54 replies to this topic

[Buffalo Fan]

I think it's time for this guy to go as well.  IMHO he is damaged goods from a mental standpoint.  The house cleaning continues with this move.  Try to land a young defenseman with talent and high effort guy.
Rip this gd bandaid off!!!!!

[ThirtyEight]

Yeah good idea. trade 2/3 of our only good line, so we can have a really young team with no direction. The Oilers top 6 are basically all number 1 overalls and they are struggling. We need to move what isn't working, not what is working

[sabretribe]

If he brings us a #1 physical defenseman then i say go for it.  Thats what this team needs somebody that can skate and take the body

[Grumpy]

sabretribe, on 22 February 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

If he brings us a #1 physical defenseman then i say go for it.  Thats what this team needs somebody that can skate and take the body

Or several of them?

[Robviously]

Thread Killer, on 22 February 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

I think it's time for this guy to go as well.  IMHO he is damaged goods from a mental standpoint.  The house cleaning continues with this move.  Try to land a young defenseman with talent and high effort guy.
Rip this gd bandaid off!!!!!

Well, propose a trade and we'll talk it over. Demanding that we trade him for whatever isn't going to help though.

[sabretribe]

doubt ud get several sutters for pominville but maybe that kind of player and a pick

[inkman]

sabretribe, on 22 February 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

doubt ud get several sutters for pominville but maybe that kind of player and a pick

I'm pretty sure every team would take a 30 goal 70 point guy on their team.

[Grumpy]

inkman, on 22 February 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure every team would take a 30 goal 70 point guy on their team.

Yes

[apuszczalowski]

inkman, on 22 February 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure every team would take a 30 goal 70 point guy on their team.

Not Buffalo, fans would run him out of town for something else............

[TrueBluePhD]

Proposal: can we just have a trade thread? Makes more sense to me than making a new thread for each player we want to move.

[bunomatic]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 09:50 AM, said:

Proposal: can we just have a trade thread? Makes more sense to me than making a new thread for each player we want to move.

  This.

[DHawerchuk10]

sabretribe, on 22 February 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

doubt ud get several sutters for pominville but maybe that kind of player and a pick

Are you being sarcastic?  Pominville is one of the best two way wingers in the game.

[sabretribe]

Say we wanted a real defenseman.  Is Shea Weber straight up for pominville a bad trade?

[TrueBluePhD]

sabretribe, on 22 February 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

Say we wanted a real defenseman.  Is Shea Weber straight up for pominville a bad trade?

For Nashville, it's atrocious.

[Sabres Fan In NS]

Oh, TrueBlue .........

In my best Nancy K. voice ........ wwwwwwhhhhhhhyyyyyyyy

[inkman]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:

For Nashville, it's atrocious.

What if the Sabres throw in Gerbe and Leopold?

[LGR4GM]

inkman, on 22 February 2013 - 11:41 AM, said:

What if the Sabres throw in Gerbe and Leopold?

Leopold and Stafford

[MichFan]

ThirtyEight, on 22 February 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

Yeah good idea. trade 2/3 of our only good line, so we can have a really young team with no direction. The Oilers top 6 are basically all number 1 overalls and they are struggling. We need to move what isn't working, not what is working

How can you call our first line a good line when Pommers is -2 and Hodgson is -3?  Is it because between the 4-5 defensive zone blunders and turnovers per game each of these guys produce, they manage to score an occasional goal?

I don't see the first line as a chemistry line.  Vanek alone makes it work.  Pommers and Hodgson are replaceable.  Hodgson may have some upside since he is still young. Pommers has peaked.

I agree with OP, if there is value offered, move him.  I feel the same way about all but 6 players (Vanek, Miller, Ehrhoff, Sulzer, Kaleta, maybe Ennis).

Edited by MichFan, 22 February 2013 - 01:13 PM.

[Drewstaffordohfer2013]

To do list:
*Move Derek Roy and his 70 points
check
*Move Jason Pominville and his 70 points
check

*Go shopping for two 70 point scorers or one 140 point scorer or four 35 point scorers
check

I mean seriously, doesn't this team already have a problem scoring goals and you
want to give up one of our top offensive players ?

