dudacek

Generally agree with this. All pieces are important, and a team is only as good as all its pieces combined. But the core is more important than the other pieces, because they are the ones that get the most ice time in the toughest situations against the best players. And, comparatively speaking, our core was the part of the team that contributed the least compared to expectations Basically, what I am responding to is the assumption that the core will be fine if they get better pieces around them. That's not necessarily true, and it certainly wasn't last season.

The Sabres have rebuilt from the bottom 4 times before: Punch: .404, .327, 564, .487, .706 stayed good but never got over the hump Gerry Meehan: .400, .531, .519, .613, .506 faded and reset under Muckler Tim Murray: .317, .329, .494, .476, failed and reset under Botterill Jason Botterill: .378, .463, .493, Botterill fired for insubordination Kevyn Adams: .330, .457, .555, .512 They've also tried to rebuild with youth twice without fully bottoming out, when Scotty started collecting 1st rounders, and when Darcy traded Hasek Scotty: .581, .556, .684, .563, .500 Bowman fired the next season as his rebuild failed Darcy: .500, .439, .518, LO, .671 team stayed mostly good before free agency chewed it away Year 4 results haven't proved to be a great indicator of success or failure of any particular build. In fact, it looks like it's not unusual to fall back in the 4th year of this type of build. The pattern Adams seems to be most closely following is that of Punch. We can only hope.

I realize I seem to be in the minority around here on this, but adding the best 3rd and 4th liners in the world won't mean ***** if Cozens, Skinner, Thompson and Tuch combine for less than 100 goals again as our core 4 forwards. The total offensive collapse of the core, not the goaltending, nor the defence, nor the contributions of Krebs, Girgensons, Okposo etc. is the biggest reason reason this team didn't make the playoffs.

I wonder about this too, and yet the 83 %....

He really is very much a "trust the process" man. If I'm honest with myself, I think I am too, and that's why probably why I'm willing to give him every opportunity to play this out. I think by and large his strategy is the correct one given this market and the crater that has been built in it. But just because the strategy is correct, that doesn't mean the execution is correct. That's where I tend to see things differently than @PerreaultForever a lot. I think Adams actually is trying to do a lot of the things he complains about in terms of culture and building from within. It's the execution where the two of them differ: Adams went speed and skill first over grit and defence, and force-feeding youth responsibility early rather than shielding them behind a collection of Pat Maroons and Brian Giontas. Given where we started in the summer of '21, I personally think we'd be in about the same place right now, had we followed the Maroon/Gionta path: a playoff bubble team, crossing our fingers that the youth was about to break out. But we will never know. What we will find out over the next 12 months is whether Adams did indeed blow it, and a Lindy-led core of Thompson/Tuch/Cozens/Quinn/Peterka/Bryum/Dahlin/Power/UP/Levi - developed the way he has chosen to develop it - has the right stuff. Because that is what Adams has built, entirely by design, and that is where he will sink or swim.

Do you think playoffs are the goal? I’m familiar with your position on that personally, and that’s not the discussion I’m going for here. I’m looking for your reading of Adams. Previously, Adams has always been pretty explicit that his goal was to build a team that could be a contender for a long time. Ideally, Tampa/Chicago, but if not, at least Carolina/Boston/Washington. I don’t think that has shifted at all. He’s not switched into “playoffs or bust” mode, I think he’s “critical mass is now here for long-term success” mode. Might be semantics as far as this season goes, but in general do you think his mindset has shifted?

So it’s the time of the year where we complain about how good the players are that we couldn’t wait to run out of town when they were here? Hmm…Krebs can definitely be ERod, different position, but Owen Power can be Reinhart (smart, but way too soft), UPL is Ullmark, Cozens for Mittelstadt, Greenway for Carrier, Skinner for Montour (skill, consistency issues, punchable face), gotta reach a bit for Jokiharju, but you guys are good. You’ll come up with something.

Great story. Pretty sure I’ve heard Kevyn Adams and Seth Appert say exactly the same thing. Pretty sure Murray and Biro and Mersch and Prow and Davies and Clague and Jost and Tokarski and Cecconi are those players. Pretty sure Neuchev and Östlund and others were in the press box in the playoffs getting blocked by some of the guys above. Sabres suck at a lot of stuff, the way they’ve handled the Amerks under Karmanos hasn’t been one of them. They’ve been competitive and they’ve developed players. You don’t need to make things up to complain about.

If failure can teach as much as success, we can hope Kulich and Rosen and Novikov will have learned something. Johnson and Levi might help the Sabres next year. Didn’t see that that from anyone else. One positive from that is that if Adams was considering leaving multiple spot open for rookies, their performance in this series may have convinced him that’s not a good idea.

