Taro T

Byram replaced Mittelstadt. Personally, expected to take that trade harder than he did, but it is what it is. 😉

Any word on whether he's replacing the current VP of Revenue Strategy or is he going to be that person's boss now?

Our dog loved that fish commercial, because he'd get a special treat on Saturday morning and always told him "aw, but it's Saturday." As soon as he heard that, he was off to where the treats were kept. Didn't even need to hear "we were biting this morning, we were biting this morning."

Yep. IF they bring in a TRUE #2 D-man, the team is likely better off using him the way Anaheim used Pronger and Niedermayer than by pairing them together. And, it seemed that concept was something Ruff was trying to mimic after the deadline - having his 3 best D-men each playing with one of the bottom 3 guys. (Not going to debate whether Byram should be considered one of the top 3 via analytics; the Sabres considered him their 2nd best D-man.) The thinking heading into the season was through most of the game Dahlin would be paired with Samuelsson and then end the game with Power as the D-bench shortened at the end of close games. But with Dahlin not being 100% at the beginning, it didn't work. (It didn't come close to working.) When Samuelsson was paired with Dahlin at the end of the year, it worked much better. They seem to believe it was due to Samuelsson improving over the season; personally give at least as much of the credit for that improvement to Dahlin being at/near 100%.

Not just about 900 W's. In the RS, exactly 900 W's. (Took 5 tries to get #900, but he got there.)

If you've done nothing, you've earned nothing of value. BUT you still have a culture. It may be toxic, it clearly is unproductive, but it is still a culture. And, you've EARNED that culture you end up with. IF you've worked hard, and built up something positive, well, you've earned THAT too. Were culture necessarily a positive thing, would agree it necessarily is built. But culture can vary widely and what you get is what you've earned.

Same with the Labatt's Bear commercial where he's complaining the worst part about living in Canada is sleeping on hard rocks and then the hot brunette he's talking to says she's got a waterbed. "Check please." Spent an inordinate amount of time trying to find that one a few year's back.

Personally, expect that's been the case since at least the trade deadline. Adams brought Byram onto the roster to pair with Dahlin. Ruff said on day one that Dahlin should be paired with Samuelsson &/or Power. Dahlin and Byram were a pair for a long time. Muel was Dahlin's partner down the stretch. They traded out from their core leadership group a player that was supposed to be a strong, solid, smart 2 way player that would contribute significantly at both ends. They brought in a guy that is that (though only gives you 50 or so games per season. Both of those moves would seem to be moving away from Adams' vision. Both Ruff and Adams are constantly saying they themselves need to be better. Ruff states what he's been doing in season to be better and what he plans to do to continue to get better. Adams gives platitudes of what he'll do to be better. Of course, all of this could be simply reading into statements what one wants to hear from them. (Hope that's not simply the case.)

Or it's not built at all (at least not a positive, successful, sustainable one). Agree that the choice of "earned" seems off. But in some ways, it's more apt than "buiit." You earn what you've worked towards. If you're foundering around, you haven't earned much, but you also haven't built anything. And if you haven't earned much, well, that's the culture you end up with: entitled, lazy, confused, etc. (Wouldn't say the players are lazy; but would say they haven't had a cohesive plan to build upon nor have they had enough successful members showing them how to build and entitled and confused probably are accurate.) And the entitled and lazy don't BUILD ANYTHING. Nothing that'll stand even a modest storm at any rate. But have they earned being where they're at? Also, probably accurate. Even if you don't build anything, there is still a culture. It's simply not one you want. Personally believe the players DO in fact want to win and want to put in the work to do so. Don't believe they have 23 Miro Satan's on the roster. But the "developmental" coaches they've had haven't been able to have them working productively and proactively towards winning. As an example, they work on the PP a LOT; and the things they do seem to be ingrained (because they work at them). Well, when you have them work on foolish things, you aren't working towards success. Combine that with management's insistence on having more than a critcal mass of youth and then the players don't even have the example in front of them of how to do it the right way. And heck, even the article that led to this discussion shows they haven't built a positive culture. Positive cultures don't have players anonymously taking to reporters saying the team hasn't bought it. But, management does seem to have earned the culture they built. 😉