Tighten up the D and get rid of some dead weight guys like Hecht, Stafford, Sulzer, Leopold.
Brayden McNabb would bring some nasty to the D and get Tyler Myers head back on straight.

[LGR4GM]

MichFan, on 22 February 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

How can you call our first line a good line when Pommers is -2 and Hodgson is -3?  Is it because between the 4-5 defensive zone blunders and turnovers per game each of these guys produce, they manage to score an occasional goal?

I don't see the first line as a chemistry line.  Vanek alone makes it work.  Pommers and Hodgson are replaceable.  Hodgson may have some upside since he is still young. Pommers has peaked.

I agree with OP, if there is value offered, move him.  I feel the same way about all but 6 players (Vanek, Miller, Ehrhoff, Sulzer, Kaleta, maybe Ennis).

I'd trade Sulzer for a hot dog and a beer. Watch him play, he really is mediocre at best.

Drewstaffordohfer2013, on 22 February 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

Tighten up the D and get rid of some dead weight guys like Hecht, Stafford, Sulzer, Leopold.
Brayden McNabb would bring some nasty to the D and get Tyler Myers head back on straight.

Brayden McNabb doesn't have his own head on straight, I dont see how he will help Myers.  Myers needs to help himself and to do that he has to be smarter and he is not.

[Campy]

Drewstaffordohfer2013, on 22 February 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

To do list:
*Move Derek Roy and his 70 points
check
*Move Jason Pominville and his 70 points
check

*Go shopping for two 70 point scorers or one 140 point scorer or four 35 point scorers
check

I mean seriously, doesn't this team already have a problem scoring goals and you
want to give up one of our top offensive players ?

Tighten up the D and get rid of some dead weight guys like Hecht, Stafford, Sulzer, Leopold.
Brayden McNabb would bring some nasty to the D and get Tyler Myers head back on straight.

I don't take issue with your overall point, but Sulzer's been anything but dead weight this year  - he's probably been their most steady Dman so far.

[ThirtyEight]

Campy, on 22 February 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

I don't take issue with your overall point, but Sulzer's been anything but dead weight this year  - he's probably been their most steady Dman so far.

Yeah as long as Ehrhoff, Sekera, Regehr and Weber aren't on the blue line.

[nfreeman]

I wouldn't oppose trading Pommer as long as the return was good.  I would be OK with Pommer for O'Reilly although would hope for a pick or prospect or other sweetener coming back as well.

As for the top line, clearly it's been effective, but I wonder whether the team as a whole would've benefited from a Foligno/Tropp/Ott type playing with Vanek and Hodgy.  The current top line can obviously score, and is surprisingly good on the forecheck, but they seem to give up plenty of goals against and are certainly not hard to play against.  Having a guy like that play with Vanek and Hodgy would allow Pommer to play with Ennis and Foligno, while dumping Stafford elsewhere.

[inkman]

LGR4GM, on 22 February 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

I'd trade Sulzer for a hot dog and a beer.

Hot dog optional (isn't it always)

[Campy]

ThirtyEight, on 22 February 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

Yeah as long as Ehrhoff, Sekera, Regehr and Weber aren't on the blue line.

Weber has done okay in the dozen games he's dressed.  

Reggie got off to a decent start, but...  

And Ehrhoff has been wildly inconsistent this year while looking lost in his own end half the time.

I'm not arguing Sulzer is a better player than either Reggie or Christian, but I will argue that those two have grossly underperformed this year while Sulzer is his usual self - nothing spectacular but positionaly sound - it's more than we're getting out of of Reg or Erhoff so far...

These are opinions.  You don't have to agree with me, you are welcome to be wrong.

[LGR4GM]

inkman, on 22 February 2013 - 01:45 PM, said:

Hot dog optional (isn't it always)

Not a if its a Sahlens

nfreeman, on 22 February 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

I wouldn't oppose trading Pommer as long as the return was good. I would be OK with Pommer for O'Reilly although would hope for a pick or prospect or other sweetener coming back as well.

