Jump to content

JohnC

Members
  • Content Count

    11,979
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,605 Excellent

About JohnC

  • Rank
    UDFA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. What isn't hypothetical is that the new coach in his first year took a stripped down team and made the playoffs for the first time in nearly a generation. That seems to be forgotten in the evaluation of this regime's performance in its young tenure. Chuck Knox is arguably the best coach that this franchise has had in its distinguished and not so distinguished history. Yet, in my opinion McDermott accomplished more with less in his inaugural year. You never here a peep about that from the snarling critics. No one is suggesting that this administration hasn't made mistakes. They certainly have. But if one is fair-minded and put things in perspective the overview is that they have done good job and have successfully laid the groundwork for more success.
  2. I don't understand the issue of a choice or not. When McDermott took over the reigns he repeatedly publicly stated what he was going to do. It was going to be a complete rebuilding not only of the roster and restructuring the cap but also the organization. He had a vision of the type of people and players he wanted and quickly executed it. I understand that there were other approaches to take. That's as obvious as A is the first letter of the alphabet and Z is the last letter. No one needs to be constantly reminded that there are different strategies to run an operation. From day one there was no deviation from what the new HC stated he was going to do. What's the point of rehashing the rehash? What's the point of ad nauseum haranguing about the same point that another approach could have been taken when we are entering into year three following the declared strategy made upon assuming the job? It gets to be tiresome.
  3. When I go I usually go for the fish combo that includes fries. I'm a common man who has pedestrian tastes. Simple solutions that don't call for meetings. Either widen the door or learn to come in and go out sideways.
  4. If you go to McD's for the fries or anything else on the menu what do you expect to get? If you have gourmet tastes then that isn't the establishment for you.
  5. Simple solution: Use the microwave.
  6. The problem isn't stating an A and B option when there is only an A and B option. The problem is constantly stating a preferred option and acting as if the other option is held by naïve fools.
  7. Some people blinded by their own brilliance believe that they are novel thinkers by creating the paradigm of success and failure. Inspector Clouseau and Forrest Gump could have come to the same conclusion in less than a New York minute.
  8. Isn't that the system/standard for most organizations?
  9. I'm a little surprised at the no move clause for Caserio. The standard approach is that after gaining permission to talk to one's staffer if a promotion is offered the staffer is allowed to leave. I suspect that there were problems relating to the initial conduct without getting permission. There is something smelly about how the approach was made by Houston.
  10. The clowns you refer to will never melt away. It's their life mission to state on every Allen topic that the Bills should have drafted Mahomes or Watson a year earlier. Their life moto is: "If only we would have done this instead of doing that." For them it's all about the retrospect and little to do with moving forward. Their world view is could've and should've. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=movie+on+the+waterfront+i+could+have+been+a+champion+scene+with&&view=detail&mid=58B3830F7C00554B487558B3830F7C00554B4875&&FORM=VRDGAR
  11. I'm very confident that if a deal for Vesey is made it would not require much in return. If he is being dangled by the Rangers that indicates that he is not in their plans and would want to get something for him before he is eventually dispatched. He's certainly not a prolific scorer but his hallmark is that he is a good two way player. I don't see this new coaching regime being as tolerant of loose play as the prior regime. Another player that the GM has to account for with his cap space is Montour. He will be a free agent after next year. This team can't afford too many quality subtractions.
  12. If the Sabres are going after a player such as Vesey it tells you that the GM is determined to get more production out of the third and fourth lines. Gergs and Larrsson are gritty defensive players. Scoring wise they are impotent. I don't think one of them or maybe even both of them will be on next year's roster.
  13. I doubt that any of the top tier free agents have an interest in Buffalo. But that isn't the only restraint. You can't consider expensive long terms contracts without factoring in how it will foreclose your contract options with your own best players. In the not too distant future Reinhart's contract will have to be addressed, and a little farther down the line Dahlin is going to be in position to earn a maximum contract. What I see happening is intermediate deals such as the Flyer and Capital defenseman swap materializing because teams will have no choice but to move out bigger contracts and better players to stay within the cap and apply the saved money to sign players who are already on the team. That's what happened in the Washington deal. The reality is that most often player decisions revolve around the financial puzzle that needs to be smartly assembled.
  14. The below link is a mock draft. What is starting to crystalize is that when you review the mock drafts the same names and general rankings come up. We should come away with a good player who could be ready in a couple of years. I don't envision the GM trading his high first round but I can envision him dealing off his low first round pick in a deal to get player ready to play next season. https://www.diebytheblade.com/2019/4/17/18411210/very-early-2019-nhl-mock-draft-buffalo-sabres-jack-hughes-kaapo-kakko
  15. We have a difference in opinion that won't be reconciled. I do believe in decorum. In my view certain behavior may be appropriate in one setting but not necessarily in another. That adjustment to the setting and situation doesn't translate into compromising one's principles. It falls within the realm of civility. Some people believe that it is acceptable to shout down a speaker with whom you disagree with. I don't. What I find bothersome is that there is a self-centered mind-set that crimps the expression of others. You might find that liberating while I find it to be stifling. If you want to expand the circle you do it by respectfully engaging with people you disagree with. Subduing them gets you nowhere other than intensifying the passions. We just simply disagree on this issue.
×
×
  • Create New...