Buffalo Sabres & NHL 2018-19: Sabres picking 7th overall (6/21/19). Ralph Krueger hire as new head coach!

[BillsFan4]

7 hours ago, JohnC said:

I was open to trading Risto for second-line players. Now I am less so. It's easier to get forwards through trades and free agency than it is to get top two pairing defenseman. My complaint with Risto is that he tends to lose his focus and discipline. He can be easily provoked into losing sight of his responsibilities. Part of the problem is that he plays too many minutes. I'm thinking/hoping that few minutes might translate into few lapses.

 

Next year I seen Pilut and maybe Borgen added to the mix. Compared to a few years ago our defensive corps has been upgraded. That is not to say that there doesn't need more to do with that unit.  Some people (K-9) have a scathing view of Scandella. As a third pairing blue line player I have no problem with him.  

Yes, lower minutes, better d partners and better coaching with a better defensive structure would all help Risto. We saw Montour and other making similar mistakes when forced into Risto’s minutes at the end of the year. 

 

 

 

I am not completely opposed to trading Risto. He’s been here through all of the losing and makes his fair share of mistakes (like every other Sabre...). But it has to be the right trade.

 

What I am scared of is Risto being the scapegoat this offseason - that Jason Botterill will feel he NEEDS to trade Risto and will take whatever the best offer is this summer.

 

I give Botterill some slack on the ROR trade because there were some extenuating circumstances (his attitude+comments, the $7.5M bonus due July 1, his contract structure being all bonuses, etc).  I don’t see this as a ROR situation though, so I am not willing to cut Botterill the same slack with Risto. 

 

I just don't see where a Ristolainen trade has to be done. If the right offer comes, then ok. Take it. But otherwise I’d like to see what he looks like with better partners for a season (between Dahlin being in year 2 and a full year of Montour, we have the guys to help ease his burden. And who knows, Maybe there will even be a free agent addition...) and hopefully better coaching. 

 

 

 

 

[JohnC]

11 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

Yes, lower minutes, better d partners and better coaching with a better defensive structure would all help Risto. We saw Montour and other making similar mistakes when forced into Risto’s minutes at the end of the year. 

 

 

 

I am not completely opposed to trading Risto. He’s been here through all of the losing and makes his fair share of mistakes (like every other Sabre...). But it has to be the right trade.

 

What I am scared of is Risto being the scapegoat this offseason - that Jason Botterill will feel he NEEDS to trade Risto and will take whatever the best offer is this summer.

 

I give Botterill some slack on the ROR trade because there were some extenuating circumstances (his attitude+comments, the $7.5M bonus due July 1, his contract structure being all bonuses, etc).  I don’t see this as a ROR situation though, so I am not willing to cut Botterill the same slack with Risto. 

 

I just don't see where a Ristolainen trade has to be done. If the right offer comes, then ok. Take it. But otherwise I’d like to see what he looks like with better partners for a season (between Dahlin being in year 2 and a full year of Montour, we have the guys to help ease his burden. And who knows, Maybe there will even be a free agent addition...) and hopefully better coaching. 

 

 

 

 

There is another aspect to the Risto trade issue that isn't often discussed: Does he want to stay? I read an interview where he stated that is tired of the losing and desperately wants to participate in the playoffs. As a Sabre he has never experienced the playoffs, and isn't sure that he will in the near future. That playoff drought continuing on has to wear him (and others) down and make him (and others) receptive to moving on where his prospects would be better. 

 

The GM has to be aggressive in adding to the roster going beyond his own prospect pipeline. My worry is that players such as  Eichel and Reinhart, and others, will just get so discouraged that they demand a change of scenery.  You don't think that ROR is glad that he expressed his disgruntlement that ultimately got him sent to a team that is advancing in the playoffs and also has a legitimate chance at winning the Stanley Cup? 

[BillsFan4]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure how I feel about Martin. To try and focus on the positive -

 

 he does have a ton of experience, and has also turned around a franchise before. 

 

He took over the Ottawa Senators head coaching job in their 4th season in the NHL. 

