Taro T

Agree with most of this, but believe you are leaving out one huge issue from last season that contributed heavily towards your issues 2 & 3. The coaches don't know how to get through to the players on this team. Is that because they don't know how to teach/implement the system Ruff wants them to run, is it beause the system (as opposed to Granato's lack of a system) isn't good enough, is it because the players can't/won't implement it, something other, or a combination of all? Yes. But regardless of why the coaches are ineffective and have been for years hear; making a change there would seem to be the low hanging fruit to get improvement from the players. So frustrated that there is no movement on remedying this particular issue.

Thought he meant Samuelsson and Power.

Love the idea of landing Demko. Realize that there's little chance he'd be the only player leaving Vancouver. Hate the idea of Buffalo being the team that believes it can turn Petterson around. So, very much like this trade idea.

He only has about a year left on his deal. 1 year and 2 days to be precise here on Sunday June 29. A player can't sign a new contract with more than a year remaining on a current multiyear deal. (They have to wait until January 1 to sign a new deal when their current deal is only for 1 season.) So, Adams could make a trade with Dallas today and have a gentleman's agreement with Robertson that he'll sign an extension on Tuesday, but if Robertson decided to walk away from that deal and play out his current contract the Sabres would have no recourse to force him to sign nor to force Dallas to nullify the trade. Robertson could very well get moved but would be surprised if it happens before Tuesday unless it is to a team he REALLY wants to play for. And guys do get traded before "extensions" can be signed, O'Reilly being the most recognizable example here. But there is a legit risk involved from the team's perspective and can't see a GM for Buffalo or Columbus or any other "destination" team being dumb enough to take that risk.

Why is 18 the draft age? Ken Linesman. Why doesn't it get modified to something such as players can be drafted at age 18 but only in rounds 1 & 2? Because it would have to be negotiated in the CBA (one can't keep adults from freely practicing a legal trade unless a union for workers of that particular skill agrees to it) and neither the players nor the owners want a change like that enough to push it through. Will be at least 5 more years before you see something like that. And wouldn't have any money on it happening then either.

True. It has a nearly perfect track record since Golisano sold the team.

Kesselring either ends up with Power or he might even end up Dahlin's partner.

And both of the extra games were played at neutral sites. They also did it in '93-'94. The reason given for the neutral sites was to determine fan interest for potential expansion sites. (And they eventually chose Atlanta, Columbus, Nashville, and St. Paul witht the next phase of leaguewide expansion.)

And IF they USE that cap space, the Peterka trade looks a LOT better. Again, am HOPING they do that. But until they actually do it, won't expect it. THIS trade could work. Clifton wasn't bad as the 6. But he was brought in to be much more than that. They'd likely like to see Timmons be more than the 6, and if he is great. But if he isn't, at least he's cheaper than Clifton and MAYBE they'll actually use that cap space..

It's a flashback, to a time outside the primary focus of the 1 Tank 3 GMs One Man Show Starring Kevyn Adams as all 3 GMs. Back before the world got so ugly. When life was simpler and a GM could hedge his bets about only roughly 1/2 of 1st rounders panning out, so draft 2 guys at one position or one name when you're REALLY taking it to the next level and you'll end up with at least 1 guy that can play on your roster for way longer than a significant portion of the fans are comfortable with. He's still focused on Life in a Northern Tank, but it still helps heighten the drama by taking us outside the present and allowing the GM to breach that so called 4th wall separating him from the audience with one of those honest conversationsTM that are so integral to the entire production.

And he had no issues whatsoever with overzealously collecting RHD's when it was his boy Botterill doing the collecting.

Which MIGHT have us still in the Darcy Regier portion of the 3 GM in 1 One Man Show as we're in flashback mode to the Grigorenko-Girgensons, Ristolainen-Zadorov, and arguably even the Long and Short of Two Tylers mode. It is SOOOOOOO confusing.

Trading into the Sabres slot is still considered moving up, no? 😉

Wait. He was playing with Karlsson in Pittsburgh? We didn't just now find our 3rd pairing D-man; we might've found our top pairing D-man. Yikes!!!

But it's only a net of 3 as Clifton went out the door. So, they'll need at least one coming back for Byram to truly get to the quota.

Hmm, any teams that have their eye on a large RHD in this draft now have a simple logic tree to follow on deciding whether to move up or not? Are the Sabres drafting ahead of us?

Doesn't THAT go without saying. Just sayin'. 😉

A fearing it's Demko and Petterson for Bryam, a 1st, UPL, and a prospect (Helenius?). Really like the idea of getting Demko. Hate the idea of Adams being the guy thinking he's smart enough to get Petterson back to what he was prior to signing that big contract.

Yeah, we blew right through the Murray portion of the Kevyn Adams 1 Man 3 GM show into the Jason Botterill all your RHDs belong to us phase of the show. Did not expect to see that heading into the weekend. Thought we'd stay on the Tim Murray overpay for what we want portion of the program a bit longer than we did.

Issue with that is. From going back to Berglund at a minimum, when cash gets freed up unexpectedly due to circumstances changing, it's always wound up in ownership's pocket rather than being used to buy something fun. HOPING that isn't the case this time. EXPECTING it is, until it finally isn't. (And it is very possible that in the new plan they do have a plan to spend that money. But after getting fooled on that one so many times, won't believe it until it has actually happened.

Isn't the knock on Gibson that he starts a season well and then fades? Hasn't the knock on the Wings the last couple of years been that they start a season well and then fade? We might have a match made in heaven. (Here's to hoping at least.)

Well, they have Byram, they have prospects up the wazoo, they have cap space. It makes too much sense to bring in a top F &/or a proven G with that ammo. Can it actually happen?

So, after Byram goes, we end up with Samuelsson Dahlin Power Kesselring Timmons Bernard-Docker Bryson & Johnson(?) as the spares. IF Samuelsson can keep from dragging down Dahlin, still not thrilled but maybe it can work? Or rather than going out the door for a F, does Byram go out the door in a package for Dahlin's partner?

As of Adams presser this AM (last night?) am convinced Byram is gone by July 10 but don't even really expect even Samuelsson gone this off-season. At least when they did absolutely nothing back in '23 they could roll back to the beilef that staying the course would work because even if the upward trajectory leveled off it was still upward and they were (seemingly) close. Not sure how they're going to justify coming into the off-season with a plan of only swapping out Byram for a defensive defenseman right after a sub-80 point season. Yes, they also swapped out Peterka, but that was only because they knew there was no way he was going to come back.

Interesting. Just for context, Quinn and Peterka were the B&GI players in January of 23. So, yeah, he wasn't always of the "get me the f out of here, now" bent.