Paetsch placed on waivers

by twoeightnine on Jan 4, 2010 2:55 PM EST

According to Bob McKenzie at TSN and via his twitter account.

http://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/7374274004

St. Louis puts Yan Stastny on re-entry waivers. Buffalo put Nathan Paetsch on waivers.

No other place is reporting it yet but this could be clearing space for Gerbe up here. Would hate to lose Paetsch's versatility (disregarding it's actual use or amount of use) but something had to give eventually. Wait and see what happens.

This is a fanpost written by a member of the community, it doesn't necessarily express the views or opinions of Die by the Blade

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Interesting … what was he making? I can’t imagine more than 1mill/yr.

Wonder if this is clearing any space for a potential move … hrmmm …

by sabre74kkn on Jan 4, 2010 5:22 PM EST reply actions

Only $1m a year.

I forgot that Kaleta was on IR so I’d say it’s making room for him.

All your tshirt needs.

by twoeightnine on Jan 4, 2010 5:32 PM EST up reply actions

Sekera is the new Paetsch

An upgrade offensively and defensively from Paetsch, IMO. Next year when one of our free agent d-men leaves, Sekera will be in the regular lineup.

by Andy Boron on Jan 4, 2010 5:46 PM EST reply actions

Very true.

I didn’t think of that. He’s been playing that “position” of late.

All your tshirt needs.

by twoeightnine on Jan 4, 2010 5:50 PM EST up reply actions

True, but will he bring the grit, work ethic, and attitude that Paetsch brought? I don’t know Sekera very well. How does he respond to being a healthy scratch so often? I’m surprised that Darcy couldn’t get anything for Paetsch. Paetsch seems like the ideal depth player.

by Traver on Jan 4, 2010 7:01 PM EST up reply actions

Maybe they’re just moving him to Portland to stay active? If he clears waivers, that is. I’d rather not lose him, he gives the Sabres great depth in both ends in case of injury — something necessary for a deep playoff run.

by lassathrax on Jan 4, 2010 7:16 PM EST reply actions

We must also remember that Weber is looking damn good down in Portland.

by Traver on Jan 4, 2010 7:36 PM EST reply actions

Very true. And I believe that if we were to lose Paetsch it wouldnt hit as hard because of Webers play.

"I don't know how to explain it but we seem to find eachother on the ice and make things happen... Yeah. Pass, shoot, score... Yeah. Pass.. Shoot.. And score."

by bflo on Jan 4, 2010 8:01 PM EST up reply actions

I know no one wants to hear it – but imagine if we had this kind of depth a few years ago. Say 2005-2006? ugh

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Jan 4, 2010 9:06 PM EST reply actions

I thought the same thing.

by Traver on Jan 4, 2010 9:32 PM EST up reply actions

Didn’t Paetsch play in game seven against Carolina that year, and play rather well? Those teams had some depth. It’s just that no team could have survived losing three of your top defensemen in such a short time.

by krytime on Jan 5, 2010 12:10 AM EST up reply actions

Paetsch played

but so did Rory Fitzpatrick, Doug Janik and Jeff Jillson

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Jan 5, 2010 12:18 AM EST up reply actions

Exactly, I’d take Sekera and Weber over any of those three for sure. Even if we had four defenders go down now (like we did then) we’d STILL have five defenders with NHL experience that are fairly reliable. I would have killed for five reliable defenders during that series with Carolina.

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Jan 5, 2010 12:30 AM EST up reply actions