They had 8 total wins the year prior and had 8 total wins when he took over more than 1/2 way through the 1995/96 season. 

 

The sens went from last place to first in the northeast division by Martin’s 3rd full year and had 2more 1st place finishes in the following 4 seasons.

 

 

He was also brought in to stabilize the Pittsburgh bench 2 separate times - once under Bylsma and again when Mike Sullivan was promoted. 

 

He may not be the worst choice to help stabilize the Sabres. For those who want a hard ass who will put a good defensive structure in place, Martin could be that guy. 

 

And he could be transitioned into another role if/when someone like Chris Taylor was ready to take over (he’s done that before). 

 

 

Definitely wouldn’t be the most inspiring hire. But I’d give him a chance I guess. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by BillsFan4

[May Day 10]

14 hours ago, JohnC said:

There is another aspect to the Risto trade issue that isn't often discussed: Does he want to stay? I read an interview where he stated that is tired of the losing and desperately wants to participate in the playoffs. As a Sabre he has never experienced the playoffs, and isn't sure that he will in the near future. That playoff drought continuing on has to wear him (and others) down and make him (and others) receptive to moving on where his prospects would be better. 

 

The GM has to be aggressive in adding to the roster going beyond his own prospect pipeline. My worry is that players such as  Eichel and Reinhart, and others, will just get so discouraged that they demand a change of scenery.  You don't think that ROR is glad that he expressed his disgruntlement that ultimately got him sent to a team that is advancing in the playoffs and also has a legitimate chance at winning the Stanley Cup? 

 

if that's the case, put it on these players to find it within themselves to make it happen here.  That needs to happen at some point.  OReilly, Lehner, Kane, etc all have gotten placed into great situations.  Ship Risto out because he "is sick of losing".... how long before Reinhart, Eichel, Dahlen follow suit?  

Sick of losing?  that's great.  Do something about it.

 

The team straight up quit on themselves, the franchise, and the fans 3 straight seasons.  

[BillsfaninChicago]

Is there a reason why the Sabres didn’t make a move for Quinville during the season when he was still available? He actually got the Blackhawks off the ground with a similar roster back when he took over in 2008. Firing Housley actually made sense only if there was an obvious upgrade available which it seemed like there was.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, May Day 10 said:

 

if that's the case, put it on these players to find it within themselves to make it happen here.  That needs to happen at some point.  OReilly, Lehner, Kane, etc all have gotten placed into great situations.  Ship Risto out because he "is sick of losing".... how long before Reinhart, Eichel, Dahlen follow suit?  

Sick of losing?  that's great.  Do something about it.

 

The team straight up quit on themselves, the franchise, and the fans 3 straight seasons.  

When discussing the departure of ROR, Lehner and Kane they all went from a team with a lesser amount of talent to a team with much more talent. It's not surprising that playing for a winning team and playoff participating team is more enjoyable and rewarding. 

 

The players in the league are not stupid and unaware of their situation and team's status. They know which organizations are better managed and more likely to have more talent and are in a better situation to win. Losing not unsurprisingly has a corrosive effect, especially if has been going on for a decade or so. Players are competitive by nature, not robotic drones. They want to win! As I and others have stated in prior posts the GM has to act with urgency to improve the roster and make this a more competitive team. Otherwise, the demoralizing effect of losing will open the door for more players to want to exit. 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by JohnC

[plenzmd1]

 

 

 

 

3

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

When discussing the departure of ROR, Lehner and Kane they all went from a team with a lesser amount of talent to a team with much more talent. It's not surprising that playing for a winning team and playoff participating team is more enjoyable and rewarding. 

 

The players in the league are not stupid and unaware of their situation and team's status. They know which organizations are better managed and more likely to have more talent and are in a better situation to win. Losing not unsurprisingly has a corrosive effect, especially if has been going on for a decade or so. Players are competitive by nature, not robotic drones. They want to win! As I and others have stated in prior posts the GM has to act with urgency to improve the roster and make this a more competitive team. Otherwise the demoralizing effect of losing will open the door for more players to want to exit. 

 

 

 

 

WHAT!!!!!!!!!Are you kidding me!!!!!!!!!!

