and i agree with you on all of that. he shouldn't get a free pass for the previous 7 years - which also come with an asterisk because it dates back to when Tommy G. took ownership and the bottom line was the key.

let's see Darcy get thru a season of having an owner who could care less about the bottom line. if things don't pan out the rest of the way, fine, he can go.

i know all the armchair GMs and coaches think it's so damn easy, but for (frank)s sake, i'd like to see another GM do any better with the same scouting dept. and ownership that Darcy has had for the past 7 years.
- EricNearBuffalo

To be fair, I know Darcy had some restrictions but under Golisano he could still spend pretty close to the cap. Under Golisano Darcy signed a few bad contracts. The post lockout team fell apart partly because Darcy lacks ant foresight.

He does supposedly have free reign now and yet again he has done nothing to help this team. We were falrering Starting in early November and he just sat back and watched. I may be jaded but, I'll never be convinced that he a quality gm. A hell of a yes man though, I'll give him that

Well if chicago will trade us your boy Toews I'm all in...
But isn't it more like we sign our stud in free agency (parise)
And develop a possible #1 in Galchenyuk ?
And if he only plays at a "#2" level, but we also get that outta ennis, adam, or whoever...
Then aren't we still in pretty good shape?
- jdfitz77

We would probably be in better shape than now just because the center depth on this team couldn't possibly be any worse. It doesn't mean that it will actually work out. But, that's the risk you have to take. There's no guarantees in any of it. It's really just a crap shoot, especially when you're talking about young players.

i tend to blame a lack of forward puck possession on stupid toe-drags and passes just inside the blueline that opposition dmen have learned to expect playing against the Sabres.
- EricNearBuffalo

Tat's a huge part of it

8
- gerbe75pts

We are 7 points behind Florida for 8th. YOU suck at math!!!!

We are 7 points behind Florida for 8th. YOU suck at math!!!!
- Goobacks

Also have 3 games IH on Winny...

They're all equally important. If you don't have one or another, the area you have that should be your strength also ends up exposed. That's why they're called a "team." Every player plays an important part. If you have good centers but no wingers, you don't have anyone to put the puck in the net. If you don't have a center to feed the winger, again, the puck doesn't end up in the net. If you're D stinks you end up hemmed into your own end for the entire night and the puck can't end up in the net. Even if you have the best goalie, the scoring output is poor enough that even he looks poor.
- HonkFortheGoose

Everybody has a role. Some are just more important than others. I just think you can get by with average wingers a lot easier than with average centers or d. Again, not saying it's right or wrong. Jusy my view on it and how I would build a team

This is a rare time when I actually agree with Jeremy White. It's all about puck possession and the fact that our forwards can rarely control the puck hurts this team and defense more than anything
- RayHatesDomi

Don't disagree,
But when 30 sec of your 45 sec shift is spent in your own zone trying to help get the puck out its kinda tough to hold onto the puck when all your energy is spent helping out the defense

And I just don't understand why your playmaker had to play center & can't be the LW or RW on a particular line?
It's not like I'm saying go with 4 "gaustads" up the middle
Ennis & Adam have #2 potential & Galchenyuk has more than that
With strong wingers I think they would be fine

And frankly,
Teams don't give up true #1 centers anyways
I don't think Crosby or even a "backstrom" is getting traded anytime soon

Don't disagree,
But when 30 sec of your 45 sec shift is spent in your own zone trying to help get the puck out its kinda tough to hold onto the puck when all your energy is spent helping out the defense

And I just don't understand why your playmaker had to play center & can't be the LW or RW on a particular line?
It's not like I'm saying go with 4 "gaustads" up the middle
Ennis & Adam have #2 potential & Galchenyuk has more than that
With strong wingers I think they would be fine

And frankly,
Teams don't give up true #1 centers anyways
I don't think Crosby or even a "backstrom" is getting traded anytime soon
- jdfitz77

Nope. You have to draft those players. It's the only way you get one. Sometimes you may get lucky and pry someone away, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. There are better odds at drafting guys and hoping they turn into that #1 guy.