As for the top line, clearly it's been effective, but I wonder whether the team as a whole would've benefited from a Foligno/Tropp/Ott type playing with Vanek and Hodgy.  The current top line can obviously score, and is surprisingly good on the forecheck, but they seem to give up plenty of goals against and are certainly not hard to play against.  Having a guy like that play with Vanek and Hodgy would allow Pommer to play with Ennis and Foligno, while dumping Stafford elsewhere.

IDK why this is occurring in 2 dif threads but you dont trade a 65pt a yr vet for 22yr old kid and hope for a pick and prospect, you expect those in the return. That being said I would trade Pommers for O'Reilly and stuff.

Vanek_Hod_Kaleta... lol not sure that would work at all but it might be fun to watch.

[TrueBluePhD]

nfreeman, on 22 February 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

I wouldn't oppose trading Pommer as long as the return was good.  I would be OK with Pommer for O'Reilly although would hope for a pick or prospect or other sweetener coming back as well.

As for the top line, clearly it's been effective, but I wonder whether the team as a whole would've benefited from a Foligno/Tropp/Ott type playing with Vanek and Hodgy.  The current top line can obviously score, and is surprisingly good on the forecheck, but they seem to give up plenty of goals against and are certainly not hard to play against.  Having a guy like that play with Vanek and Hodgy would allow Pommer to play with Ennis and Foligno, while dumping Stafford elsewhere.

IMO the first line's propensity to give up goals is due almost entirely to Hodgson's cluelessness in his own zone, not the lack of an Ott/Foligno-type physical presence.

[Campy]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

IMO the first line's propensity to give up goals is due almost entirely to Hodgson's cluelessness in his own zone, not the lack of an Ott/Foligno-type physical presence.

I don't disagree that CoHo has had his share of D zone lapses, but can you remember a Sabres team that gave up as many quality shots as this year's does?

The blueliners' play from top to bottom has been very poor atrocious.  I guess what I'm saying is that there's plenty of blame to go around...

[sizzlemeister]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

IMO the first line's propensity to give up goals is due almost entirely to Hodgson's cluelessness in his own zone, not the lack of an Ott/Foligno-type physical presence.

Not to mention Pominville seems distracted on the ice compared to last season and seasons prior.

[716]

funny, I was just thinking Vanek for Taylor Hall and Justin Shultz.

[TrueBluePhD]

Campy, on 22 February 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

I don't disagree that CoHo has had his share of D zone lapses, but can you remember a Sabres team that gave up as many quality shots as this year's does?

The blueliners' play from top to bottom has been very poor atrocious.  I guess what I'm saying is that there's plenty of blame to go around...

Not absolving our defense at all, they've been horrid.  Just making an observation on why the top line is on for a seemingly large share of goals.

sizzlemeister, on 22 February 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

Not to mention Pominville seems distracted on the ice compared to last season and seasons prior.

Yea, it's weird.  Maybe I'm "misremembering" but it honestly seems like he's had more defensive gaffes this year than all of last year.

Edited by TrueBluePhD, 22 February 2013 - 02:50 PM.

[ThirtyEight]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

Yea, it's weird.  Maybe I'm "misremembering" but it honestly seems like he's had more defensive gaffes this year than all of last year.

I think it is generally the whole team not clicking. Everyone is making more mistakes this season (bar Miller)

[drnkirishone]

sabretribe, on 22 February 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

If he brings us a #1 physical defenseman then i say go for it.  Thats what this team needs somebody that can skate and take the body

I can only think of 2 players in all the NHL that fit that description and I don't see boston nor nashville trading them

[nfreeman]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

IMO the first line's propensity to give up goals is due almost entirely to Hodgson's cluelessness in his own zone, not the lack of an Ott/Foligno-type physical presence.

sizzlemeister, on 22 February 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

Not to mention Pominville seems distracted on the ice compared to last season and seasons prior.

Beat me to it.  Hodgy has certainly made his share of mistakes in the defensive zone, but so have Pommer and Vanek (including glaring ones by each of them in the last couple of games).

