nfreeman

It was a valid point. He's had a cup of coffee at center. And it's not realistic to think that his skating can drastically improve. He's been skating his entire life, and is a below-average NHL skater. He might improve a bit but is never going to be better than average.

Unless, as PTR posits, Jack is lukewarm-to-negative about staying in Buffalo and is fully negative about signing for substantially less than McD got. As for Weber -- I don't agree that it would've been a dumb move for Philly, which has been mired in mediocrity for years. Weber is one of the best players of his generation and he was 26 when he signed it. The fact that Nashville matched is also an indicator that it wasn't a dumb offer. I don't want Eichel to sign an offer sheet either, but we shouldn't pretend that it's an impossibility. The Sabres have been atrocious since he arrived, they don't have much of a winning tradition, they play in a small, cold-weather market, they have a history of losing their best players and they are stepping into the unknown with an untested coach and untested GM.

Well, I don't think Eichel gives a crap about ticking off the fan base. I also think signing an offer sheet does not in fact alienate more than a small portion of the fan base. Vanek was pretty popular here despite signing an offer sheet -- we had a pretty active thread just recently with many posters agitating to bring him back. Vanek and Shea Weber.

It will be kinda disappointing if all of the forward kids are in Rochester on opening night and Moulson is in the lineup.

An offer sheet -- specifically, a 4-year offer sheet, which would result in Jack becoming a UFA upon expiration -- is my concern.

Now this is just some outstanding hockey talk boys (and btw dudacek this has been an excellent series -- thanks). I like Weave's take but I think Pommer is a more apt comparison than Sharpe, who had/has much more of an edge than Reino. I do think Reino is a better playmaker than Pommer, although Reino's speed lags behind both of them. I too hope Howie uses him at center, preferably in a 3-scoring-lines structure with Kaner on his wing. I agree with much of this but I don't think Reino is a #1 center on any playoff team. Well, someone's been into the sauce for lunch on Labor Day!

Prediction: it's either his last or 2nd-last NHL season.

This also raises an interesting question -- i.e. not "when" they decided this, but have they in fact decided this? I don't think trading Sammy, Darby and Ragland necessarily means that they have decided to sell off assets as a rebuilding move. The Darby and Ragland trades could simply have been unloading guys whom they felt didn't fit their schemes. The Watkins move could have been either (i) they didn't want to commit huge $$ to a guy with Sammy's injury history or (ii) they didn't want to commit huge $$ to WR before they knew they had the right QB. I think it's most likely that the Darby and Ragland moves were designed to make the team better and were scheme-driven. I'm not sure about the Sammy move, but if it was about not paying for a WR until they have a QB, then it's kinda of a piece with the Darby and Ragland moves -- and my biggest concern about McD and BB is that each of these moves (as well as some of their draft-day trades) smacks of being too clever by half. In other words, it's too clever to dump good young players because they don't fit your scheme, instead of adapting your scheme to the talents of your players. It's too clever to dump a superstar WR because you are trying to time your WR cap space to coincide with year 2 or year 3 of some future QB who may or may not materialize. It's too clever to give up draft picks because you think the guys you've identified in rounds 2 and 3 are sleepers. I'm not sure if it would be too clever to dump Dareus, but it might be. So while as I've said previously I like a lot of what I see from McD and BB, I am concerned that they might be missing the forest for the trees and accordingly we might be looking at yet another debacle. We'll see.

I don't either. For example, I think Grigorenko was never going to be a good NHL player. However, I do think proper development can help a prospect realize his potential more quickly and more completely. Zemgus is 23. If he has more to give, there's plenty of time for him and Wowie to figure out how to extract it.

This raises another interesting question -- how much rope do McD and BB think they have? And how much do they actually have? Surely they're aware that TP has shown a fairly short fuse with coaches and GMs of both of his franchises -- do they not think they are at risk of the same fate if the team delivers 2 crappy seasons in a row? Especially if Mahomes turns out to be a star and/or if Dareus does the same for another team?

