Taro T

Presuming your question is Sabres specific. With the possible exceptions of Jokiharju, Greenway, &/or Zucker could see the Sabres go the entire deadline with no moves other than something that might bolster Ra-cha-cha's chance of winning the Calder. Would figure Jokiharju going out the door at ~50%, Greenway ~15%, and Zucker ~8%. Making a true NHL hockey trade ~5% (with Cozens making up 80% of that and Samuelsson the bulk of the rest of it). Doing anything else <1%.

To a degree. Still expect that having a true top 4 veteran D-man who is preferrably stay at home or at minimum a solid 2 way guy to play with Power would do wonders for the unit overall. Getting 1 more Zucker preferrably or even another Greenway for the top 6 would be 2nd on this kid's list. Why are ANY of the coaches not named Ruff (and possibly Bales) still employed. What have ANY of them done to improve the output of this (or any other recent) Sabres roster?

80's. Pretty sure PART of the issue is with revenue sharing, both the owners and especially the players have a significant incentive to want to increase immediate revenues at the expense of using the broadcast availabilty to not just increase revenues today but to build a loyal future customer base that will lead to increased revenues in the future as well. Players careers are short and roughly every extra $1,400 in league revenues is an extra $ in every player's pocket.

Umm, violation of the Logan Act. Not saying they should be prosecuted for it, but that is what legitimate charge would/could be brought.

Yes, there were claims that Housley was a D coaching genius, but it NEVER made any sense. That D that Nashville had was absolutely stacked and they were great before Housley ever showed up. He didn't make them any better than they'd already been. He also had nothing to do with Rinne and Saros being absolute studs. Claiming he was a genius was akin to saying Adam Gase was one because Peyton Manning liked him and played well when he was his OC. Sure, people said it, but they were oh so very wrong.

Depends on whether you do the early bird renewal every year or not. If you do, it's ballpark a 5% increase (just like every other year) taking out the fact that they're selling 44 games (41 RS, 3 exhibitions w/ barely 50% NHLers playing) vs 43 (40/3) last year. Don't know if it'll be worth renewing but they were better this season about promoting the perks of being a STHer. Expecting that'll be the case again next year. Again, not sure that'd be enough to flip the switch from no to yes for anyone else.

Would be very surprised if the Sabres make more than just a small move along the fringes of the roster. They have more prospects than they know what to do with and absolutely don't need to get any younger so it isn't likely they'll be sellers. They'd need to win about 20 of their last 25 games to have any shot at the playoffs and that ain't happening so they aren't going to be buying a rental. Really don't see Adams going anywhere this offseason so don't see him being in desperation mode, again leaning towards them not buying a rental. Maybe there's a real hockey trade to be made like the Byram for Mittelstadt deal last year a smidge before the deadline, but can't see a team looking to trade a 1 for 1 guy that is on the same timeline as what we'd be sending out and can't see a point to getting the younger guy AGAIN so don't see that happening either. Used to be one of the funnest days of the year. Not even sure will even be spot checking in for updates on what happened that day. We really are in purgatory, aren't we?

Htf do the cockroaches always survive? Like that Ruff has them ready to play from the get go almost always. Hate that the same schmucks that couldn't teach X's and O's the past 2 years (once by choice and once by ummm not choice) were brought back this past season. Would really like to see some serious up & comers brought onto the staff and absolutely hate the idea of Appert being the heir apparent. Back to the thread. Expecting very minimal changes in the roster before October. If Levi has to clear waivers, Reimer is definitely gone. Could see Jokiharju leaving as they try to find a true vet with either stay at home or 2 way pedigree to take the 4th D role. Not expecting any changes at F providing Zucker and Greenway are willing to come back. Would really like to see at least one more Zucker/Greenway brought in to help teach the youth how adults play hockey in the best league in the world. Wouldn't be surprised if we don't even get that. 100% expect Adams and Ruff both back.

How ####ing hard is it to go with the obvious: the Utah Fighting Mormons (Mormen?). Either that or play off the Jazz with the Utah Punk Rock. They could use that same logo that was proposed for the Hockey Club. 😉

Pretty sure we're reacting to the expectation that the guy assembling the roster may be considering him a 1C; as he currently is this team's 1C.

And he could excel in that role and prove Adams right "all along" in having that be the move. But it's far more likely that he ends up a 45 point player (or less) in his sophomore season in the NHL rather than a 60+ point player. Have him pencilled in as the 2C or 3C (or a 2W or 3W) and if he flat out shows that he NEEDS to be the 1C, well you now have a player that WAS pencilled in at the 1C that can now be deployed either as a W on that 1st line or the 2C or even a 2W and likely you have 2 lines teams have to prepare for to try to take away and that's significantly harder than simply taking away a single line. And Adams does seem to believe that these kids are close to taking off. But close is a really relative term. And those of us that pay to watch the team rather than get paid to play a role in shaping it seem to have significantly different interpretations of the term "close."

The Cardinal to which the Stanford Cardinal refers is the color cardinal red, not the bird by the same name. The way this kid has heard the story of how that became their mascot is that Elway's dad was the football coach at the time they decided to stop calling themselves the Stanford Indians and he came up with the idea because they were "the Harvard of the West." It's a takeoff of the Harvard Crimson. As told by a Stanford graduate.

Look, if Kulich at 21 is pencilled into the 1C role, the margin for error has become precipitously thin. And they are getting into the territory where they need to stay healthy and not have any one else in a key role not meet expectations. Should've said "that would meet A criterion" not "that would meet THE criterion." But are you seriously going to argue that pencilling Kulich into the 1C ISN'T a risky move? As to the D, I have been advocating for a LONG time for an in his prime / late prime stay at home (preferred) or 2 way legit top 4 D-man. Would also like to see Wolford punted into the sun. Both of which would improve the D significantly. Am not anticipating either to occur prior to the kickoff of the '25-'26 season. Which again, leaves the margin for error precipitously thin. The problem continues to be that as long as Adams continues his "this team will be built through the draft" with no regard to how experienced/mature the team is relative to the rest of the league, there will be razor thin margins for error. Keeping the same coaching staff that wouldn't teach defensively responsible hockey under Granato and apparently also can't teach defensively responsible hockey further erodes the margin for error. The only true difference from last year to this year is the team IS ready to play from the get go. They've had the 1st goal of the game ~40 times now and have had multigoal leads in many of their games. But the youth, inexperience, and lack of instilling in these guys how to play in their own end and how to defend a lead has meant that oftentimes has come to naught. So, it would seem that Ruff HAS made a difference. Am still hoping he can convince those he reports to to let him make significant changes to his staff. The could help widen that margin for error which every team needs to have because they all hit rough patches.

Well, IF Kulich is pencilled in for the #1 C role and he hits a wall/ undergoes a "sophomore slump", pretty sure that would meet the criterion to fit the "1 - 2 players not meeting expectations ... will doom next season as well." Right?

Pretty sure @Thorner was sarcastically stating what he expects Adams to believe. Sadly, can also see that being Adams expectation. And if he IS their #1 next year, they will once again be setting themselves up in a situation where they have a very small margin for error and only 1 - 2 players not meeting expectations (and with a youth filled team, how do you not have 1-2 underperform expectations as they continue to learrn to be top level pros) or 1 - 2 key injuries (and how often do teams go an entire year without a couple) will doom next season as well. REALLY hoping that isn't the off-season plan.

Is he in the traditional C model? No. But if Matthews can be a C, guess any goal scorer can. As long as he's willing to have to put in extra work in his own end, sure, why not. And wouldn't be surprised if LT he's back at W. But for now, sadly, he's about the best they've got.

Danke. From our seats in the building, can't see the owner's box as it is blocked by the Jumbo Jumbotron. As mentioned, afaik they were never shown on the Jumbotron and if TP gave a tribute to Ray, personally missed it. So, don't believe either was brought to the attention of the fans; but maybe they were very briefly. (There were a lot of tributes to him at breaks and the intermissions.)

For whatever it's worth, the guy that usually sits next to us at the games said he heard an Adams interview yesterday or the day before where he said that the Sabres will not be sellers at the deadline. Personally, am expecting he'd like to re-sign Zucker and Greenway and those are about the only 2 guys that he'd be able to sell anyhow with any reasonable return. Maybe Jokiharju goes at the deadline as personally can't see him in their LT plans. Would like to see a true hockey trade, but that's not the time those are typically done. Maybe he can make something happen in February as it seems some true hockey trades are currently happening.

IF he showed up, he wasn't on the ice for the ceremony nor was he announced to the crowd AFAIK. Shame that they held the ceremony at 6PM on a weeknight. (Yeah, Friday evening starts the weekend, but a lot of people had to go to work yesterday. Tough ask to get off work at 5, get home, meet up with people you're going to the game with and get into your seat by 6PM.) Though the building was sold out (or close to it) only about 1/2 of the seats were filled when the show began. It was a nice ceremony. Not spectacular, but nice. Doug Allen singing the anthems 1/2 an hour later got as loud a roar as Rayzor got. Though in fairness to Ray, the building was a lot fuller by then. Glad the Sabres managed to find a way to squeak out a win for Ray's sake.

To the bolded, to a certain extent, but not entirely. Yes, his play picked up after Levi spit the bit vs the BJ's. It absolutely did. (But have NOT argued it is because of it.) And, the pattern of his play picking up after there is no legit competition for him for the starter's role and taliling off when there is legit competition has shown through in 3 consecutive seasons. And this year, his play has since fallen off even without legit competition for the starter's net while Levi has been in Ra-cha-cha and a guy nobody confuses for a starter is his primary backup. As to your claim that there has been no "legitimate" competition for the starter's role, have you not seen how Levi has played when called up late in the past 2 seasons nor the drop off in UPL's performance at that same time? Have made NO claim that there is causation there. But the correlation is strong. And that correlation flies in the face of the OP's post declaring that UPL is at his best when there is competition for the starter's net. Is his play tailing when he isn't the defacto pure #1 due to causation? Don't know. It could simply be UPL gets burnt out late in the year and can't get himself into mental game shape until a couple/few weeks into the season or something else. But the correlation is there. Could go on with a lot of nuance about expectations for him, but have stated it all before several times and simply don't have the time, nor energy, nor desire to rewrite it all. (And no, have no expectation that you or anybody else would remember what one particular poster on an anonymous message board has written likely months ago. Merely stating why there is little (though some) chance that my participation in this particular line of dicussion will continue.) (Cliff notes version: he has improved significantly in several areas physically since first playing in the NHL; he's picked up on the mental side of it too but nowhere near to the same degree. Can he continue to improve those aspects as well? Yes. Will he / will he enough to be a legit starter in this league when he has a legit 1B goalie paired with him &/or when the team is playing "important" games on a consistent basis? No f'n clue, and though there is hope he does, and do expect him to improve at that further, wouldn't have a mortgage payment riding on it.)

Interesting take, and you may be onto something there. One minor issue with this take though is that it is literally the exact same coaches that can't get the players to play in a disciplined manner are the same ones who were teaching them to play undisciplined the previous 2+ seasons. (Even Appert, who wasn't in Buffalo was teaching Granato's systems in Ra-cha-cha.) The players consistently do things that create issues with getting out of their own end and also getting into the offensive zone. They consistently leave themselves down a man in puck battles along the boards. They consistently still do the (in the manner in which they do it) incredibly inane dropback pass when attempting to enter the offensive zone on the PP. There are several other things that they consistently do poorly. The X's and O's of what actually get implemented on the ice are not good and IMHO that comes down coaching. MAYBE it is the players simply can't grasp these concepts but it's not like these aren't concepts they were taught prior to playing for the Sabres the prior 2-3 years. They should be able to get them. And some of the things that the players end up doing that work are completely on the players seeing what they're given and taking it. In the Pens game, there was one PP entry that IIRC Dahlin had where he skated the puck into the Pens zone because it was there for him and there were LITERALLY 2 Sabres still inside the faceoff circles down by UPL when the puck was IN the offensive zone. They've been coached to do the LOOOOOOOONG drop back pass so often that 2 of the Sabres on the PP were over 100' behind the play when the puck was in the offensive zone. And if you were watching at home, you had no idea that just happened because there's no way of knowing where guys that are out of the camera's eye are on the ice.

You do have one part of this correct - thought not giving Ullmark a longer than 1 year deal was a mistake (understandable due to the uncertainty of the state of the entire world at the time, but still a mistake) and hated that he left. You are completely mistaken though in your understanding of my views on UPL. The post you take issue with was dealing with 1 particular aspect of his play - and that is that he has not, contrary to the post that one was responding to, played better when having competition for the starter's role. He's actually played at his best when there has been no legit challenger to him. If you disagree wtih that, then go ahead and provide examples to the contrary. THAT is the ENTIRETY of what the post you take issue with referred to. That you make it into something it is not is on you.

Matt Ellis 100% was a problem. Under Appert the team will at least on occassion move Thompson around and also move the puck down low on occassion. But he uses the same assinine entries (or non-entries to be more accurate) that Ellis was a master of designing.

When has UPL ever played better when being pushed? Last year he was so bad in the preseason that he entered the year a distant 3rd on the depth chart which is right where he's ended the previous season. If not for injuries, he might never have gotten a chance. He didn't take his game to the level that got him his recent contract until Levi had become an after thought. And then at the end of the year when Levi was back in the mix again, his play fell off. Not claiming it was causation, but there was definitely correlation. And as alluded to above, in the season prior, after Levi was signed, UPL played his way into the 3rd goalie role. When there's been legit competition for the starter's job, UPL has tended to spit the bit. It's when the net is his and there is no competition for the role that he's played his best in past seasons. This year he didn't really start to play well until after Levi had the really bad game (against the BJ's IIRC). He played his best 2 games of the year right after that and continued to play well enough after that that with the sparse game schedule he never really had to miss a start until the crease was his. And by then Levi was playing maybe 1 game every 2 weeks and was no competition. UPL's worst early season game came against Moe-ray-all when Levi had finally gotten some regular usage again and then when Levi got sent down, UPL's game picked up again. UPL seemed to go into his slump not when he didn't have competition any longer, but when Dahlin was out for an extended period.

Falls under the category of coaching. Appert and Wilford should be punted into the sun.