LTS
-
Posts
8,042 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by LTS
-
-
2 hours ago, sabremike said:
The way that almost everyone has nosedived and regressed this season is such a damning indictment of the entire coaching staff. A serious organization would recognize this and take appropriate action (ie: Start handing out pink slips and hiring competent pros who are actually good at their jobs). The worst organization in modern hockey history (us) will simply do nothing, continue to fail forever and wonder why they keep failing.
I wonder why you keep putting energy into this team given all of its transgressions. If I felt as negative as it appears you do in your posts I would just tune the team out for awhile and save my sanity.
The team has regressed this year. It very probably has to do with the fact that they are a young team and they are not handling the expectations placed upon them. They are playing too tight. It could be that they just suck. The question is, are the players capable of playing better and the coaching staff is keeping them from achieving or is it that the players are not executing what the coaching staff expects? I'm not sure we know the answer to that. There's a ton of speculation here. It was the same coach that had them playing better last year. So why have they regressed?
1 hour ago, Dr. Who said:He's over-corrected for the previous toxic atmosphere. I don't know what the answers are, but from my distant perspective, I'd like to see KA choose a core of young players not yet on the club or just starting as keepers (eg. Kulich, Rosen, Levi, and Benson,) and put everyone else on the table for trades. It would probably do him good to even take less than how he values someone to break the ice in a trade. He's too scared to lose a trade, or too emotionally invested in his players. And really, I'd like to hire Michael Peca as HC. If a team ultimately reflects the attitude of their coach, Peca would shape them into a team that wins, even at home, lol.
Perhaps he did. But it's hard to say that an alternate path would have been better. That's the luxury everyone here has. First, hindsight is 20/20. Second, we can all make prognostications as to what changes are correct but we all make those without any direct insight into the organization or the league itself. It's pure speculation and certainly when it plays out negatively as predicted the justification is there. He could have made the changes people thought and it could have still not worked out to be any better.
When the Pegula family took over they tried all manner of quick fix solutions and they all failed. They've settled on a plan to build a team and by all accounts that was working. For that I am at least thankful. The quick fixes only burned out all talent from this organization.
The fans will always have a shorter timeline than the organization because they continue to carry baggage of past management structures with them. That said, it's clear there are some changes that need to be made and the inflection point is upon us.
They have to decide on Benson. That alone requires them to take action. They have to decide on how to ice 6 defense and 12 forwards. This 11+7 crap is no way to ice a team. They need to move some bodies. Whether that's moving some of the prospects for players who can definitively help the team now or moving some of the vets blocking the prospects so the prospects can help the team now. Something has to change. The risk with bringing MORE youth in is that it's already a very young team.
The Sabres will be forced to make one of the less common December trades that helps the team turn things around. They aren't a team that will be able to wait for the deadline.
-
9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
I think American news is crazy and it's driving the country crazy (along with the internet "news" sources as well of course). Constant drama and over reaction all the time.
Do we blame them for SabreSpace drama and over reaction too? 🙂
In all seriousness, those who were on here posting "preliminary reports" should not do so unless they want to link to the specific source that was saying it. Situations like this can be serious and we've unfortunately all been witness to it. It's right to consider the possibilities of something like this but equally important to consider the probabilities and demonstrate constraint.
If you don't cite a source then it might as well just be you posting it. There's no evidence it was actually said by anyone other than you or that you are not just playing the part of conspiracy theorist and fearmonger.
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
-
If sending Benson down brings up Kulich or Rosen would you change anyone change their mind?
Although I think it would more likely be Biro that got brought up.. at which point I know, people want Benson here.
Although Biro has more goals. 🙂
-
6 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:
Neither may have a complete 200 foot game at the moment
that being said how many feet are Okposo, Krebs , Jost and Olofsson giving you at the moment ?
8?
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, #freejame said:
Savoie wasn’t invited to the WJC because Hockey Canada got butthurt he played in the USHL during covid.
Good 'ol Hockey Canada. The BEACON of integrity and great decision making.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Curt said:
Not trying to put words in your mouth. The original comment w was replying to said that he should be “out of the league for good”, and you seemed to say that you were in favor of “banning” him from the NHL. Banning sound rather permanent to me. Did you mean a temporary ban? As in a suspension?