They're all equally important. If you don't have one or another, the area you have that should be your strength also ends up exposed. That's why they're called a "team." Every player plays an important part. If you have good centers but no wingers, you don't have anyone to put the puck in the net. If you don't have a center to feed the winger, again, the puck doesn't end up in the net. If you're D stinks you end up hemmed into your own end for the entire night and the puck can't end up in the net. Even if you have the best goalie, the scoring output is poor enough that even he looks poor.
- HonkFortheGoose

That's kinda what I've been saying
Does it matter if you best scorer on line 1 is a RW and your best assist guy is a center or vice versa?
All that matters is do those 3 guys work well enough to put the puck in the net consistently

Example;
Is Detroit any better or worse when zetterberg plays LW instead of center?
No, it just matters that they have a "zetterberg"

We can't get "stamkos"
So let's get "parise"
"datsyuk" isn't going anywhere, but Brown might be available

Just make the team better the most efficient way possible

Nope. You have to draft those players. It's the only way you get one. Sometimes you may get lucky and pry someone away, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. There are better odds at drafting guys and hoping they turn into that #1 guy.
- HonkFortheGoose

And that's why I don't get all the "#1" center talk
It just isn't gonna happen
Carter has an attitude, stastny has 4 consecutive years of declining stats at a huge cap #, getzlaf is outta shape & has attitude issues himself (as per homer)
All these dogs have fleas

And we'd have to likely give up a stupid amount to get them
No thanks

That's kinda what I've been saying
Does it matter if you best scorer on line 1 is a RW and your best assist guy is a center or vice versa?
All that matters is do those 3 guys work well enough to put the puck in the net consistently

Example;
Is Detroit any better or worse when zetterberg plays LW instead of center?
No, it just matters that they have a "zetterberg"

We can't get "stamkos"
So let's get "parise"
"datsyuk" isn't going anywhere, but Brown might be available

Just make the team better the most efficient way possible
- jdfitz77

It really is a matter of finding players that complement each other the best. The problem that the Sabres have is there's too much of the same thing. Too many soft, skilled guys with not enough sandpaper to help get the job done. You don't really want the exact same type of guys playing together, because it's predictable for the other team. There's nothing you can do to essentially "change things up" during a game to help get guys going or confuse the opposition.

And that's why I don't get all the "#1" center talk
It just isn't gonna happen
Carter has an attitude, stastny has 4 consecutive years of declining stats at a huge cap #, getzlaf is outta shape & has attitude issues himself (as per homer)
All these dogs have fleas

And we'd have to likely give up a stupid amount to get them
No thanks
- jdfitz77

The only one of those I'd be remotely interested in is Getzlaf. But I'm not really willing to give up the farm for him either. As much as people around here complain, the Sabres actually do draft players well. People just have a tendency to look at it right now and say they don't because of the lack of centers. That doesn't mean the guys they did draft aren't quality players that will be on an NHL roster in the next however many years.

Everybody has a role. Some are just more important than others. I just think you can get by with average wingers a lot easier than with average centers or d. Again, not saying it's right or wrong. Jusy my view on it and how I would build a team
- RayHatesDomi

I don't even disagree
Heck, if the isles would trade Tavares I'd freak
I just don't see it happening
So if we can improve our top def pair, do it
If we can improve LW, do it
Or whatever position as economically as possible

If the sharks would trade us pavelski that'd be great too
I'm just looking at players that I think will help us the most for what we have to pay them & give up to get them

I just don't see too many options the way you'd build the team, so I'm trying to find another way to do it
No disrespect intended

It really is a matter of finding players that complement each other the best. The problem that the Sabres have is there's too much of the same thing. Too many soft, skilled guys with not enough sandpaper to help get the job done. You don't really want the exact same type of guys playing together, because it's predictable for the other team. There's nothing you can do to essentially "change things up" during a game to help get guys going or confuse the opposition.
- HonkFortheGoose

Agree
The lines I suggested that spurred this debate were:
Vanek-ennis-Pommer
Parise-adam-Brown
Armia-Galchenyuk-Kassian
Gerbe-goose-kaleta

A good blend of speed, grit and scoring
That's my opinion anyways
And I'm not concerned about which line is even my "#1" bc on any given night it could be any of those top3

I skipped like 15 pages of comments so forgive me if this has been addressed, but does anyone think that a top 4 (maybe top 2) D and a #1 is a pretty good price for Carter? Roy, at least statistically is probably a step below Carter, so is it unrealistic to think we could get a #1 for him. What about Gaustad? He doesn't score much but his intangibles are pretty desirable for a team who is playoff bound. Could we get a #1 for each?

