Taro T

Thank you for the reply. That does clarify what you were saying. 🍺 (Don't agree, but do understand.) The RESULT is the same thing. You can say it "isn't rushed" but if at the end of the day ...

Pretty sure a more accurate description is, unlike the Eulers who let their "big 2" and the guys they identified as key (Nugent-Hopkins and Nurse) additional pieces of their core actually grow into men, who pretty much "all of a sudden" became good enough to actually build around though they weren't when they were kids, the Sabres gave up on the idea right about the time that Eichel and Reinhart (and McCabe and Montour and ...) were entering their primes. NEVER should've traded away O'Reilly. Keep O'Reilly and build around O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin, and McCabe and still bring in Montour. That would be a really good basis for a team today and for the past couple of years. Skinner never gets brought it as they'd've already added Sheary and wouldn't have the money for both Sheary and Skinner with O'Reilly still around.

Disagree all you want. Other teams (particularly good teams) don't have youth in key roles to anywhere near the extent that the Sabres put them. Can you please expound upon this thought? Not sure the point you are making here.

Well, in fairness, there are 2 components to the "they rush their prospects to the NHL" line of thought. Their players get to the NHL a tad earlier than other teams youngsters get there, but once there they end up getting thrown into top 6, top 4, and starting goalie roles. MOST of the guys on other teams end up eased into the NHL in the bottom 6; 4/5/6 D; or or backup roles. The Sabres have them centering the 1st line after 2 years in the AHL. And that puts the kids into roles that other teams don't force them en masse into. Adams seems to have run an experiment believing that it isn't so much growing into fully adult bodies that translates to effective NHLers but rather experience in the NHL that translates into effective NHLers provided the players have the talent that they should be in those roles in their primes. In general, we're seeing that yeah, players really need both to be effective in top of the lineup roles - they need to be men and they need experience. Yes, there are some very rare exceptions, but in general, they do need both.

Perhaps. And not saying it's causation. But there is a distinct difference in the changes in the hockey department pre early-2022 and post when the team has underperformed yet again.

One thing that I wonder about in all of this is how much, if at all, this situation would be different had Kim Pegula not had her heart attack which essentially resulted in a stroke. The 2 were most definitely a team and without her around now it sure seems from the Fairburn article that Adams and Terry are now that team as far as the hockey side of things goes. Maybe he'd be even more entrenched were she still more involved, but wasn't a significant portion of the ouster of their 1st GM hire a perceived or real insubordination towards her and a significant portion of the 2nd GMs ouster was the owners "not feeling heard" (or something to that effect). (Pretty sure it was her idea to can Brandon too.) Might Kim have been a bit more pointed in the questioning of what was going on at the end of season reviews and during the inseason low points? Terry made some sort of boast when he bought the Sabres that he'd never fired anyone from his Energy East company. But he and his wife sure did fire a lot of people in their 1st 9 or so years of owning the Sabres. Maybe he's a softie and she's the one that has more of the stomach for that sort of thing. Since the team's taken a step back from 91 points we've now seen Granato fired, the S&C coach fired, and Ellis demoted and that's the entirety of the removal for performance in the past 2 years. (Not counting alterations to the playing roster to date.)

Knew that. But that fact alone didn't really seem to explain the response to Tom's post. Pretty sure @Dr. Who's response which gave some more insight into Staal is correct.

Charlotte probably would've beat the Amerks had Ra-cha-cha been able to get past Laval. They took the season series 3-1-0 with both teams getting blow out SO wins down in LTL and the Checkers winning 2 - 1 goal games in Ra-cha-cha. Not sure that the likelihood that the Checkers (that finished 2 points ahead of the Amerks in the regular season) would've beat the Amerks in the 3rd round means that Ra-cha-cha didn't have a good season nor that there are no players down in the former Flour City that can help Buffalo in the near future.

?????

By any chance, were any of them "flies on the wall" during the last NFL draft so they could not just get to use the Bills war room but see how the people in it used it? Expecting the answer is 'no' but hoping that they were.

