So does this make sense?

[BlackMetalNinja]

Supposedly after Quinn's comments last night, we offered Drury essentially the same thing as the Rangers, but he seemed determined to be somewhere else next year...

Briere on the other hand, at least seemingly wanted to stay here but was insulted by our original offer... Plus the Sabres had Connolly pegged for his slot.

So, does it make sense for us to have gone this way, or should we have given up on Drury, knowing he wanted to leave even if we gave him the same money and gone after Briere, who we might have had to overpay slightly to keep?

Do we do that just to keep one of them to try and appease the fans or not?

And don't bother with the "we should have signed them months ago" crap, while it's true, we didn't and it's too late now, so please stick to the thread topic.

I don't know what I think of this. Most here were agreed that Drury was the one we needed to keep, but if he was so bound and determined to leave, I'm not sure we should have tried to throw all that money on him and lose out on others instead.

The one thing I do know is that it's turned into a mess all the way around and I don't think anybody's happy about that.

[snow1989]

I might have opened the vault a hair more for Drury....maybe 5.5m-6m tops. I would have never offered Briere over 6.5m, sorry....and Briere at one time mentioned a 'home town' discount....what exactly is the discount on $10 million???
Sadly I think some of us remember playing college, high school or even street hockey....and confuse our passion for the fact that it is a livelihood for these guys...

[tampabay25690]

Supposedly after Quinn's comments last night, we offered Drury essentially the same thing as the Rangers, but he seemed determined to be somewhere else next year...

Briere on the other hand, at least seemingly wanted to stay here but was insulted by our original offer... Plus the Sabres had Connolly pegged for his slot.

So, does it make sense for us to have gone this way, or should we have given up on Drury, knowing he wanted to leave even if we gave him the same money and gone after Briere, who we might have had to overpay slightly to keep?

Do we do that just to keep one of them to try and appease the fans or not?

And don't bother with the "we should have signed them months ago" crap, while it's true, we didn't and it's too late now, so please stick to the thread topic.

I don't know what I think of this. Most here were agreed that Drury was the one we needed to keep, but if he was so bound and determined to leave, I'm not sure we should have tried to throw all that money on him and lose out on others instead.

The one thing I do know is that it's turned into a mess all the way around and I don't think anybody's happy about that.

I agree with your statements. Know one is happy that both guys are gone but I think it was obvious that they weren't going to be back here this year, WELL I GUESS I DIDNT. The Sabres know they are going to have to pay Vanek big bucks. I still think the Sabres are a playoff team they have a ton of young talent. Wait till next year Free Agenst they will get almost $10 mill a year, that will be bad news for the SABRES!!!!!

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

It is starting to become evident that players don't want to play for this organization. Briere can say all he wants, it took him 4 hours to jump ship, if he really wanted to stay he would have worked out a deal with the team. It also could have been as simple as the Sabres telling him that their offer is final and they don't want him back for anything more.

[BlackMetalNinja]

It is starting to become evident that players don't want to play for this organization. Briere can say all he wants, it took him 4 hours to jump ship, if he really wanted to stay he would have worked out a deal with the team. It also could have been as simple as the Sabres telling him that their offer is final and they don't want him back for anything more.

I partially agree... he may have wanted to stay, but the offers were so far apart, I can't blame him at all for going. I'm pretty sure he knew the Sabres weren't going to throw anything like that his way. There's a fine line between "wanting to stay" and getting offered such a good deal that you can't turn it down.

[Philagape]

These are issues of commitment and loyalty.

Set aside dollar amounts for a moment ... you don't wait until a few days before the deadline to START negotiations. That shows the intelligence of a lazy frat boy doing his homework the night before it's due. That's not a sign of commitment. The day they cleaned out their lockers, the Sabres shouldn't have let them leave the building without new deals (so to speak).

And go back a year (I gotta bring it up because it's related to the present circumstances). The Sabres knew what kind of players they had, they led a young team to a deep playoff run, but they said, "No, we don't believe in you enough to extend you in advance." Again, not a very good foundation for a loyal relationship.

And then the Briere offer, an insulting irony that it was the same deal he would have jumped at a year ago. No raise for the guy who led the NHL in even-strength points. I'm standing with Briere telling the Sabres to go to hell after that.
And I'll bet anything that nailed the coffin for Drury as well. The two are close, and when he saw the way the Sabres do business, just like Peca did years earlier, he sees a team that puts tightwad bottom-line policies before a commitment to winning. Drury, being the competitor and winner he is, wants nothing to do with that and jumps ship. It's entirely consistent with the way he plays the game. I fully believe that players of integrity like Drury and Briere were very willing to stay, even for a discount, if they felt the Sabres were committed to them and committed to winning.

If there was a breakdown in loyalty, I put it all on the Sabres. They burned the bridges. They wouldn't commit, and they got left at the altar as a result.

[Philagape]

Wow, after I wrote that I read these quotes from Briere in today's News:

"Tell the fans that I was sincere when I said I wanted to stay in Buffalo,” Briere told The News. “That was my priority when the season was over, but at the same time, with any job or anything you do in life, with any employer, you want to feel wanted."

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/111087.html

[Philagape]

And this:

“They had time. If they were interested in my services they would have come back in a couple weeks after the season at the latest. All the other teams do that. But when it got to three weeks I thought, ‘Maybe they have other things to do.’ Four weeks? Five weeks? Six weeks? Then I knew they weren’t interested."

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/story/111231.html



I am so ashamed of this FO.

[patmoran2006]

Supposedly after Quinn's comments last night, we offered Drury essentially the same thing as the Rangers, but he seemed determined to be somewhere else next year...

Briere on the other hand, at least seemingly wanted to stay here but was insulted by our original offer... Plus the Sabres had Connolly pegged for his slot.

So, does it make sense for us to have gone this way, or should we have given up on Drury, knowing he wanted to leave even if we gave him the same money and gone after Briere, who we might have had to overpay slightly to keep?

Do we do that just to keep one of them to try and appease the fans or not?

And don't bother with the "we should have signed them months ago" crap, while it's true, we didn't and it's too late now, so please stick to the thread topic.

I don't know what I think of this. Most here were agreed that Drury was the one we needed to keep, but if he was so bound and determined to leave, I'm not sure we should have tried to throw all that money on him and lose out on others instead.

The one thing I do know is that it's turned into a mess all the way around and I don't think anybody's happy about that.
you make that paragraph sound like it DESERVES to be treated as an afterthought.