7+6=13

North and South game, lets go.

Kane, IMO, gives relentless effort and gave this team some offense in an ultra boring system deployed by Bylsma. He was one of the few players we had that would go to the net and be in position to be set up for a goal - and he got several clean up goals for his willingness to stay at the net. He's a difficult guy to clear out. His effort at times could also be categorized as out of control and he often takes ill-advised shots - when a pass was the better option. Nonetheless, his effort was appreciated, especially by his supporters because that's ultimately something that matters greatly to fans. In saying all of that, I don't see him being a system guy - and if that's what JBot is looking to build than he may not be your man. Especially from your top 6. Now, I don't necessarily mind having a non systematic player like Kane on my 3rd or 4th line. If you're more talented than your line mates or the defensive players you're against, do your thing a little bit. However you can't pay a guy that much money for that role. I think this may be one of the biggest factors in the decision JBot has regarding what to do with Kane. Can he be a guy that plays within a system and get an assist 3 games in a row while patiently waiting for his goal opportunities vs forcing those opportunities?

I like what I read about Jake Oettinger who is 19 1/2 but your point is well taken about goaltenders in the draft predominantly being young. I'd love for us to draft Oettinger in the 2nd round. I'd also like JBOT to figure out a way to get either of the Penguins prospects Tristan Jarry or Casey Desmith.

Not every goalie gets drafted when they're 18 though. I do agree they take a considerable amount of time to develop but if you draft a 22 year old - he could contribute to the organization sooner than the Peterson example.

I don't see us trading Kane for equal value on defense for what he brings to the offense. In other words we're not going to spend the 6-8 million we'd have to give him on a defender. Mainly because those type of defensive players rarely become FA's and a team isn't trading that type of defenseman for Kane. The Kane decision has to be based on the simple concept of can we afford Kane, upgrade our defense with a 3.5 mil guy and sign Eichel and/or Sam - or do we need Kane's money to accomplish that. Kane is a very good hockey player, he's not perfect but he's not easily replaced. If he leaves or gets traded we'll downgrade the offense for a period of time for reasons necessary for the future vision.

I liked Murray and he deserves a lot of credit for building a team with very little talent into a solid roster to build on. However I disagree about him doing something earlier about the system as I don't think GM's should get involved in that during the season, that's should be left to the coach. He had an opportunity after the season to convince the owners how he'd address the system and the answer appears to have been not good enough. It is time to move on though and I think we got a good one in Bots.

I use the WGR app and it works perfectly. I wait until the shows are over and listen "on demand" - which takes out every commercial break.

I'm not sure counting on the player at pick #8 being that player if Kane is traded - mainly because it could be 2-3 years. So in your scenario Carrier is definitely an option.

There's are no on ice reasons to trade him. The only reasons to trade him is if we anticipate not being able to fit him in the cap at the price we value him at or Bots has information that the numbers he's getting from his agent on an extension is just too high compared to ours.

I like Carrier as the 2nd LW - unless you're already counting him? I'm higher on Will than most though.

Interesting that we have a different view when Lehner spoke out and how much he should or shouldn't have. I'll admit I probably didn't hear or read everything he said but the moments that stand out in my memory is him calling the team out. I didn't care for it. He would say "we" but then his explanation was clearly directed at the other players. He would complimented Gio and say the team should be listening to him and following the coaches game plan. They were curious comments to me because it was obvious we didn't have the talent to do much better on defense - so was he calling out the offense too? If he was - there wasn't a lot of people including players (as it turns out) that liked the game plan. He did take the 3rd most shots against so I can definitely understand the frustration - I'm just not a big fan of goalies calling out skaters.

I was waiting for this to get brought up. I don't dislike Lehner on the ice although of course he's frustrating at times - most goalies are. However I think he may have called out his teammates a bit too much during the season. He never seemed to put any responsibility on himself but was all too quick to say there was a lack of effort in front of him. I also think he was wrong about effort most of the time. We lacked skill but it sure looked to me like the guys for most of the year were trying.

Do it in your time

Only difference is JB would be tacking Dino when he comes home.

I don't think he said everything starts with building a winning organization in the AHL. I think he said constant development is a must from the NHL players, AHL players and elsewhere and if anything breaks in that line it doesn't work. IMO everything starts with hiring a coach that can get the N and S game going with an emphasis on understanding how to get that done through Eichel and ROR. Obviously I'm not saying that will be the first thing he does as there may be other decisions and getting ready for the draft that happens right now - but we can't wait until the shelves get stocked in the AHL to be ready to win.

Because he didn't cough into the mic like Terry - I just got the sense they're not n'sync. Bye bye bye!

He won't neglect the defense just as Murray didn't - mainly because it's the elephant in the room. The difficulty will be making the correct decisions - that's what Murray did wrong. I'm confident that was a large part of what was discussed in the interview process. Choosing a coach that through his philosophy can make the defense better than the limited physical ability and/or experience will be important.

I don't really understand this post. Drafting and an even (flat and smooth) approach isn't what this team needs. It needs a totally different mindset - mostly from the NHL head coach, a defense that needs to be rebuilt or assembled depending on how you define our D, decisions on Kane and probably goaltender and smart resolutions to some of the contracts not working in the teams favor. The pending expansion team and who you expose is important in that you need to make sure the player you want taken by them - gets taken. Moves need to be made so aggression will be needed. Drafting is a process that often takes 3-4 years to see the benefits. I know it's an important thing to keep the team replenished but that's not where we're at now.

Offensively with a better philosophy - we have the talent to be a playoff team. We are not a playoff team defensively and one of three things have to happen 1) we make one or two significant player acquisitions. 2) The coach's scheme elevates the play of the defense. 3) We become so good offensively we outscore teams and that becomes our identity.

I guess we'll never know. My main point was Murray has my respect for his effort. We should have been better even with our lack of defensive talent and I put that on largely on Bylsma.

Murray did a bit more than entertain you in a press conference. I think Murray put everything he had into making this team a winner. A well connected man in hockey that I'll always respect for his efforts. Obviously every move he made didn't work out but I don't think we got the short end of any trades. Heck he got so far as to be able to make an offer to Stamkos. He pursued Vesey, Drouin and Antipin. I didn't like his goalie decisions, Moulson and Ennis extensions, and Bylsma was a flop. What an active and creative GM he was - far beyond just a fun sound bite. Ok, I feel better.

Clearly this isn't a valid pic. Skies never look like that in Buffalo.

Buffalo does not poach from Pittsburgh sports.

I think Pegula had to have been impressed with Murray's talent evaluation skills - for the most part - but I think he just believes we could be better. I believe he wants his GM to be more than a "hockey guy" - I think he wants a better relationship with the GM and wants him to be more of a face of the franchise (PR) guy too. I don't think he takes into consideration the money lost on the contracts - I believe he wants to win. Whether he actually knows how to go about doing that is one thing - but I do think all he wants is to WIN.

My thoughts: How do we pay for him? We'd have to trade Kane for a defenseman. You can't invest more in the offense without at least counter acting for the defense, IMO. Is he the type of player that accelerates the development of the young future Sabres or is he the kind of signing needed when Jack is around 23-24?