Taro T

But have you ever strapped a 60# vest on and pulled a 200# sled around for 45 minutes ala Lloyd Bridges on Seinfeld? Bet 'cha haven't, have ya? Well, there you go. Slackers. 😛

In a vacuum, absolutely. And, again, would prefer they keep him on the roster even if they add say Kane and Danault along with a 4th liner. But, IF Ruff sees Skinner in the light that Drury saw Satan OR in the light that Smerlas and Devlin were on the '89 Bills (the leaders of the team that were long in tooth and kept that team from being Kelly & Smith's when it should've been Kelly & Smith's team), then am fine with him going away even if his replacement isn't obviously coming in through the door. Mittelstadt and Skinner were 2 guys the young guys gravitated towards; maybe management wants them gravitating towards others instead? (Not saying management does, just literally speculating "out loud.") There were MANY people that were upset when all those 3 guys left town respectively, but it turned out to be the best move in the long run (realize there will be push back on the Smerlas move as Jeff Wright was tremendously undersized (but the D never becomes Smith's and Talley's and Biscuit's if Fred is still there IMHO), but the Bills walked away from Parella too a couple of years later and don't see either move as the reason the Bills never won a Super Bowl). Will trust in whichever decision they make on what to do with Skinner.

Pretty much it comes down to, does the coach want him here on a lower line or does he want him out the door (ala Satan in '05). If after talking to the other players and staff, Ruff thinks that Skinner would be a distraction from/ detriment to what they are trying to accomplish or would become a room cancer if he isn't going to be on the top line (and all the tea leaves indicate he will not be on the top line) then he is not going to be here even if they don't officially fill his slot. Punting Miro with no widely recognized backfill for his production (though Briere was in house and should've been expected to replace his PP scoring if not the ES/EN) was one of the moves that lead to the best 2 year stretch in Sabres hockey in well over 30 years. Personally, have preferred that they keep Skinner this year rather than punt him to get him fully off the books 5 years from now rather than 6 unless they have something in the works that needs his money for this season now, but wouldn't be upset if they did simply walk away from him. Should Quinn be able to stay healthy all year, a lot of Skinner's production gets replaced right there.

Nobody will pay TB anywhere close to what they spent to get him. Those assets are all sunk costs at this point.

Not true. Flagg here used their play in the year or 2 before they got good but had no goaltending as examples of how the Sabres SHOULD be playing. He had dozens of examples of that team playing the right way overall but getting undone by below average AHL goaltending.

Dubois doesn't come as part of the package, does he? 😉 (Actual answer. Depends on the cost.) Technically trades can happen at any time at all. It's just post-trade deadline traded players aren't playoff eligible for their new team, so there's seldom incentive to make such trades.

Considering what the "official" shopping list is, not entirely convinced they'd spend to the cap minus Skinner's full cap hit. And if they aren't going to go to the cap minus his hit, then wait until next off-season to make the determination whether to cut him or not. Heck, it is not outside the realm of possibility that under Ruff he ends up in a situation where he is firmly in the bottom 6 and decides on his own that maybe getting traded elsewhere to play further from home for 2+ years isn't such a bad thing after all. And this comment has little to do with the subject at hand, but found it interesting leaving the MMArena last week and seeing on the outside of the building photos of Priolo (Captain of the Bandits), Tuch (Captain Candidate for the Sabres), Dahlin (Captain Candidate for the Sabres), Skinner (NOT a Captain Candidate for the Sabres), and then somebody else whose photo was blocked by a stanchion on the far side of the revolving doors they no longer use for entry into the building. No idea why Skinner's photo was up with those others, but as stated above, found it interesting that it was.

You can't add a player to your playoff roster at this point in the year. And they can't keep him in the minors over the summer hoping he doesn't have to clear waivers in October. It doesn't work that way. There is NOTHING (readily apparent) gained by waiving him today and keeping him in the organization.

What do you mean by perhaps? If they didn't waive him with intention to buy him out, where are they getting all this cap space from? They'll gain ~$950k in cap space by him being "in the minors." They gain $8.8MM in cap space above and beyond the actual $88MM cap by it simply being between July 1 and opening night. Truly not understanding your point.

That was niiice. But had hoped to see a bit more skewered spleen. There was almost no skewered spleen. And him overskating the puck on a penalty shot isn't exactly getting "destroyed." Would sue for false advertising, but did actually get full monetary value from it (exactly what was paid) so pretty sure there isn't a case to be made. 🍻

But, presumably he was waived so the Rags can buy him out, right? So, if the Sabres don't pounce on him by noon (2PM?) tomorrow, they'll have another crack at him at whatever contract they could come to an agreement with him on. (Of course, they'd now be competing with up to 30 other teams for his services at that point but still if he WANTS to be in Buffalo see no reason for them to guarantee an overpayment of him. And if they'd need to make a claim on him to land him, don't see Adams doing that.)

And that is a big part of why it is very plausible that should this Sabres team get to the playoffs, that they'll be able to "step out of character" so to speak and play tougher too. It's almost impossible to play physically AND at the very top of your game for 82 games for over 6 months; but when you might only have to do it for a week and a half (but hopefully for 2 more months) and the other team is getting just as beat up as you while you're playing that way, it becomes an accomplishable task.

