...

This is true. Of the 7 problems, his share is 1 / 7th.

...and this is how Nashville plays. It's the offense and defense working together. In the playoffs they're amazing to watch.

Balderdash. Maybe that's what some write-up somewhere says about Sheary, but anyone watching these games knows very well little of that represents reality. Skinner courageously...to a fault...goes to the dirty areas. Sheary never goes where it takes a little courage. The best we get out of that guy is he courageously nearly hyper-extends himself trying to get his stick into a play. Skinner and Sheary have been with Eichel. Who is still playing with Eichel? Sheary could not capitalize on being paired with Eichel. That he "needs" a good center is a distraction from what he really is. Skinner is a master at creating upset on ice and drawing penalties. Sheary is a nothing in this area - there is no intensity to his game. I never was stricken by Sheary's alleged speed. Skinner can skate circles around most of the league. Sheary shows none of this ability. Speaking of courage and skating, Sheary routinely turns over the puck because he lacks the courage and skating ability to avoid hits and so coughs up the puck in a variety of ways.

I have to suppress my inner Jame. There is no way I would ever consider Sheary "Skinner light". The ballparks aren't on the same planet.

Free drinks?

It's not coached. It's something else. This problem has been occurring with this team for a decade or longer.

On your Sheary comparisons, you forgot to mention Samson at $3.65 mil per. I expected from Sheary someone who could score goals if not fulfill the other duties of a second line winger. I didn't expect the amount of turnovers and failures to maintain possession. I would hope for some sort of net-front presence and ability to battle on the boards. I won't even bother looking for guys across the NHL who make around $3 mil per or less and provide all of these things because you know they're out there. On "the kids" we're seeing these kids being given a chance and it's not working so well this season. Therefore it's reasonable to conclude that doing so next season is a gamble.

I can not in any way agree that Sheary is good. I think relying on Mitts and Tage to be better next season is a gamble. I don't think Bogo is movable, right? Per his contract. I've been a staunch defender of Risto for quite some time but the past few weeks I've been watching him differently. He and Bogo are really, really bad at maintaining possession on exits and he's a major source of give-aways. We can't have that any more in the D zone. We already have Dahlin doing that, who, obviously, we should expect to improve (greatly) in this area. If Bogo can not be rid of, then we have to get rid of his doppelganger. If the offensive lines were more productive, I would be okay with on-boarding Olofsson during the season, but, like Mitts and Tage, I don't want to rely on his potential contributions. So, Jbots must get rid of at least two of Sheary, Girgensons, KO, and Sobotka if he plans on succeeding at improving the foward lines.

I happen to appreciate Bettman's response to all of this:

I'm going to combine some content I put in other threads here, because I think it summarizes what JBot needs to do and why. The mission: Determine a style/system of hockey that has a better chance of success in the playoffs than other styles/systems (there must be data to ascertain this, no?). Find a coach who ostensibly will be excellent with that style/system. Create a roster that can successfully play that style/system. I think items 1&2 are done. Therefore, Phil isn't going anywhere until 3 is completed. On item 3, here are the players he has yet to upgrade: Risto, Bogo, Scandella, Girgensons, Sobotka, KO, Pommenstein, Hunwick, Tage, and Sheary I also suspect that Nelson, O'Regan and Wilson will need to be upgraded as well. So, JBot likely has through all of next season to do what he can about the above players. Some, obviously, will be easy to get rid of. Replacing them with ideal players is another story.

I can tell you that of our players, those who would look stupid in Nashville are: Risto, Bogo, Scandella, Girgensons, Sobotka, KO, Pommenstein, Hunwick, Tage, and Sheary. I haven't seen enough of Nelson, O'Regan and Wilson to say.

Better talent that can make accurate passes, will hit when necessary, and maintains puck possession. That's offense and defense. They have four offensive lines that can score. Their D will clear the zone more efficiently.

Bogo sucks, yeesh.

Skinny "Bad Boy" Jefferson.

I'm so sick of the COLD!

Possession instead of dump-n-chase. It sounds so easy.

UGH! Not on Hutton, on Scandella.

There was conversation...here? On the radio broadcast yesterday? ...about how an organization treats players goes a long way in helping to acquire players. Things about how if a team is able to get a traded player to a team where they might have legit opportunities, or being cognizant of the impact a trade might make for the person/player and dealing with it as best as possible, becomes part of the reputation the organization has among players. I'm a believer in that approach, so, I have no problem with how the Sabres handled Montour yesterday.

So here's a thought, perhaps more tangential than directly related to this sliver of conversation... What if instead of assembling a roster of those whose stats are favorable without regard for the team and circumstances around them, and then expecting to find a coach who can create a system that works best for that assemblage (which I believe was the plan of exGMTM) what if JBot is working in a different direction? What if that direction is thus: determine a style/system of hockey that has a better chance of success in the playoffs than other styles/systems (there must be data to ascertain this, no?). Find a coach who ostensibly will be excellent with that style/system. Create a roster that can successfully play that style/system. What say you, dear reader, about this as "the plan"?

I really don't disagree. Replace Zegmus, Sheary, Sobotka, Scandella, Hunwick, KO, Pommenstein with better pieces and a lot of these losses are wins.

I figured it out: Sheary has a gambling problem and bets against the Sabres routinely.

Hunwick you HAVE to hit that guy in the corner.

Woah, Eichel. So Jacked, he took down his boy.

Is the parking garage to that place twice as high as the arena?