At the B&GI's back 6 or so weeks ago, Ruff said, what at the time seemed to be a very controversial statement - that several players were not the level of conditioning that he'd expected them to be and that it was a major problem and this coming off-season the Sabres were going to work more closely with individual player's off-season trainers to make sure young guys were developing the way they should. And personally read that comment as not just an indictment of the players but the staff here - how could they have no idea that the players weren't going to be where they expected them to be. Seeing "conditioning" being the buzzword du jour coming back, figured that Ruff must've made a comment to that effect elsewhere. The other thing that was beyond frustrating to hear on that evening was Ruff actually defended that stupid dropback pass they use to enter the zone on the PP. "We're actually in the top 3 in zone entries; the problem is we don't maintain that control." Well, if you don't maintain that control because not one single player other than the guy who carried the puck in has ANY speed at all as the other 4 players are all within 10' of the blue line as he's finally carrying the puck not just over the red line, but the blue line as well; then MAYBE just MAYBE you aren't ACTUALLY top 3 on entries and you should do something different. Yes, most all teams drop the puck back (on rare occassions significantly back, but that is on RARE occassions), but they typically drop it about 12' back, not 80' back, and it gives then 4 players coming in with pace (2 REALLY flying) and the puck carrier has several option upon crossing the red line - he can dump it to a corner, he can work a give and go with any of 3 teammates, he can skate it in himself, or he can pass it to the guy flying up with him who now has the same options he had just had prior to passing it. The other thing that was interesting about that night is, the questions for the most part were more pointed than the ones that the media asked at the end of season press conference. Didn't submit a Q myself as didn't expect they'd take "hard" questions via presubmission, and couldn't come up with anything to ask that they'd've wanted to answer. But they in fact did take hard Q's. Adams pretty well punted them but Ruff seemed very honest. When he was asked what he could've done better/different during the losing streak; he said that whenever you get into that situation (losing that many in a row) you pretty much always fire the coach. He also talked a fair amount about getting more veterans into the lineup. Really do expect to see them not be the youngest roster in the league this coming year.

Personally see the PoHO role as far more of a schmoozer than actually determining who is going to be on the ice. Ruff has ties to Hockey Canada so he's one of the insiders. Could Bettman possibly still be mad about Ruff's calling him out on No Goal? If not, could see it being a net positive having him in that role when the top brass get together and could see him getting involved on leaguewide competition committee at the ownership/operations level. Keeping owners out of the GM's hair on a day to day basis. Reining in the worst impulses of both ownerhsip and the GM. And helping to sell suites and convincing whatever local state power brokers that'd get involved in allowing the Sabres to mess up the MMArena even more than it currently is. (Some of the ideas on how to renovate the barn were whacked and personally can't see them working in this market. But we shall see.) And, yeah, until he came back to Buffalo, never saw him in that sort of a role. Saw him as more of an advisor to whomever was running the hockey department rather than being the ostensible boss. Darn shame they never reached out to Dudley back when the new owners took over. Alas, not meant to be. Neither. The owner. But, when there's a united front and a compelling reason why the pocketbook should be opened ...

So, of 6 head coaches between Lindy Ruff stints, at present, not one single one of them is coaching in the NHL. Im-forking-press-ive.

Would like to see a GM brought in that can come up with a F lineup that a 20 year old Benson slots into the lineup as a 3rd liner when all are healthy and if necessary climbs the ladder some when injuries do hit. Would like to see New Guy - Norris - Thompson Zucker - McLoud - Tuch Benson - Kulich - Greenway Malenstyn - Krebs - Lafferty as the starting 12. Don't want Peterka gone, nor is it desired to have Lafferty back. Would rather have a UFA taking Lafferty's spot, but don't expect it. And am expecting Peterka will be part of the package to fix the D and that Byram will be part of the package to find that guy that plays a large chunk of the season in Norris' spot and plays with him and Tage when Norris is healthy. Especially if they bring in a guy that makes Lafferty the 13th or 14th F, then when Norris is out they have options of bumping up any of Tuch, Zucker, Benson, or Kulich. And they'd probably still have Quinn around or could give Östlund, Kozak, Rousek, or Rosen looks to backfill depending upon who else is out. (Actually, would really like to see a 2nd new guy sliding Zucker down to play with Benson and Kulich, bumping Greenway onto a really good 4th line and Lafferty into the press box with Quinn. (Nobody is giving anything of value to take Quinn at this point. Might as well keep him around and see if his stightly improved play down the stretch can be a starting point to his living up to his draft pedigree.) But, with also needing to fix the D and ideally have more certainty between the pipes, not sure that 2nd top 6 guy is a luxury we'll get to see. (IF 2 of Norris, Greenway, and Power look like they'll start the year on IR; would REALLY like to see them try to make that 2nd new top 6 guy a reality.) And if Benson forces his way into a bigger role than 3L, cool. But good teams have good players actually showing up on the 3rd line.

He was. Personally, will run with the Housley effect takes longer to take hold but ultimately overtakes the positive effects of others around him. 😉

He might've played for the Pens; remember him and Danny Grant being 2 key pieces of the No Stars.