nfreeman

It won't be Vogl, because he's leaving too, but I have to believe that someone -- probably someone already there -- will write columns -- and that there's a good chance that whoever it is will do a better job than Bucky (I was always OK with Sullivan's columns).

This could happen, but the Sabres will need to become a good team pretty soon, and for a number of GMTM's draft picks to prove out as better-than-JAG-to-very-good players. E.g: - 2 of Guhle, Borgen and Fitzgerald become top-4 defensemen - Nylander and Pu become top-6 forwards - Reino becomes a consistently productive player who shows up when it counts -

No. The tank failed because it didn't achieve its goal, which was to produce a good hockey team. The tank and the rebuild are two stages of the same project. To date the project has failed. It is impossible to know whether you, Robvy and others are correct that the project would've been successful had GMTM been better at stage 2 of the project -- but what is known is that to date the project has been a crashing failure. Now, it's possible that Dahlin will become a superstar and lift the Sabres to perennial contender status. If that happens, the question of whether the tank was successful will be impossible to answer, because it will be impossible to know what would've happened without Dahlin. Of course, that will be a good problem to have.

That's an interesting interpretation of this conversation.

The bolded is very fair. My thinking is that getting Gruby would give the Sabres two chances that a young guy will step up and seize the opportunity next year instead of one shot at it. If it's Ullmark? Then we may have wasted a low #1 pick next year, but we'll have a good goalie in Ullmark and Gruby will still probably be either a decent #2 for the Sabres or an asset that can be traded.

Would you agree that a tank is a type of rebuild? And that the Sabres, in approaching their rebuild, adopted the tank as their method of rebuilding? And yet AZ finished ahead of the Sabres this year.

When the Lehner trade happened, I thought it was a slight overpay, but not egregiously so, and I was generally OK with it because I thought GMTM had identified his guy -- who had pretty decent credentials -- and gone out and gotten him. I was willing to give GMTM the benefit of the doubt on scouting and knowing his guy, which I think is the kind of deference one has to give to a GM. As for Gruby's similarities to Lehner -- this is very true, as I think it would be for any young, rising #2 goalie that the Sabres might acquire -- although Gruby comes from a better organization than Lehner (and GMTM for that matter) came from. I'd rather get Holtby than Gruby, but if JBott identifies Gruby as his guy, then I'm fine with Gruby. The broader point of course is that I'm OK trading a low first-rounder for the guy that the Sabres' GM thinks is the long-term answer in goal -- understanding that the GM might be wrong on his guy -- as GMTM was about Lehner. That's just how it goes. As for Ullmark, I'm strongly against going into the season with him as the clear #1 and only a CJ-like backup for him. I think there's at least a 50% chance that Ullmark does not have the right stuff, and if that turns out to be the case, it will be another wasted season, filled with losing that seeps even further into Jack, Reino, Risto and everyone else on the roster. So I'm really hoping for Gruby, Holtby or someone else who will come into camp with at least a strong shot at the #1 job.

Well, whoever is so inclined can dance around with terminology all he/she wants, but I'll venture that no one here wanted the Sabres to tank, get Eichel and still stink, which is undeniably what has happened so far -- and what the brave, clear-headed and handsome anti-tankers were concerned about. If what we've seen so far is a successful tank, I'd hate to see a failed one.

We've beat me to it. I'd also point out that if the Sabres win a cup, it will likely be due at least as much to Dahlin than to Eichel -- and I disagree that getting Dahlin was part of the tank.

I would trade the SJ #1 for Holtby or Grubauer in a heartbeat. Not Rinne though.

A more nuanced, and accurate, view is that if your house needs some repairs, you shouldn't burn it to the ground because you think you'll ultimately be able to build a better house with a fancy cornerstone that has caught your eye -- because doing so usually ends up in you and your family sleeping under a bridge.

Respectfully, I think this is a distinction without a difference. The Sabres didn't tank, and no one would ever tank, just to get a great player. A lousy team with a great player is no fun a-tall, as some of us have learned the hard way the past few years. The sole reason to tank was the (wrong) theory that getting Eichel would enable a rebuild that would get the Sabres to a higher level than they otherwise would've achieved. The tank may be stage 1 of the project, and the rebuild stage 2, but they are very much parts of the same project.

Prime rib roast is an outstanding cut of meat.

That was a fantastic performance by LeBron.

There is NFW a new stadium will cost less than $1B.

I’m starting to wonder if dudacek is some kind of sinister fifth column, trying to cripple the Sabres by keeping Lehner in net.

You mean you don't mentally pronounce "OSP" every time you read or type it?

Building a new arena seems pretty GD wasteful to me.

I was really just asking a question -- not taking sides! (And noting that I haven't really seen any detailed coverage or explanation of TG's position -- just a series of content-lite news stories promoting a "rich skinflint thinks he's entitled to special privileges because he pays a lot in property taxes" narrative -- which are probably eliding some important details.)

I guess the question is whether the government entity that is prohibiting him from employing goose-prevention method XYZ is the same government entity that he is asking to control the geese for him.

Despite my strong distaste for DC, I found myself rooting for the Caps last night and will likely do so in the Finals. Related point: there is a Caps fan blog with a great (IMHO) name: "Russian Machine Never Breaks."

Serious question: has anyone (including any of the media coverage) looked into TG's side of this? e.g. is he legally prohibited from shooting the geese or taking other steps, with the result that he has to live with mountains of goose poop? Although it's certainly an appealing narrative, it doesn't seem likely that he would just demand that the town fix a problem on his property with no justification.

How do you think a stadium gets funded? This is certainly true. My point though was that the other NFL owners aren't going to pick up the tab for a new stadium -- none of them got this kind of help from the other owners, and they aren't about to start with the Bills. I agree that it's a complete waste of money for the limited usage reason you pointed out -- and this is true regardless of who pays for it.

What does this mean?

Well, this is true, but there is zero possibility of this happening.