 

All last year when @K-9 were all in on firing Housley from Mid December on as we were letting a shot at the playoffs slip, and for the love of God we needed to win and get that good feeling back, go all in for the playoffs to change this freaking team..all we heard from you was .."patience". PLayoffs and winning did not matter, development mattered.

 

What has changed? 

[Lurker]

15 minutes ago, Leonhart2017 said:

Is there a reason why the Sabres didn’t make a move for Quinville during the season when he was still available? He actually got the Blackhawks off the ground with a similar roster back when he took over in 2008. Firing Housley actually made sense only if there was an obvious upgrade available which it seemed like there was.

 

IMO, Quenneville was always ticketed for the Panthers job due to his strong relationship with Dale Tallon.     Taking a year off, going to a warm weather state with low taxes and the opportunity to rebuild by signing FA's like Panarin and Bobrovsky were other key factors.

[Nextmanup]

Martin would be a terrible idea for a Sabres HC.  But this report doesn't mean he is actually being seriously considered anyway.

 

Let's hope he is not.

 

If he is, or God forbid, if he is actually hired, that will be your way of knowing Botterill is in fact beyond clueless, as long suspected.

 

If Martin is hired as HC, expect both Martin and Botterill to be leaving the Sabres at the end of (or before) the 2019/2020 season.

 

 

[BillsfaninChicago]

10 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

IMO, Quenneville was always ticketed for the Panthers job due to his strong relationship with Dale Tallon.     Taking a year off, going to a warm weather state with low taxes and the opportunity to rebuild by signing FA's like Panarin and Bobrovsky were other key factors.

Yeah that all does make sense it still is too bad. Myself and a lot of other Sabres fans in Chicago thought the timing could not have been better when Quinville was available and the Sabres season started going sideways.

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

WHAT!!!!!!!!!Are you kidding me!!!!!!!!!!

 

All last year when @K-9 were all in on firing Housley from Mid December on as we were letting a shot at the playoffs slip, and for the love of God we needed to win and get that good feeling back, go all in for the playoffs to change this freaking team..all we heard from you was .."patience". PLayoffs and winning did not matter, development mattered.

 

What has changed? 

I don't know why you are saying my opinion has changed, when it has not? You along with some of your associates and I won't agree on the Housley issue. So let's put it aside. What I have consistently been saying is the dissatisfying record is linked to the caliber of our roster. How you interpret any of my posts contradicting that notion is not only wrong but also weird? 

 

This GM is entering the offseason with cap room and extra high round draft picks. In addition, there are teams that have good  players on expiring contracts with little cap space. That is a propitious situation for the GM to make some deals to add some good players to bolster the roster. How is it that advocating for aggressive personnel action goes against anything I have previously stated? 

 

The point that I was making to a prior poster is that it isn't surprising that on systemically losing team that rarely participates in the playoffs that it isn't surprising that some players will want out of that type of situation. If you think that is surprising or wrong then you have an odd view of the hockey workplace, or any workplace for that matter. If you don't think that ROR, Lehner or Kane are more happy in their current situation than with their prior situation then you are living in a fantasy world. 

 

Please stop with the twisting and distorting. It is unbecoming. 

[Lurker]

18 minutes ago, JohnC said:

When discussing the departure of ROR, Lehner and Kane they all went from a team with a lesser amount of talent to a team with much more talent. It's not surprising that playing for a winning team and playoff participating team is more enjoyable and rewarding. 

 

ROR and Kane were traded and (as far as I know) didn't have a say in where they went.   Lehner was lucky to find another job after his meltdown.    The fact that they're having success now doesn't have anything to do with the Sabres situation, IMO.

 

Murray screwed the pooch in rebuilding the roster after the tank.   That's the mess that Botts is now trying to clean up.    As a first-time GM, he's been tentative for the most part--but I expect him to be more aggressive this summer, as his job is now on the line.

 

They need more talent to build a more balanced roster.   Period.   Full stop.    I think we're in agreement on that.

 

IMO, elevating guys like Olofsson and even Pilut to the big club this year wouldn't have helped.   After watching them disappear in the Amerks series with Toronto, it's apparent (to me) that they need to work on their strength and understanding of North American PLAYOFF hockey.  Same for Tage Thompson.   

 

A big reason the Sabres flamed out in the second half of the year was their lack of physical presence.  Other teams were gearing up for the playoff battles and this (soft) roster couldn't match that intensity / level of compete...

 

 

[May Day 10]

the guy to move on was Trotz last Summer.  

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

 

ROR and Kane were traded and (as far as I know) didn't have a say in where they went.   Lehner was lucky to find another job after his meltdown.    The fact that they're having success now doesn't have anything to do with the Sabres situation, IMO.

 

Murray screwed the pooch in rebuilding the roster after the tank.   That's the mess that Botts is now trying to clean up.    As a first-time GM, he's been tentative for the most part--but I expect him to be more aggressive this summer, as his job is now on the line.

 

They need more talent to build a more balanced roster.   Period.   Full stop.    I think we're in agreement on that.

 

IMO, elevating guys like Olofsson and even Pilut to the big club this year wouldn't have helped.   After watching them disappear in the Amerks series with Toronto, it's apparent (to me) that they need to work on their strength and understanding of North American PLAYOFF hockey.  Same for Tage Thompson.   

 

A big reason the Sabres flamed out in the second half of the year was their lack of physical presence.  Other teams were gearing up for the playoff battles and this (soft) roster couldn't match that intensity / level of compete...

 

 

Review my post to Plezmd!

 

With respect to the highlighted segment we are in accord. Contrary to how Plezmd zanily interprets what I have previously stated I have always believed that the main problem is the roster. While others look for the bogeyman I'm looking for an upgrade in talent. Some people can't accept that developing talent takes time. I do. 

[plenzmd1]

43 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't know why you are saying my opinion has changed, when it has not? You along with some of your associates and I won't agree on the Housley issue. So let's put it aside. What I have consistently been saying is the dissatisfying record is linked to the caliber of our roster. How you interpret any of my posts contradicting that notion is not only wrong but also weird? 

 

This GM is entering the offseason with cap room and extra high round draft picks. In addition, there are teams that have good  players on expiring contracts with little cap space. That is a propitious situation for the GM to make some deals to add some good players to bolster the roster. How is it that advocating for aggressive personnel action goes against anything I have previously stated? 

 

The point that I was making to a prior poster is that it isn't surprising that on systemically losing team that rarely participates in the playoffs that it isn't surprising that some players will want out of that type of situation. If you think that is surprising or wrong then you have an odd view of the hockey workplace, or any workplace for that matter. If you don't think that ROR, Lehner or Kane are more happy in their current situation than with their prior situation then you are living in a fantasy world. 

 

Please stop with the twisting and distorting. It is unbecoming. 

Consistently last year you said the Sabres had a developing roster and the playoffs should not have been the goal, and if you could give advise to JBotts was tonstay the course on his “ plan” and build from within. 

 

I was advocating trades, firings , anything to give that roster and team a shot in the arse and stop the freaking losing/ losing atmosphere that surrounds this team. 

 

Now, you say the GM has to act with urgency..... he had to act with urgency when he was given a gift 10 game win streak and he sat on his ass and you agreed with it. 

 

Trades me ya giving something of value up( unless you St. Louis or any team that trades with Chiarelli). He should have shown the same urgency you desire now back in January. Maybe the losing culture could have been shifted by now

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said:

Consistently last year you said the Sabres had a developing roster and the playoffs should not have been the goal, and if you could give advise to JBotts was tonstay the course on his “ plan” and build from within. 

 

I was advocating trades, firings , anything to give that roster and team a shot in the arse and stop the freaking losing/ losing atmosphere that surrounds this team. 

 

Now, you say the GM has to act with urgency..... he had to act with urgency when he was given a gift 10 game win streak and he sat on his ass and you agreed with it. 

 

Trades me ya giving something of value up( unless you St. Louis or any team that trades with Chiarelli). He should have shown the same urgency you desire now back in January. Maybe the losing culture could have been shifted by now

Last year's roster was last year's roster. It was for the most part set. There was little to do that was going to alter the course of the season during the season unless you were willing to give up young assets for making some marginal expedient moves that would have in the end set us back. If you think that I was against the Montour trade, you are wrong. If you think that I don't want the GM to use his assets to add talent this offseason, then again you are wrong.  

 

While you were in a constant state of frenzy and despair last year I argued to stay the course with the rebuilding plan and not act out of desperation. I still am advocating for the same thing. However, that doesn't mean that I'm against making deals that will upgrade the roster when we are in a position to do so. That would make no sense. You thinking that that is what I am advocating for is extraordinarily off the mark. While you were exhaustingly chasing your imaginary bogeyman I kept trying to encourage to focus on the real issue i.e. the roster. The best time to act is when you are in a position to do so. I believe that this offseason the organization is in a position to upgrade the roster. That's always been the underpinning of my discussions. I'm not sure you have fully grasped what I have been saying.  

[BillsFan4]

 

 

 

just a reminder that the Amerks game will be televised tonight

[K-9]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Review my post to Plezmd!

 

With respect to the highlighted segment we are in accord. Contrary to how Plezmd zanily interprets what I have previously stated I have always believed that the main problem is the roster. While others look for the bogeyman I'm looking for an upgrade in talent. Some people can't accept that developing talent takes time. I do. 

When you’ve been the beacon of patience and restraint all season and then use words like “urgency” to describe what the GM needs to do to improve, I can see why @plenzmd1 interpreted your post as he did. 

 

We need better players. 

 

AND

 

We need a better coach than Housley. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by K-9

[plenzmd1]

53 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Last year's roster was last year's roster. It was for the most part set. There was little to do that was going to alter the course of the season during the season unless you were willing to give up young assets for making some marginal expedient moves that would have in the end set us back. If you think that I was against the Montour trade, you are wrong. If you think that I don't want the GM to use his assets to add talent this offseason, then again you are wrong.  

 

While you were in a constant state of frenzy and despair last year I argued to stay the course with the rebuilding plan and not act out of desperation. I still am advocating for the same thing. However, that doesn't mean that I'm against making deals that will upgrade the roster when we are in a position to do so. That would make no sense. You thinking that that is what I am advocating for is extraordinarily off the mark. While you were exhaustingly chasing your imaginary bogeyman I kept trying to encourage to focus on the real issue i.e. the roster. The best time to act is when you are in a position to do so. I believe that this offseason the organization is in a position to upgrade the roster. That's always been the underpinning of my discussions. I'm not sure you have fully grasped what I have been saying.  

See, in your previous posts you talk about the losing culture and why would people want to stay here. I agree with that. That why I was so all in on making changes early January when that losing mentality could have changed. 

 

Duchene or Stone maybe makes a difference you bring them in January. You do that, maybe Skinner is signed by now. Maybe those trades with a new coach gets them in 8th... and still playing. Columbus GM showed some stones, looked what happened. 

 

As @K-9 mentioned, you seemed to have changed from patient to urgency. You say the culture and losing needs to change, but you were not willing to do that during the season when it was readily apparent the whole the whole season was circling the drain. 

 

Free agent money would would still be there BTW. 

 

I would take a playoff appearance and Skinner signed right now with only one first rounder. That would have shown urgency, and stones , and some semblance of understanding the situation here. And maybe changed some of the “ it’s okay to keep losing, we are building “ that seems to have kept this franchise from moving forward. 

[Lurker]

25 minutes ago, K-9 said:

When you’ve been the beacon of patience and restraint all season and then use words like “urgency” to describe what the GM needs to do to improve, I can see why @plenzmd1 interpreted your post as he did. 

 

Urgency in the off-season is a hell of a lot different than urgency in season...especially when the playoffs were not a goal this year.

 

The people who wanted to bring up Olofsson in February and March, for example, were wrong, IMO.   He's a nice prospect but no way has he got the physical stature or North American experience (yet) to be a difference maker.  He had a nice run of 6 games at the end of the year, but adding him to the roster before he's physically ready would be not unlike Tage Thompson--who was (rightfully) blasted all season for being soft/weak/not ready for the NHL.

 

It takes time for draft picks and new-to-North American hockey players to mature, physically and mentally (at least those who aren't generational phenoms like Dahlin).   

 

That's why the calls for UPL to start for the Amerks are absolutely silly, IMO.    He's got a great future ahead of him.   But that can easily be screwed up by throwing him to the wolves and hoping for the best just because of frustration. 

[plenzmd1]

6 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Urgency in the off-season is a hell of a lot different than urgency in season...especially when the playoffs were not a goal this year.

 

 

This is exactly what is holding this franchise back. How in holy hell could the playoffs not be a goal for a team that has the longest drought in the NHLand year 2 of JBotts-Housley. 

 

 

That mentality of “ playoffs was not the goal” is a standard that unless you tanking... has got to go. 

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

When you’ve been the beacon of patience and restraint all season and then use words like “urgency” to describe what the GM needs to do to improve, I can see why @plenzmd1 interpreted your post as he did. 

 

We need better players. 

 

AND

 

We need a better coach than Housley. 

The interpretation that Plenzmd1 made of my stance is categorically wrong. What I have clearly stated all last season is that our primary deficiency had to do with the talent-level of the roster. That deficiency was not going to be sufficiently addressed during the season. That was my basic position then, as it is now. I never argued not to bring in players. Quite the contrary I have strenuously argued that better players had to be brought in to make us more competitive. That requisite change to the roster was not going to be sufficiently done during the season. Although I very much liked the Montour pickup. However, this offseason is an all together different situation than in the midst of last season. 

35 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Urgency in the off-season is a hell of a lot different than urgency in season...especially when the playoffs were not a goal this year.

 

The people who wanted to bring up Olofsson in February and March, for example, were wrong, IMO.   He's a nice prospect but no way has he got the physical stature or North American experience (yet) to be a difference maker.  He had a nice run of 6 games at the end of the year, but adding him to the roster before he's physically ready would be not unlike Tage Thompson--who was (rightfully) blasted all season for being soft/weak/not ready for the NHL.

 

It takes time for draft picks and new-to-North American hockey players to mature, physically and mentally (at least those who aren't generational phenoms like Dahlin).   

 

That's why the calls for UPL to start for the Amerks are absolutely silly, IMO.    He's got a great future ahead of him.   But that can easily be screwed up by throwing him to the wolves and hoping for the best just because of frustration. 

You are astute and perspicacious.

Edited April 24, 2019 by JohnC

[K-9]

18 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The interpretation that Plenzmd1 made of my stance is categorically wrong. What I have clearly stated all last season is that our primary deficiency had to do with the talent-level of the roster. That deficiency was not going to be sufficiently addressed during the season. That was my basic position then, as it is now. I never argued not to bring in players. Quite the contrary I have strenuously argued that better players had to be brought in to make us more competitive. That requisite change to the roster was not going to be sufficiently done during the season. Although I very much liked the Montour pickup. However, this offseason is an all together different situation than in the midst of last season. 

You are astute and perspicacious.

So, patience during the season and urgency in the offseason. Got it.

 

Housley certainly coached without a sense of urgency and JBotts certainly managed with that same lack of urgency. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by K-9

[K-9]

50 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Urgency in the off-season is a hell of a lot different than urgency in season...especially when the playoffs were not a goal this year.

 

The people who wanted to bring up Olofsson in February and March, for example, were wrong, IMO.   He's a nice prospect but no way has he got the physical stature or North American experience (yet) to be a difference maker.  He had a nice run of 6 games at the end of the year, but adding him to the roster before he's physically ready would be not unlike Tage Thompson--who was (rightfully) blasted all season for being soft/weak/not ready for the NHL.

 

It takes time for draft picks and new-to-North American hockey players to mature, physically and mentally (at least those who aren't generational phenoms like Dahlin).   

 

That's why the calls for UPL to start for the Amerks are absolutely silly, IMO.    He's got a great future ahead of him.   But that can easily be screwed up by throwing him to the wolves and hoping for the best just because of frustration. 

Per the bold, I’d be interested in what those differences are. 

