h1

Bucky: You’re Killing Me!

April 1, 2008

Dear Bucky,

You write a nice article explaining the growth of Derek Roy as a player. You make me sort-of smile with this image in the second paragraph.

Barring an unforeseen rescue from the hockey gods, the probable scenario has the Sabres cleaning out their lockers Monday. It will coincide with Year in Review meetings with coach Lindy Ruff & Co, where a few players are expected to be twisting in their seats.

Oh, to be a fly for a day. Derek Roy will walk away from the year-ender unscathed given the season he’s had. At this point, he could kick back, throw his hands behind his hand and prop his feet on Ruff’s desk without getting any grief.

(Though if Roy-Z did that, I can just imagine Lindy lifting his eyebrow silently, and Derek removing the feet from the desk, properly chastened.)

Then, any and all good will you had from me was thrown away by your entry on Sabres Edge where you again flog the dead horse that is the Drury and Briere negotiations.

Everything was based on getting Drury and Briere signed, which would have set the market for Vanek. For the umpteenth time, Drury was prepared to sign a four-year contract worth $21.5 million. Briere was looking for five years and $25 million.

If the Sabres get those two locked up, they could have made an aggressive attempt to sign Vanek by using Drury’s and Briere’s contracts as the standard. Instead, the Sabres fiddled around with Drury, ignored Briere, did nothing with Vanek and wound up losing two players and paying through the nose for the third. By the way, it also would have increased their chances of signing Brian Campbell.

I get how signing D&B would have set the market for Vanek and allowed them to play the Edmonton offer sheet differently. I get it. But what I don’t get is how signing D&B would have helped them sign Soupy. Soupy wanted the kind of money he could get on the open market, not what he was worth. There’s a slight difference. The Sabres weren’t prepared to commit to that. Not to mention that the NHLPA had Brian Campbell’s balls locked away in a vault in Toronto, that certainly wasn’t helping the Sabres chances at all.

The article is nice and really does compliment Roy-Z, but any good the article does is washed away by the blog. Its nothing more than kicking the boys (and management) when they’re down. What purpose does it serve?

Sincerely,

Shots Off the Crossbar

No, no, no, no. That was my reaction to Greg W’s latest post on Fanhouse regarding on-glass advertising at hockey games. Didn’t I just write the other day that hockey ads are unobtrusive and easily ignored? I don’t want to have ads for dog food, ultimate fighting or the hunting show of the week broadcast in the middle of my hockey game. People complain that hockey’s hard enough to follow and now we’re going to put ads in the middle. (I don’t care that they say they won’t block the action. Just by being there, they will annoy the crap out of me.)

I work in media, and while I do like hearing about new advertising mediums, this one makes me cranky.

Advertisements

One comment

  1. […] be a great reprieve form the constant barrage of hate mail that you receive. Not to mention the countless blogs on the internet that mock you whenever […]



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: