Taro T

Not quite true. Syracuse got at least 1 shot on net on the Amerks PP.

Was making a funny, but it couldn't have been that good of a joke if it has to be explained. My bad. 🍻

Tryst. Not trust.

Umm, isn't that usually used to describe a brief tryst?

Bummer.

True. But when there are only 32 jobs above your current one, sometimes you leave a place you're really happy in because you don't know when or if that opportunity to move up will come around again.

Was going to go with Swamp Cats in 7 over the B's, but BuffaloNill picking the Cats caused a quick rethinking of that pick. Ended up going with the B's in 6.

You leaving your map of the world in the place or hiring a crane to take it with you?

Several things were the issue with the PK. 1. The goalie is your best PKer. Enough said on that one. 2. Because Granato philosophically wants to be able to attack at all times he puts his scoring forwards with reach on the PK. Thompson and Tuch probably would not be regular PKers on most teams except late in the game down a goal. Cozens was either the 2nd or 3rd PKer and he'll get very good in that role, but he is still young. Quinn was getting PK time at the end of the year and Krebs too. Young guys getting their 1st crack at it are still learning and will get better but it doesn't do much for the PK today. 3. The PK is ridiculously passive. IMHO that is due in great degree to #1 above. If guys agressively attack the puck carrier and close the primary passing lanes, they will typically cut down on the shots given up but when there is a shot it will be from a high danger area more often than when playing passively. If they have no faith in the goalie, they will rather suffer the good shot from outside and the opportunity for a rebound chance rather than trying to force a turnover with the knowledge that if they fail in their pressure they are giving up a shot their goalie probably can't stop. It'll be interesting to see if they get more agrressive next year with Levi between the pipes. Expect they will, but we shall see. 4. They are REALLY bad (even at 5v5) at defending when the puck is below their goal line. Far too often BOTH D crash below the goal line at 5v5 leaving a F crashing the low slot open unless the F realizes what is going on and gets back to cover. They tend not to crash both D down below the goalline on the PK but they still get too low to the goal line IMHO leaving space in the slot. 5. The one place where they do pressure the PP is when it is down low near the boards. Several times this season, we'd see Lyubushkin chasing a F to the boards and then one of the yound F's also cover the puck carrier leaving a 4 on 2 in the rest of the ice without any passing lanes taken away from the puck carrier because the D and F were on top of each other rather than at least working in tandem. (See Carolina's PK for how teams are supposed to pressure the puck carrier. The Sabres DON'T do that.) 6. As mentioned by posters above, the D try to play the puck when it is low rather than boxing out the F in the low slot leaving the puck to either his partner or the goalie. Take the PP F out of the play and then let your teammate (ideally the G, but the other D or even the lower F is a better choice than the 1st D on the scene) get the puck out of danger. 7. That doesn't even take into account smaller things like losing the initial face off far too often or having poor reverses or F's losing battles for loose pucks when the puck is close to the blue line. Getting another Samuelsson type should help with the poor reverses. And a legit 4C should help with the lost face offs and lost puck battles high in the zone. And if you get Levi a legit NHL goalie to tandem with, you will necessarily fix several of these other problems (or should be able to do so). Am HOPING a lot of the poor scheme was due to #1 and not simply having really poor concepts from the start. Because doing a lot of these other things right, with the goaltending they had most of the year would've very possibly (or rather likely) resulted in them being even worse. My 2 cents.

Roy for Ott didn't fail because Roy's production wasn't replaced. That was. (At least the end of his Buffalo tenure Roy; Roy himself didn't replace earlier Roy.) Hodgson replaced Roy's scoring. But nobody stepped up and replaced Hodgson's 2C scoring. Not Ennis, not Leino, not Grigorenko, none of them. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect that crew to do so. And Hodgson only replaced Roy's production for a very brief time as his genetic disorder kicked in about a year after Roy left. On paper the transaction, should have worked. Roy and (the concept of) Kassian for Hodgson and Ott was effectively what was swapped out. But they forgot they'd already swapped out Connolly for Hodgson. And Hodgson hadn't fully replaced Connolly. They needed 1 more move to make that work. That or Hodgson staying healthy. At minimum they needed 1 of those 2 to happen and ideally both. And, Olofsson down the stretch was only playing about 2 of 7 games. Doubt without some serious reshuffling that he'll have any chance of getting regular action in Buffalo should he stay a Sabres. How tough will it be for them to replace 20 games worth of VO's scoring just with youth being 1 year better than they were this season?

Agree with most of this, but don't understand the bolded. He won't max out his points in any given season by being the 3rd option at top of the umbrella, but how will that prevent him from being an effective player in the other aspects of the game?

The answer has to be either "ones with tails" or "ones with really friggin' good balance," right? ;)

Seems the strategy should be assume he is now the 63rd pick in the 2024 draft. If that, as part of a package, is something other teams would want for something that would help the Sabres this coming season and moving forward, great. If not, well they now have 2 2nd round picks next year and 7 total picks in that draft (they traded away their 5th). He likely tops out as a 2nd pairing D-man with 3rd pairing the expectation. It would be nice to have one that will stay in house for several years as he wouldn't have the learning curve/adjustment phase to your system that we see when bringing in FA 3rd pairing guys; but there are a lot of 3rd pairing guys available every year. Hoping his signing or bailing doesn't materially affect the Sabres strategy at this draft nor during the 1st week of July. (Would hate to see them forego adding an extra 5/6 guy because they don't wat to scare Johnson off only to see him walk anyhow.) Assume he's the 63rd pick next off-season and if they get him instead, well instead of having a 3rd pairing D 3-6 years from now (or a bottom 6 F 3-4 years out), they can have that sometime between now and 3 years from now. Woo hoo.

It does. Thanks.

Presuming they don't cut down on the shots against. (Expecting that to be a poor assumption as IMHO they will likely play a tighter defensive game in zone (though do believe they will give up a bit of a higher percentage of high danger chances relative to total shots allowed).) Personally, should they stay reasonably healthy again next year and get NHL caliber goaltending (not even GOOD NHL goaltending), which with the team being so young overall is reasonable to expect, am expecting them to have comparable GF totals next year relative to this year and lower the GA by at least 30 and likely 40. (Yes, expect this team to drop the GA by nearly 0.5 GPG next year.)

Not nitpicking, genuinely curious, you say the grades (and those of the Fs as well) are adjusted for roles AND expectations. It doesn't really seem like expectations factored in except for 2 or 3 grades. And the roles don't seem to have factored in at all. Power was a #3 D-man playing #1 minutes (as were 2 other D-men) while IIRC maintaining very good stat metrics. How that only rates a B is curious if role is getting factored in. Again, not meaning to nitpick, just understand better. You have very well reasoned takes in most all your posts and personally agree with many of the grades you handed out.

Have only seen a handful of Rags games this year, but friends that are Rag fans are really high on Miller. Pretty much consider him their 2nd best D-man. Would be all over getting him for a single draft pick.

Can they modify the bench to keep a spittoon there? If yes, absolutely. If no, still yes. ;)

Bickering Bills was '89. Only Jerry Whatshisname at the Snooze was trying to keep that going during the Superbowl run.

Early prognostication on whether the referendum passes?

Started this season. The Loafs have the lamest one: Milk.

Not many, but the list includes the '05-'06 Canes squad. And the GM's experiences with that team seem to have greatly shaped his views towards team building and trying to sustain success long term. That team was unable to sustain the success long term. Everything the GM has said and done indicates that he expects the best way to be the one team in any given year that hoists Lord Stanley's Chalice is to be one of the handful of teams every year that has an opportunity to catch lightning in a bottle and you need a lot of luck to go with the skill and plan to be that 1 team that does actually win so he likely isn't EVER going to go ALL IN on any 1 given season. (The exception possibly being when Dahlin is getting too long in the tooth to be a top player for more than just 1 or 2 more years.)

Would love to see Krebs become a Gilmour. But holy cow is that a huge ask of the kid. He does seem to have the body type and the temperament. But Gilmour was a special player and was scoring as just a rookie and a sophomore the way we'd probably be very happy with Krebs if he could get to that consistently. (Not even going anywhere near the PGP+ player Dougie was in his heyday.)

The question would've been better had it asked what of those sorts of moves JW was hinting at was Adams in on and why was/wasn't the triggered pulled on more of them. (Pretty sure we already have the answer to those questions. But putting it out there like that would've resulted in a more interesting answer IMHO. (And again, haven't had a chance to listen to today's press conferences; but am basing this on the responses here and the other times that Adams has spoken on these subjects.))