HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

Bryz buyout - Miller to Flyers?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-29-2013, 02:48 PM
  #526
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresAreScaryGood View Post
And what did he say about contract talks? Are there any ongoing contract talks?
Doesn't sound like it. The interview's like, 3 minutes long, you can check it out.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 02:50 PM
  #527
SabresAreScaryGood
McDavid 2015!!!
 
SabresAreScaryGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Doesn't sound like it. The interview's like, 3 minutes long, you can check it out.
Im just really confused on the whole situation. COuld they possibly be upset with Ruff's firing? Its just so odd. When did Vanek decide he didnt want to be in Buffalo?

SabresAreScaryGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 02:54 PM
  #528
Rhett4
KALETA REBORN
 
Rhett4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Home of the 'Merks
Country: United States
Posts: 11,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresAreScaryGood View Post
Im just really confused on the whole situation. COuld they possibly be upset with Ruff's firing? Its just so odd. When did Vanek decide he didnt want to be in Buffalo?
Likely after they traded Pominville...which signaled a full rebuild and meant the end of his good friend in Buffalo.

Rhett4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 02:56 PM
  #529
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresAreScaryGood View Post
Im just really confused on the whole situation. COuld they possibly be upset with Ruff's firing? Its just so odd. When did Vanek decide he didnt want to be in Buffalo?
Well... the team kinda sucks and traded away one of its best players. Do you think Vanek gives a damn about Johan Larsson?

It's not like people expected at any point that he would definitely sign an extension here.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:07 PM
  #530
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresAreScaryGood View Post
Im just really confused on the whole situation. COuld they possibly be upset with Ruff's firing? Its just so odd. When did Vanek decide he didnt want to be in Buffalo?
Rebuild. I mean, isn't that obvious?

You don't trade away your captain and best two-way player for draft picks unless you don't intend to contend for about 5 years.

We're not going to be a choice place to be for any veteran with a say in the matter until we have young stars that buoy us back up, probably ones that we acquire through the draft.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:16 PM
  #531
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,611
vCash: 500
Buffalo will be out of "rebuild" mode within five years, or the front office won't be doing it right. It's not like the entire roster needs to be overhauled. IMO, to be a SC contender, they need one top-four D-man (two if Myers busts), two top-nine Cs, two top-six RWs, and maybe one LW (if Vanek is traded). We have McNabb and McCabe as D-man prospects. Larsson, Grigs, Girgs, and Armia as FW prospects. I see at least two pieces still needing to be added (assuming not all prospects pan out). It sure as @#$% shouldn't take five years to acquire those pieces, even if more pieces are required.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:24 PM
  #532
Rhett4
KALETA REBORN
 
Rhett4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Home of the 'Merks
Country: United States
Posts: 11,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Buffalo will be out of "rebuild" mode within five years, or the front office won't be doing it right. It's not like the entire roster needs to be overhauled. IMO, to be a SC contender, they need one top-four D-man (two if Myers busts), two top-nine Cs, two top-six RWs, and maybe one LW (if Vanek is traded). We have McNabb and McCabe as D-man prospects. Larsson, Grigs, Girgs, and Armia as FW prospects. I see at least two pieces still needing to be added (assuming not all prospects pan out). It sure as @#$% shouldn't take five years to acquire those pieces, even if more pieces are required.
They really need to add a couple elite players, which means either finding a way this year (likely impossible at this point) or completely sucking for a year or two. Throw in some development time, and they could be fairly bad for 5 years. Then again, I see your point...they could turn this thing around in less if they tried hard. I think they have some good, upcoming complementary pieces. Now they need the top-end talent.


Last edited by Rhett4: 06-29-2013 at 03:33 PM.
Rhett4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:32 PM
  #533
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Buffalo will be out of "rebuild" mode within five years, or the front office won't be doing it right. It's not like the entire roster needs to be overhauled. IMO, to be a SC contender, they need one top-four D-man (two if Myers busts), two top-nine Cs, two top-six RWs, and maybe one LW (if Vanek is traded). We have McNabb and McCabe as D-man prospects. Larsson, Grigs, Girgs, and Armia as FW prospects. I see at least two pieces still needing to be added (assuming not all prospects pan out). It sure as @#$% shouldn't take five years to acquire those pieces, even if more pieces are required.
Acquiring and developing are two different things.

Grigorenko is presumably one of our top 6 centers. How long do you think it'll take him to be ready to lead a team to the Stanley Cup? 24 years old sounds reasonable. He's not Crosby, he ain't doing it at 22, most likely. That's a five year period, man.

I'm not expecting a serious contender until about then. Look at every damn mock lineup of what our team will look like when it's good, it's all guys who aren't even in the league yet. 5 years is perfectly reasonable.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:34 PM
  #534
Rhett4
KALETA REBORN
 
Rhett4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Home of the 'Merks
Country: United States
Posts: 11,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Acquiring and developing are two different things.