I skipped like 15 pages of comments so forgive me if this has been addressed, but does anyone think that a top 4 (maybe top 2) D and a #1 is a pretty good price for Carter? Roy, at least statistically is probably a step below Carter, so is it unrealistic to think we could get a #1 for him. What about Gaustad? He doesn't score much but his intangibles are pretty desirable for a team who is playoff bound. Could we get a #1 for each?
- Pierceme69

if it's a team that could go deep and end up with a late #1, i wouldn't rule it out.

I skipped like 15 pages of comments so forgive me if this has been addressed, but does anyone think that a top 4 (maybe top 2) D and a #1 is a pretty good price for Carter? Roy, at least statistically is probably a step below Carter, so is it unrealistic to think we could get a #1 for him. What about Gaustad? He doesn't score much but his intangibles are pretty desirable for a team who is playoff bound. Could we get a #1 for each?
- Pierceme69

The problem is that even though Roy isn't statistically that far off of Carter, his name is no where near as "big." Carter played on a very good Philly team, where Roy has played in the city of irrelevance for the most part. Philly is so much more visible of a market, that just makes their players worth more, whether or not they've actually produced better.

The problem is that even though Roy isn't statistically that far off of Carter, his name is no where near as "big." Carter played on a very good Philly team, where Roy has played in the city of irrelevance for the most part. Philly is so much more visible of a market, that just makes their players worth more, whether or not they've actually produced better.
- HonkFortheGoose

I get your point but he was on Columbus all year. Some of the tarnish came off from that as well as his reputation as a booze hound. LA must really trust their coaching staff to reunite Carter with Richards.

I get your point but he was on Columbus all year. Some of the tarnish came off from that as well as his reputation as a booze hound. LA must really trust their coaching staff to reunite Carter with Richards.
- Pierceme69

Roy has that same reputation though, so that's pretty comparable as well. Though I don't believe any rumors have surfaced about him having an affair with a teammates wife, so I guess he has that going for him still.

Plus Columbus has been so bad all year they've been the talk of the NHL all season.

Roy has that same reputation though, so that's pretty comparable as well. Though I don't believe any rumors have surfaced about him having an affair with a teammates wife, so I guess he has that going for him still.

Plus Columbus has been so bad all year they've been the talk of the NHL all season.
- HonkFortheGoose

who's been screwing around?

who's been screwing around?
- EricNearBuffalo

At the beginning of last season it came out that Carter had an affair with Hartnell's wife. The locker room was completely divided because of it. I think that's what helped the GM to pull the trigger and trade him. If the guy can't respect his teammate, he didn't want him there.

At the beginning of last season it came out that Carter had an affair with Hartnell's wife. The locker room was completely divided because of it. I think that's what helped the GM to pull the trigger and trade him. If the guy can't respect his teammate, he didn't want him there.
- HonkFortheGoose

Hartnell is having a great year this season. I wonder if he kicked her to the curb. Miller = Vezina?

The problem is that even though Roy isn't statistically that far off of Carter, his name is no where near as "big." Carter played on a very good Philly team, where Roy has played in the city of irrelevance for the most part. Philly is so much more visible of a market, that just makes their players worth more, whether or not they've actually produced better.
- HonkFortheGoose

I agree to a point, but Carter is considered more valuable than Roy because he has been a 46 goal scorer, 30+ two other times (36 & 33) and 29 goals another year. Derek Roy has had one 30+ goal season (32). Goals are what win hockey games and they are what bring glamor and value to NHL forwards and Carter brings that skill and achievement with him. Carter could have had those stats in Buffalo and he would have been as valued by scouts and GM's just as much as if he played in Philly, NY, Toronto or MTL. Novice fans, they might value big city players more than small city ones.

I agree to a point, but Carter is considered more valuable than Roy because he has been a 46 goal scorer, 30+ two other times (36 & 33) and 29 goals another year. Derek Roy has had one 30+ goal season (32). Goals are what win hockey games and they are what bring glamor and value to NHL forwards and Carter brings that skill and achievement with him. Carter could have had those stats in Buffalo and he would have been as valued by scouts and GM's just as much as if he played in Philly, NY, Toronto or MTL. Novice fans, they might value big city players more than small city ones.
- GilPerreault

So that being said, back to my original question. Carter fetched a #1 and a top 2-4 D. Can we get a #1 for Roy? Gaustad?

So that being said, back to my original question. Carter fetched a #1 and a top 2-4 D. Can we get a #1 for Roy? Gaustad?
- Pierceme69

I don't see Gaustad garnering a 1st. Roy should but with his injury last year and his poor year since that injury, it might not be so cut and dry. With him picking up his game and centers being in demand, I'd say he gets a 1st.