nfreeman

Well, FWIW, Paul Hamilton said on WGR this week that Kane "isn't the most well-liked guy in the room." It will be interesting to see if they try to sign him to an extension after this season. If he enters next season as an upcoming UFA then I think we have to assume he will get traded at the deadline next year.

Whoa. Eichel's ear is fire engine red.

But Eichel definitely gets credit for responding to that shot on Moulson.

As I said: mailing it in.

Eichel looks like he's mailing it in.

That was Lehner in a nutshell -- huge juicy rebound right into the slot and onto the stick of the opponent.

Yes indeed.

This seems topical: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/whats-behind-carey-prices-recent-slump-220350694.html

Reservoir Dogs. Some of the guys are likable, some are edgy, everything lacks polish, nothing seems logically connected and it turns into a complete bloodbath.

I'm interested to see Nelson. He hasn't looked ready for prime time, but has shown flashes of good skating and puck skills IMHO. We should remember that most defensemen take a while to learn the NHL game -- Soupy was still getting healthy-scratched in 2005 -- and he got a $50MM deal in 2008.

Get the D back to a reasonably healthy state and see how they look in the 2nd half of the season. If they deliver another 80ish point season pace in the 2nd half -- seriously consider whether the game has passed DDB by (like, e.g., the NFL game apparently passed Rex by).

Be careful, my friend. This is what they do. They get you kinda psyched to watch a game and then, when you've got your food and your drink and your spot by the TV all set up -- they pitch a stinker.

Well, as someone noted upthread, the correct comparison isn't the additional goals those guys would've presumably delivered vs zero -- it's the goals they would've delivered vs the goals that were delivered by their replacements, including on the top PP (which has performed surprisingly well all season, including while those guys were out). It's also important to remember that every team has injuries -- so again, the correct comparison isn't this team vs a 100% healthy team -- it's this team vs a team with an average amount of injuries. I don't dispute that injuries have set the Sabres back, or that with better luck in that department plus better performance in the SO, they might be on the bubble. I just think we as fans are entitled to evaluate them based on their results, and to give as much (or as little) weight to the injuries as we see fit.

Game on! Will Carey Price finally rise to the occasion vs his nemesis Anders Nilsson? Will Casey Nelson give Shea Weber another lesson in NHL defense, toughness and general manhood? The Habs are in 1st place in the division but a so-so 4-4 in their last 8. Patchy is having a nice season with 21 goals so far.

awesome.

Well, I'm willing to stipulate that any team that makes the playoffs and finishes with fewer than 20 regulation losses is exempt from criticism on the "not really .500" basis. Separately -- Taro and Liger -- pls settle down. We got Liger back and I'd like to savor the moment.

It's all part of the proh-cess, you hoser.

I don't think we're arguing in a vacuum. I think everyone here is well aware of the various difficulties the Sabres have been confronted with this season. I think everyone here is also capable of considering those difficulties in evaluating the overall state of the Sabres. Some of us think GMTM deserves a pass, while others do not. No one is pretending that Eichel and Kane didn't miss games -- it's just that some people think that even with those (and other) setbacks, the team should be better than it is.

I will ask you again: if the Sabres are well out of the playoffs again next year, should GMTM be accountable?

No. The Sabres are not .500. They have won 17 games and lost 27. If we want to pretend that the definition of .500 should disregard OT and SO losses -- enjoy your 82-point, bottom 5 in the NHL team. At least they're ".500"!

No need to guesstimate. Eichel's been back for 23 games. The Sabres are 10-9-4 in those games, for 24 pts. That is an 86-point pace for the season, or 46 pts in 44 games. As it stands, they have 43 points in 44 games (an 80-point pace). So it's fair to say they would've had 3 more pts -- so instead of 3rd-last in the NHL, they'd be tied for 5th-last. BFD.

So is Nilsson, who is starting tonight, officially getting a chance to seize the #1 job? Discuss.

OK -- but the ultimate point remains: the look-good-on-paper additions haven't translated into materially better results. That is on GMTM.

Quite a drive-by from Liger! I'm hoping for more.

I don't really agree with the "failed/failing" characterization of most of these moves -- except for Moulson, which has been an utter debacle -- but I completely agree with the ultimate point: GMTM is accountable for the results. The results have been poor. Good post. I completely agree that it isn't the failure to make the playoffs that's such a letdown as much as it is the failure to be competitive. I agree with much of this too.