But southern cities (especially Texan ones) aren't condensed like northern cities are. They sprawl greatly and many areas that would be suburbs in the north are incorporated within the city limits down where you're at. In cities like Houston without zoning (at least that was zoning less 30 years ago) wouldn't be surprised at all at there being areas with livestock within city limits. So, not sure a lost goat sign IN ENGLISH necessarily confirms you're in the Barrio. Btw, once hit a deer within Buffalo's city limits.

Correct. Nothing like the NFL's "cap." A true hard cap with very few opportunities for players to earn bonuses. One of the very ways to partially, sort of, circumvent the cap is to include signing bonuses that get paid on day one of a league year but count against the cap like an ordinary contract (~1/187th counting against the cap each day during the regular season). So, a team could pay the player a significant portion of his salary on day 1 then trade him and the team trading for him has the whole remaining nut that season count against the cap but only having to shell out the actual remaining $'s for that season in that season. And those sort of bonuses can only move money around within that particular season. (You can't sign an 8 year contract with 90% of the total value of the contract paid out as a signing bonus at the actual signing of the contract.)

Guessing the OP's Q is now moot. (If it wasn't at the time it was asked. 😉 )

Just cut it back to just Dahlin, Tuch, and Thompson. My 2 cents. YMMV.

Hey, hey, hey now. Nobody wants to hear about your neighbors' wives. 😜

No data. But one thing to keep in mind is that Adams says he talks with Beane fairly frequently and we know Pegula talks to him as well. And there's now Guelli overseeing the business side of both teams; he might've had a small role in it as well. (Because let's face it, HIS Sabres job becomes MUCH easier if the team doesn't #### dead donkey #####.) Beane tends to have a LOT of experienced guys working for him. If he actually likes Adams (no idea if he does or doesn't), he might've suggested to him that the smartest bosses don't work in a vacuum and getting input from people well outside the normal circle he relies on could be extremely beneficial. And having an outside voice with relationships that Kevyn doesn't have (from a cursory glance, the 2 don't seem to have much overlap in their past key coworkers list) could be a huge benefit in an organization as insular as the NHL seems to be. As stated above, no idea who's idea it was to get Adams the help. Honestly, hope it was Adams (the one who professes he consistently is looking for ways to improve what he does and who professes he tries to have honest conversations (and if you can't have an honest conversation with yourself, you can't truly have one with anybody else) who realized what HE needed help with and went out and got it (hopefully he chose right in finding advisors to help and also hopefully they're still looking to shake more things up; but will expect them when we see them (or at a minimum @Brawndo tells us they're in the works)). As for Ruff, yeah, expect that the plan for him is still the same as it seems when he took the 2 year deal to come to Buffalo. If things work this year, he becomes an advisor to new PoHO Adams and if things don't work this year, he becomes PoHO. Can't see him simply retiring after this season nor him heading to some other organization next year.

Expect you are correct about that. He seems earnest. But if spitting the bit when signing a big contract and spitting the bit when getting a letter says he doesn't yet know HOW to be a consumate pro. Buffalo clearly wasn't where he was going to figure that out. Not sure that Otterland will be significantly better for him trying to figure it out either. Expect he needs to land on a veteran laden team that he can actually learn that portion of the game from. If he ends up in a location less disliked personally than Otterland will wish him well and hope he figures it out. As long as he's there, am perfectly fine with him continuing to struggle.