[MichFan]

LGR4GM, on 22 February 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

I'd trade Sulzer for a hot dog and a beer. Watch him play, he really is mediocre at best

That's absolutely crazy.  Sulzer has been our second best defender this season and is delivering great value for his contract numbers.  He's one of only two regular defenders with a positive +/-.  Possibly the best two moves Regier has made lately (trading for and then resigning), and probably an afterthought at that.  Not a star, but the kind of steady defender you need to build depth.

[TrueBluePhD]

I don't know what to think anymore when people wax poetic about Sulzer. I think he's been pretty bad. Slow decision making, poor passing, contact averse, turnover machine when pressured. The guy is a 7th defender in this league, no more. If he's been our second best defender (not close IMO), that says volumes more about how bad everyone else has been than how good Sulzer has been.

[Campy]

TrueBluePhD, on 22 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

I don't know what to think anymore when people wax poetic about Sulzer. I think he's been pretty bad. Slow decision making, poor passing, contact averse, turnover machine when pressured. The guy is a 7th defender in this league, no more. If he's been our second best defender (not close IMO), that says volumes more about how bad everyone else has been than how good Sulzer has been.

I'd probably say he's a 5-6 on some teams and a 7 on most (semantics).  

But so far, he's been among the best Dmen on this team. And that's my point - it has less to do with praising him and more to do with damning the others.  But calling one of the team's better performing Dmen "dead weight" doesn't seem accurate, expecially given the amount of non-performing dead weight currently on the roster.

Edited by Campy, 22 February 2013 - 04:23 PM.

[ThirtyEight]

Campy, on 22 February 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

I'd probably say he's a 5-6 on some teams and a 7 on most (semantics).  

But so far, he's been among the best Dmen on this team. And that's my point - it has less to do with praising him and more to do with damning the others.

I dunno, I'm just not that impressed with him. He has been a plus player mainly because Ehrhoff is his D-partner. I really think the ones I named have been better players than he has. I also think neither has under performed this season really. But I guess people notice different things

[Grumpy]

MichFan, on 22 February 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

That's absolutely crazy.  Sulzer has been our second best defender this season and is delivering great value for his contract numbers.  He's one of only two regular defenders with a positive +/-.  Possibly the best two moves Regier has made lately (trading for and then resigning), and probably an afterthought at that.  Not a star, but the kind of steady defender you need to build depth.

OMG

Drewstaffordohfer2013, on 22 February 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

To do list:
*Move Derek Roy and his 70 points
check
*Move Jason Pominville and his 70 points
check

*Go shopping for two 70 point scorers or one 140 point scorer or four 35 point scorers
check

I mean seriously, doesn't this team already have a problem scoring goals and you
want to give up one of our top offensive players ?

Tighten up the D and get rid of some dead weight guys like Hecht, Stafford, Sulzer, Leopold.
Brayden McNabb would bring some nasty to the D and get Tyler Myers head back on straight.

Actually, unless you want to let the facts get in the way, they do much better scoring goals than stopping them.

Edited by Grumpy, 22 February 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[Campy]

ThirtyEight, on 22 February 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

I dunno, I'm just not that impressed with him. He has been a plus player mainly because Ehrhoff is his D-partner. I really think the ones I named have been better players than he has. I also think neither has under performed this season really. But I guess people notice different things

It's odd that we watch the same games and see something completely different.  Unless you're taking a trip to Va Beach soon, It won't happen, but I'd love to watch a game with you so you can show me what you're seeing as it happens.  Who knows, maybe I'm missing something...

What I see is a D corps that has been as bad as I can ever remember a Sabres D corps being.  They get pinned in their own end, make very few good first passes out of the zone and more often than not are weak on the puck and weak along the boards.  At times I see them having no desire to block shots, and even worse, they have probably screened Miller on what, 4-5 goals already this year?

And if that's not enough, they chase and allow themselves to be pulled out of position.  Maybe it's because I played D so I notice them more, but if I see one more Dman leave an opponent sitting at Miller's doorstep to go below the goal line when a forward and another Dman is already there, I'm going to pull what's left of my hair out.  

I've seen play that would make an ECHL coach cringe, and it must improve or it won't matter who they have up front, in goal, or behind the bench...