 

As for playoffs not being the goal, then JBotts should be summarily dismissed. Especially when your team is first in the league at the end of November.

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, K-9 said:

So, patience during the season and urgency in the offseason. Got it.

 

Housley certainly coached without a sense of urgency and JBotts certainly managed with that same lack of urgency. 

You are not getting the point. The GM will be in a better position to make better deals in the offseason compared to during last season. Why would the Sabres give up valuable assets for players such as Duchesne or Stone when they may only be rental players? That would make no sense. (The Skinner deal was altogether different. He waived his no trade clause to come to Buffalo so there was a greater chance that he would re-sign when his contract was up.) The GM in my view made a good in-season deal with the acquisition of Montour who is under a contract for another year or so. No one is against making deals when it makes sense to do so. What Plezmd1 is arguing for is making more risky deals when you are in a panic mode. I'm saying that is not a smart and strategic thing to do. 

 

 

[K-9]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

You are not getting the point. The GM will be in a better position to make better deals in the offseason compared to during last season. Why would the Sabres give up valuable assets for players such as Duchesne or Stone when they may only be rental players? That would make no sense. (The Skinner deal was altogether different. He waived his no trade clause to come to Buffalo so there was a greater chance that he would re-sign when his contract was up.) The GM in my view made a good in-season deal with the acquisition of Montour who is under a contract for another year or so. No one is against making deals when it makes sense to do so. What Plezmd1 is arguing for is making more risky deals when you are in a panic mode. I'm saying that is not a smart and strategic thing to do. 

 

 

No, I got the point and I appreciate your expanded explanation. I just don’t entirely agree that a passive GM with a first place team that needs a couple tweaks can afford to sit on his hands in the manner that he did. I don’t think it sat well with Housley and, more importantly, the players. 

[K-9]

Amerks down one zip early. Toronto came out fast and the Amerks couldn’t match the intensity. Where have we seen that before?

[Alaska Darin]

9 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Amerks down one zip early. Toronto came out fast and the Amerks couldn’t match the intensity. Where have we seen that before?

Every hockey team ever?

 

[K-9]

7 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

Every hockey team ever?

 

Far from it. I’ve watched game after game in the playoffs where both teams come out with their heads in fire, up and down the ice, from the puck drop. The Amerks, facing elimination, came out flat, couldn’t match Toronto’s energy, and found themselves down a goal in the minute and a half in a game they NEED to stay alive. If I didn’t know better, I’d think Housely is behind the bench.

[Lurker]

19 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Per the bold, I’d be interested in what those differences are. 

 

As for playoffs not being the goal, then JBotts should be summarily dismissed. Especially when your team is first in the league at the end of November.

 

Like it or not, teams are built in the off-season.  IMO, in-season trades only work if the team is set to win NOW.   As in make a deep playoff run.   Or trading a pending FA for assets before he's  lost--an even then, they don't get made (Panarin).

 

Go back and read what Botts and others had to say about this team back in February:

 

https://buffalonews.com/2019/02/20/buffalo-sabres-jason-botterill-phil-housleys-nhl-2019/

 

"We are always looking to improve our team. We're always looking to make additions to help our players," he said. "We're not going to change our motto, our focus on trying to bring players in that are going to help this team, not only this year but for the future. That's what we're looking at right now."

 

"Of course, [the playoffs] are the goal for every team to start the year," he said. "But our situation right now, we have to focus within. I know our coaches and our players are focusing on our next game against Tampa Bay because it's going to be a very difficult game, but our goal generally is we have to start playing better. We have to be more consistent as an organization."

 

Asked why he hasn't made any major moves while the team slid from first overall in the NHL's standing to 17th, Botterill said putting his players in difficult positions is part of their growth.

 

 

[K-9]

Thompson with a nice wrested on the PP to tie it. Amerks with life.

[K-9]

16 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Like it or not, teams are built in the off-season.  IMO, in-season trades only work if the team is set to win NOW.   As in make a deep playoff run.   Or trading a pending FA for assets before he's  lost--an even then, they don't get made (Panarin).