Envy bread, yum. (Much tastier than sour grapes, but maybe not as good as having YOUR cake (especially when one gets to eat it too).) 😜

Wait one goll durned second. Filly is looking to trade Atkinson, trade him with retention, buy him out, OR keep him? Any other Phlyers Dreger can give us as quality insight into what Briere is considering for their futures as well? Short of talking him into early retirement (and MAYBE they're trying that tack as well, you never know), that is pretty much every option that is available to all teams for all players they have under contract.

This thread is pure gold. PLEASE keep it going.

Ah, yes, but 6 years ago (when the Sabres traded for Skinner in an analogous contract situation), Skinner was how old?

No show to an extent, but more just everything that could go wrong for the Swamp Cats did. Nurse initially gets a 5 minute penalty for kneeing Bennett which gets reduced to a 2 minute minor. Point man for the Cats hits the post on the PP and Reinhart pounces on the rebound and bounces it off the same post and though the crease. Later that same PP the F at the point makes a poor decision to win a race to a loose puck in the high slot creating a 2 on 1 with Montour the Cat dropping back. No biggie, right? Except when Montour goes flat to take away the pass to the far side F, his momentum takes him right back into Bobrovsky who winds up behind the goal line to the left of the net tangled up w/ Monty. Puck goes back in front and it's an easy goal for the Eulers. That initial goal was a microcosm of the entire game.

Wifey noticed it when it happened and got a pretty good kick out of it.

It is EXTREMELY unlikely that, should say Kane and Cirelli (or other vets of similar stature) get brought in that Kulich and Savoie will outperform them out of the gate. NOBODY is disputing that. Where the divergence of opinion comes in is that some of us believe that SHOULD it happen, it would be a very good thing; but others see that outcome as a "fail.'

🤷‍♂️

Yep. Pretty much the only TRULY gritty player on the team is Dahlin. Girgensons is close but doesn't bring the mean with it. (Which IMHO is a part of being gritty.) Clifton and Krebs bring the attitude and are (again IMHO) gritty players but are a little undersized and not dirty enough to make up for that being undersized to fully earn the label. And then there are guys that are still young and could very well be gritty with a bit more seasoning. Am pretty sure the point of these polls is for the OP to say the only truly gritty players are Dahlin, Quinn, & Benson (maybe Peterka too). But personally would only give him Dahlin out of that grouping and would say Peterka is at present the closest of those 3 forwards but not quite there yet. Tuch and Greenway can be gritty, but aren't consistently.

IF they demonstrably outperform others and earn spots on the roster, then they play as Sabres. Whether it is a fail of Adams or not, is entirely a reflection on what competition he brings in for them to outperform. If he brings in Kane and a true top 3C (say a Cirelli, Ek, or Danault) and a legit gritty 4th liner or 2 and those 2 make the roster, well then the Sabres should be really good (provided the GT doesn't take a step back) because they'll legitimately have 4 legit lines and the D should be improved under Ruff as well. If he brings in the equivalent of Jost and Robinson to be challenging for top 9 roles, well, yes, it'd be a fail. In either case, if they are 2 of the top 9 F's, they need to be on the roster. (Don't necessarily want them in 4th line roles at this point, so if they're say 11, and 12 would likely send them back down even though technically they're better than what else would be in Buffalo.)

So, they have a rink. No wonder Bettman let them move there. 😉

No. No "sea foam green" in there. Actually IMHO looks to be more derivative of Winnipeg's 3rds. Just with UT Alamo Heights initials in Caps rather than doing the UCLA cursive like Winnipeg used for "Jets."

Not exactly. Got the impression that Adams is going to continue to make adjustments to the roster and Ruff is going to significantly change how who is on the roster will be playing. While Ruff will have input into what Adams is trying to do (as does Karmanos, Ventura, Forton, etc.), it's Adams job to adjust who the personnel are and it's Lindy's job to adjust what those players are actually doing. Ruff actually specifically talked about the differences in how he'll be looking to improve the team game to game and it's Adams role to be looking for improvement on a more macro level (my term, not his, don't recall his exact words). Lindy also specifically said that he sees a Hughes, a Bratt, and a Hischier on this squad already. So, personally don't believe that Ruff sees the roster needing major overhaul. It will be interesting to see if they make a move to change the D makeup as Adams was really happy with the D after the deadline. If they do make a move there, would expect that Ruff was a major driver of the move. But overall, they seemed to be pretty much on the same page and they both were expecting a lot of improvement to come from being tougher to play against. Ruff specifically talked of actually having a system in their own D-zone, NOT trying to exclusively score on the rush (because they have way too much firepower), and trying to get tip ins / net front goals that they haven't gotten too often. He's also going to significantly revamp the PP and he'll keep the unit together without much (or any) variance in the personnel but that they'll be moving a lot and moving the puck a lot. Watch some of the Amerks PPs (particularly when Quinn and Peterka were there) to get an idea of what that'll be looking like. Seems that for the PP, it'll be Ruff's concepts with Appert's tactics as they'll both be working on it with Appert "taking the lead."