Grigorenko is presumably one of our top 6 centers. How long do you think it'll take him to be ready to lead a team to the Stanley Cup? 24 years old sounds reasonable. He's not Crosby, he ain't doing it at 22, most likely. That's a five year period, man.

I'm not expecting a serious contender until about then.
I'm OK with not having a contender for 5 years, but I'd like them to make gradual steps. A playoff team in 3 years would be swell

Rhett4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:38 PM
  #535
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhett4 View Post
I'm OK with not having a contender in 5 years, but I'd like them to make gradual steps. A playoff team in 3 years would be swell
Definitely. I think that's very reasonable. A couple more high draft picks, then you really start rolling with what you've got.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:44 PM
  #536
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Rebuild. I mean, isn't that obvious?

You don't trade away your captain and best two-way player for draft picks unless you don't intend to contend for about 5 years.

We're not going to be a choice place to be for any veteran with a say in the matter until we have young stars that buoy us back up, probably ones that we acquire through the draft.
5 years is way too long a time frame. I don't think it'll take too long before there's a reasonable chance the return we got for Pominville is > Pominville.

I'm not saying they will be contenders in 5 years but I don't think trading Pominville implies Darcy thinks the way you said.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 03:48 PM
  #537
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Paxon View Post
5 years is way too long a time frame. I don't think it'll take too long before there's a reasonable chance the return we got for Pominville is > Pominville.

I'm not saying they will be contenders in 5 years but I don't think trading Pominville implies Darcy thinks the way you said.
Maybe Larsson = Pominville in 3 years, but we weren't contending with Pominville either. We needed to take several steps forward, and we're taking steps backwards instead. I stand by what I said in the terms I said it, that we're not planning to actually contend until around 2018.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 04:06 PM
  #538
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Maybe Larsson = Pominville in 3 years, but we weren't contending with Pominville either. We needed to take several steps forward, and we're taking steps backwards instead. I stand by what I said in the terms I said it, that we're not planning to actually contend until around 2018.
Well, I don't think the trade will have represented a step back in 3 years, that's my point. If Larsson = Pominville or close then that's a lateral step, but then we also got Hackett and #16 overall has a pretty fair shot of contributing within 3 years. Regardless of how you or I look at it, it's pretty conceivable that Darcy looks at it as he said: a retool, one that doesn't represent anything worse than a lateral step within couple years but will be a step forward in the long-term.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 04:20 PM
  #539
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Paxon View Post
Well, I don't think the trade will have represented a step back in 3 years, that's my point. If Larsson = Pominville or close then that's a lateral step, but then we also got Hackett and #16 overall has a pretty fair shot of contributing within 3 years. Regardless of how you or I look at it, it's pretty conceivable that Darcy looks at it as he said: a retool, one that doesn't represent anything worse than a lateral step within couple years but will be a step forward in the long-term.
Call me when we're a contender in 2016. We'll see.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 05:02 PM
  #540
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Call me when we're a contender in 2016. We'll see.
I specifically said that I'm not only not saying whether or not we'll be a contender in 2016, but that it's irrelevant to the point of contention.

You said the Pominville trade illustrates Darcy doesn't think we'll be a contender for 5 years. I illustrated, quite successfully I believe, that doesn't necessarily need to be the case. Whatever happens with the rest of the team just isn't really relevant because it's about Pominville vs the return. In a couple years I believe the return we got for Pominville will at least equal Pominville. Beyond that it will be greater than Pominville. So it didn't necessitate belief that we won't be a contender for 5 years to have made the trade; that belief would only need to apply to last year, this year, maybe next year.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 05:12 PM
  #541
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Paxon View Post
I specifically said that I'm not only not saying whether or not we'll be a contender in 2016, but that it's irrelevant to the point of contention.

You said the Pominville trade illustrates Darcy doesn't think we'll be a contender for 5 years. I illustrated, quite successfully I believe, that doesn't necessarily need to be the case. Whatever happens with the rest of the team just isn't really relevant because it's about Pominville vs the return. In a couple years I believe the return we got for Pominville will at least equal Pominville. Beyond that it will be greater than Pominville. So it didn't necessitate belief that we won't be a contender for 5 years to have made the trade; that belief would only need to apply to last year, this year, maybe next year.
I don't particularly care about the best plausible outcome, and I doubt Vanek does either. He can look at the team and surmise where it's probably going, same as 90% of this board (wherever the other 10% are, IDK). It walks like a rebuild, quacks like a rebuild, etc., it's not metaphysically impossible for things to turn around real sharply in a hurry, but where would you invest your future?