 

Go back and read what Botts and others had to say about this team back in February:

 

https://buffalonews.com/2019/02/20/buffalo-sabres-jason-botterill-phil-housleys-nhl-2019/

 

"We are always looking to improve our team. We're always looking to make additions to help our players," he said. "We're not going to change our motto, our focus on trying to bring players in that are going to help this team, not only this year but for the future. That's what we're looking at right now."

 

"Of course, [the playoffs] are the goal for every team to start the year," he said. "But our situation right now, we have to focus within. I know our coaches and our players are focusing on our next game against Tampa Bay because it's going to be a very difficult game, but our goal generally is we have to start playing better. We have to be more consistent as an organization."

 

Asked why he hasn't made any major moves while the team slid from first overall in the NHL's standing to 17th, Botterill said putting his players in difficult positions is part of their growth.

 

 

No, teams are not built during the season. But they are certainly augmented. JBotts didn’t see fit to do much of that other than trading for Montador, which was a good move but it was far little far too late. 

 

I find JBott’s comments about putting players in difficult positions vapid at best; a bunch of GMspeak bull crap. 

[Lurker]

46 minutes ago, K-9 said:

No, teams are not built during the season. But they are certainly augmented. JBotts didn’t see fit to do much of that other than trading for Montador, which was a good move but it was far little far too late. 

 

I find JBott’s comments about putting players in difficult positions vapid at best; a bunch of GMspeak bull crap. 

 

Learning to win is not vapid.  The Bickering Bills did it, the Peca-era Sabres did it.   

 

But arguing this point is getting boring...

[K-9]

17 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Learning to win is not vapid.  The Bickering Bills did it, the Peca-era Sabres did it.   

 

But arguing this point is getting boring...

Learning to win? By being the worst team in hockey over the last four months after being the best team over the first two? You and JBotts can believe it taught some lessons and instilled some sort of steely resolve for future years, but I don’t buy it after watching that team implode. 

 

Learning to win is not vapid. Empty lip service from a GM certainly is. After years of this ineptitude, it’s put up or shut up. Platitudes and cliches simply aren’t enough. That’s what I’m bored with.

 

 

[May Day 10]

10 hours ago, K-9 said:

Learning to win? By being the worst team in hockey over the last four months after being the best team over the first two? You and JBotts can believe it taught some lessons and instilled some sort of steely resolve for future years, but I don’t buy it after watching that team implode. 

 

Learning to win is not vapid. Empty lip service from a GM certainly is. After years of this ineptitude, it’s put up or shut up. Platitudes and cliches simply aren’t enough. That’s what I’m bored with.

 

 

 

The idea of a mandatory (and perpetual) 5 year rebuild plan has been ingrained into the brains of the fans of this franchise.  I was there too and snapped out of it this season when being told by the gm that this 2nd consecutive disaster of a season has been progress because "they are in a position to be in games"... and their vet-laden AHL team is in 2nd place.

 

Would lou lamoriello or brian burke ever let their teams off the hook like that?

 

In the nhl, you do not need a long rebuild.  Just look at the islanders, carolina, and vegas.  3 Years ago, calgary, winnipeg, columbus, and toronto all finished behind the sabres.  

 

This isnt a U9 team.  They are millionaire pros who have played and won at all levels in the past.... playing for a billionaire owner who claims to desire to win.  Little signs of progress and development are not worth a thing.  Wasting years of eichels prime now and dahlens elc.

 

Edited April 25, 2019 by May Day 10

[plenzmd1]

Of course another ex Sabre has to score the series winning goal?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[May Day 10]

8 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Of course another ex Sabre has to score the series winning goal?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wrong McGinn

[plenzmd1]

16 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

wrong McGinn

Is that right? I just figured it was the same dude!

[K-9]

I’m jumping on the Cincinnati Cyclones bandwagon. They won their first round series! GO ‘CLONES!

[May Day 10]

7 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Is that right? I just figured it was the same dude!

 

Brock McGinn scored

 

Jamie McGinn is the ex-Sabres and is currently with Florida I think (or Detroit?)  I forget.  Someone in our conference and not in the playoffs