say, he hasn't won anything, but he stepped up as captain this past year and is a solid all around player. I also think that, for this particular team, he's more important than, say, a Justin Williams was to LA since he's the only one out of the "core" or "Rochester group" or whatever you want to call them that did not struggle last year), maybe miller too depending on the goalie situation w/ enroth and how those 2 are doing at that point in their careers.
I started a thread devoted to the impending mass exodus of forwards after the 2013-2014 season just a few minutes ago

Karate Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:05 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.