And the assistant coaches that had been around these players for 2 or more years (only Appert and Ruff hadn't been in Buffalo that long recently) apparently thought it was a good idea to give Cozens and Samuelsson A's. Quite certain Ruff regretted those decisions and could've used better input on that front. Realize you're talking about Ruff, but there are some guys in that coaching room that don't really get it. But directly to the Satan issue, Ruff never pushed to get him off the roster. Nolan benched him. Nolan playing Ed Ronan over him was one of several items that Muckler and he did not see eye to eye on. But a few years later Drury pushed to get Satan off the roster and Regier listened to him and the team went to the Eastern Conference Finals the next 2 years. (Yes, correlation, not causation; but Ruff apparently didn't see just how much of a negative energy Miro brought to the room. He didn't get moved out until Drury made a point of it. Dahlin, Tuch, Thompson, Zucker, and Greenway should all have input (not necessarily have that input followed, but they should have input) into which guys do truly pull their weight and which ones (if any) might be addition by subtraction).

But, (and realize that at this point there are other issues wrt Power, so please realize this is only addressing the following point and not all the other issues) IF the player WOULD be a x point player but for the fact he can't get ahead of somebody that is elite at the PP (and as bad as the PP is, without Dahlin it would be significanltly worse because his ability to keep the puck in the zone and his passing is elite) WHY say he's not worth what he'd get were he not "blocked" 😉 from the PP? IF one is inclined to only want to pay for what a player can bring in his place in the pecking order, then it's pretty much guaranteed that unless you have guys on ELCs, you will never have more than 4 top line F's and 1 top pairing D because that's all you can squeeze onto the top PP. Especially if the team has cap space, shouldn't we want more than just 1 D that's excellent running the BL on the PP and more than just 2 D that are excellent PKers? And if you have an extra guy that can handle 25 minutes per night (like when they hit their primes, the Sabres current roster has 3 of those on it) then you only have to find 45 minutes of time (tops) from the other 3 guys and you should be able to cover that fairly inexpensively. (Samuelsson not playing up to his contract being a monkey wrench in that calculus.) (Not sure why THIS particular post warranted this particular reply; it's a fairly common theme here. NOT calling you out on this, it just seemed a logical spot to ask the Q.)

Know we won't ever hear, but would be VERY interested in knowing what the players think about yesterday's announcement.

Yes, there currently is depth at LHD. But IF they trade away Samuelsson and 1 of Power or Byram, is that still the case? And, even if they don't trade their NHL LHD depth away this year, will next season's GM still agree that it shouldn't be traded away? Personally like the idea of taking BPA with the 1st & 2nd round picks and then go for filling in gaps in the pipeline with the rest of the lottery tickets. (And ALWAYS draft a goalie every year. They're way too hard to evaluate at 18.) And like the idea of trading the pick for help TODAY even better. 😉

True, the sytle has changed based upon personnel. But the timing of that is off slightly. They started moving towards a significanlty more offensive entertaining style shortly BEFORE THE lockout. So, they were very well positioned to take advantage of the rules opening up the game when the lockout ended.

Some won't wait until the end of the season to turn negative, some will wait until its official that another one has bitten the dust. But, personally, see today as once again bringing us that fleeting glint of hope. But regardless of whether that glint manages to germinate an actual seed into something fruitful or not; don't see where it's the fans fault that for far too long SHKIIIP has been nonarable land. Personally don't get why people must fan one certain way or they're doing it "wrong." EVERYBODY at this site is ridiculously fanatical about this team (even the ones that have been nearly wiped from considering themselves fanatics or even simply the diminutive of that word "fans" any more). If some poster "hedging" his view on today's news irks you so, why not just come up with a list of people to temporarily put on ignore and enjoy that once again we've been given a glint of hope.

You responded while the post was being editied. IF they make the playoffs, yes, there is a chance that they go back to what seemed to be the original plan of bumping Adams up to PoHO after the past season's successful playoff run. So, yeah, it MIGHT happen, should they make the playoffs that Adams goes up, Kekalainen becomes the GM, and who knows how Karmanos and Ventura react to that move when their contracts are up.

And hopefully, and IMHO even more importantly, to say "have you ACTUALLY spoken to _____ (within the Sabres organization)? Wtf is he responsible for x? He's a f'n (pick whatever derogatory term doesn't trigger you)." And then see to it that Adams &/or Pegula end up altering that person's responsibilities.