Right, but part of the Chara thing is very much about the rawness and the development curve - how he was an outlier. Chara put up 22 points in 49 games in the Dub as 20-year-old. 9 points in the NHL at 24. Silayev at 18 is way ahead of Chara. I wasn’t making a commentary on how good he is or will be, just saying that scouts see his tools and his approach to the game as such a rare combination it could also make him an outlier to rules of thumb like production, especially when no one would be taking him to be a producer. The big question is patience. You might have to wait until he’s 25 before his game comes together and for a top 5 pick, that’s a long wait and a tough sell to your fan base.

Thanks for posting. Seravalli with a lot of the right questions and Adams not really dodging with his answers. Our GM says no more waiting; he plans to be good now. Likes his D and his goalies, wants to get harder to play against, may add to his top 6, will be upgrading his bottom 6. Likes his core, expects to be aggressive rounding the team out. Whatever moves he makes or does not make, he made his intentions and expectations pretty clear and we can hold him accountable for the results, or lack thereof.

And by the time they let me go, I was good for little else but annoying Sabres fans with my interminable message board posting and tiresome complaints about the lack of good pilsner on Vancouver Island.

Isn't the Silayev thing %100 'those tools, he could be Chara'?

I think the nuance is rather than chill bro, this group has a different immaturity issue, and they told you what it is: expectations, of themselves, of the fanbase, of each other. They struggle to screen out the noise. As much as I like the skill of this team, I think the regression of last year’s key players raised questions about Adams’ ability as an assembler of talent. I acknowledge this is work in progress, but we’ve seen no evidence whatsoever that he’s a builder of a good team.

Why is Matthews nominated for the Selke? Serious question, not trying to ***** on him. He seems positionally sound and he’s obviously got the size and skill to match up well. But I’ve never really watched him and said *****, there’s Matthews breaking up another rush, blocking another shot, or taking away another puck. But I see him 5 or 10 times a year and can’t say I’ve ever focused on him on that side of the puck. Was there some serious analytics that he dropped this year?

I feel the same way about the money thing. Most of these guys grew up in well off families, and never went wanting in their lives for material things. They’ve never worried about security or lusted over a life of leisure, or saw hockey as a means to an end. That’s a relic borrowed from other sports, or from hockey books written in the ‘50s. What matters most about the money for these guys seems to be how it’s another way of keeping score. You can’t assume the range of behaviours you see in your own workplace are going to carry over because the professional hockey player has been molded in specific place based on a very specific routine, background and set of beliefs. Of course it’s not one-size-fits-all, and there is a range that exists within the fraternity, but a lazy hockey player is about as likely as a stupid doctor, or a timid marine.

The idea of the chill bro elite athlete is something I’m forever going to struggle with in this day and age. Entitled, self-centred, sure - the environment that spits these guys out can lead to all kinds of character flaws. But lazy self-satisfaction ain’t high on the list. That’s just not the modern amateur sports culture, where the best are pulled together at a very young age, programmed by well-trained coaches, and cutting-edge sports scientists to seek out every advantage, and constantly measured against and compared to their peers in a dogfight to reach the top. The days of slackers with elite natural physical gifts able to slide by in sports that get played 6 or 8 months a year by flabby smokers vanished with Ed Van Impe.

I find these things are more so the breathless comprehension issues of the reader than issues with writer, though. At least if you are reading credible sources and you have a good grasp of how the draft actually works. When someone says “Matt Savoie is small, fast, and competitive. He’s got great hands and is always moving and attacking and prowling for openings like a shark. He reminds me a little of Danny Briere.” I certainly don’t go “whoohoo, we’re going to add a Danny Briere to the lineup next year.” And I don’t think many around here do. It just tells me that’s the type of game he plays at his current level of competition.

You’re right. Looking at the comps, looks to me like that leverage gets used pretty consistently. Lot of goalies got decent money with some pretty skimpy track records. I’d even go as far to say that Levi gives Kevyn a better deterrent than some of the other GMs had available. Alex Nedelkjovic? Jaro Halak?

If people are thinking they are going to turn #11 and Isak Rosen into Brady Tkachuk, well they are chuds. But they can turn a package like that into a player that can nicely fill a need in their middle six

Max points for alliteration there, extra for the snow and cold reference and the originality. Anything bee-related kinda works for me in terms of state-related and originality.

The Islanders traded #13 to Montreal in 2022 for Romanov, who then flipped that pick to the Hawks for Kirby Dach. The Canucks traded #17 and a 2nd for Filip Hronek. The Sens traded #7, a 2nd and a 3rd for Debrincat, the Kings traded #19 and Brock Faber for Kevin Fiala.

Wheeler dropped his first mock and it has: 9 Iginla 10 Helenius 11 Yakemchuk 12 Catton 13 Eiserman Those all look like good additions to me. They also all look like prospects with the upside teams would interested in trading for.

Does he have the forechecking/takeaway/carry through traffic element Tuch has? If so, you've suddenly made me a lot more interested.

These have been excellent @LGR4GM. In terms of utility (as opposed to play style) are we projecting a Caufield/Debrincat type: a guy whose role is finisher, first and foremost?