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 05:15 PM
  #542
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
I don't particularly care about the best plausible outcome, and I doubt Vanek does either. He can look at the team and surmise where it's probably going, same as 90% of this board (wherever the other 10% are, IDK). It walks like a rebuild, quacks like a rebuild, etc., it's not metaphysically impossible for things to turn around real sharply in a hurry, but where would you invest your future?
I didn't realize this was about Vanek's decision, I thought it was about Darcy's mindset. If I got lost along the way there it's my fault, but that's what I was talking about when I said what I said. I agree that trading Pominville is a negative from Vanek's perspective and as I said in this or another thread, Vanek doesn't give a damn about Johan Larsson.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 05:17 PM
  #543
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Paxon View Post
I didn't realize this was about Vanek's decision, I thought it was about Darcy's mindset. If I got lost along the way there it's my fault, but that's what I was talking about when I said what I said. I agree that trading Pominville is a negative from Vanek's perspective and as I said in this or another thread, Vanek doesn't give a damn about Johan Larsson.
Mm, I think that's where it started on the last page, but who can keep track....

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:02 PM
  #544
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,611
vCash: 500
Yes I agree development will take time, but we already have prospects that are about to be on the team, so for them that time frame should be cut down by 1-2 years. Grigorenko, or any other of these younger players, doesn't have to "lead" a SC team. They just have to be productive at both ends. By the time big playoff games come around (if the group being put together gets that far) players like Ehrhoff, Weber, Ott (if not Vanek/Miller also) will be the leaders. Also, some of the holes on the roster would end up being filled through UFA, I assume (maybe two semi-big roster spots), so development time wouldn't be an issue there.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:05 PM
  #545
SabresAreScaryGood
McDavid 2015!!!
 
SabresAreScaryGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,757
vCash: 500
The fan base is going to be very angry once again on Monday if nothing happens. You wonder why fans are so grumpy all the time lately? This is why. Then they ask us not to boo. Well show us something, stop talking about it.

SabresAreScaryGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:15 PM
  #546
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Yes I agree development will take time, but we already have prospects that are about to be on the team, so for them that time frame should be cut down by 1-2 years. Grigorenko, or any other of these younger players, doesn't have to "lead" a SC team. They just have to be productive at both ends. By the time big playoff games come around (if the group being put together gets that far) players like Ehrhoff, Weber, Ott (if not Vanek/Miller also) will be the leaders. Also, some of the holes on the roster would end up being filled through UFA, I assume (maybe two semi-big roster spots), so development time wouldn't be an issue there.
Are you serious? That is not a cup winning core. Maybe you just mean leaders in the moral, veteran savvy sense? If so, you still need people carrying the team on the ice. What plausible player is our #1 offensive weapon on a Stanley Cup run in 2016?

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:24 PM
  #547
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16,804
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresAreScaryGood View Post
The fan base is going to be very angry once again on Monday if nothing happens. You wonder why fans are so grumpy all the time lately? This is why. Then they ask us not to boo. Well show us something, stop talking about it.
I don't see what fans are legitimately grumpy about. It just seems like they think they know better than Darcy about how to get the best return for Vanek and Miller.

I understand impatience but people should just own up to their impatience rather than let it drive them to make undue criticisms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Are you serious? That is not a cup winning core. Maybe you just mean leaders in the moral, veteran savvy sense? If so, you still need people carrying the team on the ice. What plausible player is our #1 offensive weapon on a Stanley Cup run in 2016?
Grigorenko, Armia, Hodgson, Ennis...? Those players could reasonably be high end offensive players by 3 years time.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:26 PM
  #548
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Paxon View Post
I don't see what fans are legitimately grumpy about. It just seems like they think they know better than Darcy about how to get the best return for Vanek and Miller.

I understand impatience but people should just own up to their impatience rather than let it drive them to make undue criticisms.



Grigorenko, Armia, Hodgson, Ennis...? Those players could reasonably be high end offensive players by 3 years time.
I was responding to the bolded part of the previous post that said that Ehrhoff, Ott and Weber would lead the cup winning team.

haseoke39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:31 PM
  #549
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,611
vCash: 500
I'm talking about leadership. The veteran leaders don't have to be the most talented/most productive players. FWIW, Ehrhoff can be both.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 06:38 PM
  #550
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
I'm talking about leadership. The veteran leaders don't have to be the most talented/most productive players. FWIW, Ehrhoff can be both.
Then who will actually lead on the ice? Is Armia going to be the top line winger on a cup winner at age 22? Grigorenko a top six center on a cup winner at age 21? How many guys under 24 are you presuming are going to be in our top 6? You realize if you told this plan to fans of any other team, they'd have to laugh at you, right?

We don't even know if the guys you're presuming upon will stick in the NHL. It's not against the laws of physics or anything, but expecting a cup winner to emerge out of this group of prospects in the next 3 years is impractical to say the least.

And personally, I don't want Darcy doing his teambuilding strategy based on the most optimistically impracticable scenario.

Yes, 5 years. You can laugh at me mercilessly if they make it in 4. I think it's more likely than not that they don't make it at all.

haseoke39 is online now   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 01:03 PM.

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.