Zemgus will be an interesting test case for Howie. He's got size and speed and generally seems to have the necessary tools, and has shown flashes over the years, but has been more or less completely ineffective for the past couple of seasons. OTOH, it's hard to imagine a worse environment for a young player to spend his formative years (age 18-22) than the one provided by the Sabres for the past few years. Did that environment ruin him? Or was he never much of a prospect to begin with? Remember that Darcy drafted him -- and Darcy was terrible at drafting forwards.

That opinion on Aud Smell is also reasonable (heh). However: at what point does it become the right move for the Bills to dump Dareus and take the cap hit? I believe the next time he fails a drug test, he's suspended for a full season. What if that happens? Or what if he just continually misses meetings, is late for practice and generally doesn't buy in?

2 very valid opinions. There does appear to be an increasing drumbeat from the Bills' FO indicating that they are seriously considering dumping him and taking the hit.

The cap hit for next year is what I was referring to -- i.e. if they decide now to burden themselves with a $14MM hit for next season (which I think is the cap hit regardless of whether he is traded vs cut), they are really in ZFG mode -- and arguably to a foolish degree.

What to do with Dareus is an interesting question. If they dump him and take that cap hit, they are really in ZFG mode.

OK, I like Taylor Swift as much as the next guy, but...

Abso-freaking-lutely, and rightly so IMHO.

My wife and I have been re-watching Mad Men. We are in the middle of season 3. What a great show.

Nicely done. I've been trying to put my finger on what exactly is so off-putting about an unacceptably high percentage of Jeff's posts, and you nailed it. Liger's "mansplaining" description is also pretty apt. Jeff -- you need to turn it down from the current 9.5 to about a 5, and you need to stop repeatedly congratulating yourself about being right about a rookie QB based on his first preaseason. It's bothering too many people.

I'm not saying it's OK. (And certainly I'm inclined to defend my kid and his friends, who are all good kids.) I mentioned it mostly to point out that while the racial/ethnic/sexual orientation slur/insults of prior generations seem to have faded from usage, this one lives on. Whenever my computer acts funky, my tech support guy recommends downloading the free malware detector from malwarebytes.com and running a full scan. It's generally pretty effective.

This is nonsense.

Boys -- you're really flushing logic down the tubes here. If Mahomes is as good as the QB the Bills draft in 2018, then the Bills should've drafted Mahomes -- because then they would've had a (presumably) good QB for another year. And there are multiple ways the Bills trade could blow up in our faces.

On the QB/Mahomes question: there is a whole lotta pretending to know Mahomes' future going on in here by posters on both sides of the issue. I think everyone can (or should) agree that: - Mahomes may or may not turn out to be a good NFL QB - it's very difficult to forecast Mahomes' future NFL success, or for that matter that of any other college QB - the Bills have done an awful job of addressing the QB situation over the past dozen years - the Bills should've devoted more high draft picks to the QB position over the past dozen years - it would've been highly defensible for the Bills to have drafted Mahomes - if Mahomes turns out to be a good NFL QB, then the Bills made a mistake in not drafting him - if Mahomes washes out, but White turns out to be a good DB and whoever the Bills get with KC's pick next year also turns into a good player, then the Bills made a good move in making the trade. Bottom line: there are huge and unverifiable assumptions underlying both the "the Bills screwed up again by not drafting Mahomes" and "the Bills made a smart move in not drafting Mahomes" positions -- and the ceaseless and repetitive pretending otherwise in this thread is becoming tiresome.

I can't speak for 11, but I'm guessing he means that Bogo is going to have a big bounceback season. I'll hearken back to the words of the greatly-missed X. Benedict after the Myers-Kane-Bogo trade: he spoke highly of Bogo and said that Bogo was better than Myers.

I'm kinda optimistic on Marco. I know people here have differing opinions on Garth (I generally like his stuff, although he's certainly whiffed on a number of things), but here's his 2 cents: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/GARTHS-CORNER/Scandella-less/6/87137 Have the Sabres ever had a guy named Marco before? In any case, there's a real possibility that he could elevate Risto's game, allow McCabe to anchor a very strong 2nd pair and generally be a significant difference-maker in team construction terms and hopefully #fancystats if not #simpletonstats. And I'm getting psyched for hockey season too.