Right, understand now. The problem with temporary ban or indefinite suspension is that they seem arbitrary. I know they usually have a clause "eligible for re-applying after 1 year" for example. I think he should be out of the league, complete some significant work on cleaning up his life, get off the alcohol, and then let it be possible for re-entry. I think it should be 2 years minimum assuming he's convicted. Under ANY circumstance he should not be eligible to return until he gets his life cleaned up.
The hurdles are often not high enough, not just in sports.
-
5 hours ago, Scottysabres said:
Why isn't Kulich up?
Because Granato despises success stories?
You know it's not the coach who calls up a player right? He might have a say in it, but it's the GM.
-
7 hours ago, Curt said:
If being convicted of a DWI violates already established conditions of your employment, then that is not objectionable.
How does someone get a second chance in the NHL if they are banned for life?
Did I say banned for life? I don't think I did. If I did I certainly did not mean to. I thought my arguments have been solely about not wanting someone like that where I work or to work around someone like that.
I feel like I even called out if a person in that situation goes through meaningful change they might eventually get to the point where I would want to give them a second chance. Note that I am saying *I* might want to... I fully accept others might do it sooner.
-
2 hours ago, Taro T said:
Which breeds questions, in a year that the Sabres state THEY are focusing more on D (and personally believe they are), why are the Amerks NOT doing so? (Basing that on comments from people that watch them regularly; will likely get the Amerks package for the 2nd 1/2 of the season but didn't want to pay the full price.)
If it's because they want the kids to "learn" offense first and will then teach them D at the NHL level, with the rest of the NHLers presumably having picked up their defensive system, how do they expect that to work? Understood what the Sabres were trying to do the past 2 years (whether it was right or wrong, understood what they were trying), but don't see how they can be teaching a portion of the system in one locale and the full system in the other.
Or ARE the Amerks playing the system the Sabres are also playing? It doesn't seem to be the case, but are they? If they aren't, is it because they plan to implement the system in stages in Ra-cha-cha in a single year; like they did over a couple in Buffalo (to middling success to date).
The Amerks have a good record (8-4-2) (5th best win %age in the East; 9th best overall) but not great.
I guess you could say the Sabres are focused on D. Truth be told I cannot speak to how the Amerks are playing now but the prevailing trend is that the minor league team employs the principles of the NHL team to get youth acclimated to the way of playing. It's possible the Amerks are focused purely on the offensive side now. It's also possible they are just not that good at D.
Although I feel like the AHL tends to have more goals scored overall as it's played more wide open.
In the end, the Sabres aren't very good at D and from what I've seen in the scoring, the Amerks very much aren't. The other thing both teams have in common is that they struggle to keep a lead. No insight into that either.
-
2 hours ago, Curt said:
My definition of cancel culture differs slightly from your but that’s mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand.I’d argue that, while his actions were an assault on public security, banning him from the NHL doesn’t improve public security. It would just be a BS, low effort PR move on the NHL’s part.
In the case of someone who does something like this, domestic violence, if you are in favor of revoking their ability to work, you probably should just be in favor of a long prison sentence for them, no? How is someone supposed to get help/improve themselves while they are blackballed from working?
His actions were not an assault on public security. They were allegedly an assault on his spouse. Banning him from the NHL demonstrates consequences to his actions away from the game. The criminal justice system can demonstrate consequences to his actions in the courts.
I am in favor of revoking their ability to work for me or with me, yes. Everyone has their own standards. If someone else wants to give him a shot then that's great for them. If the person seeks help and turns their life around, then great. At some point if I were close enough to the situation, I might actually give them another chance. But this isn't about a second chance, this is about messing up your first chance. It takes a conscious decision to assault another human being especially how it was described.
Some people get angry when they drink. Those people should be told that and they should stop drinking before their anger boils over. I've been WAY too close to that situation in my life. If a person who tends to rage when they drink won't stop drinking I'm 100% getting away from that.
-
12 hours ago, Amerks8796 said:
It’s Appert. 22nd defensively in the league last year. 30th the year before. They turn the puck over nonstop, and they play a very passive style defensively. They collapse very low, never pressure the puck carrier. It results in a lot of zone time for the opponent, lots of free shots from the point, and tons of rebounds. That’s just my amateur opinion, but people should take note next time they watch the Amerks how passive they play defensively. It’s clearly doesn’t work, and Appert is either too stubborn to adjust, or the Sabres are mandating they play this terrible style.
Appert runs the system the Sabres want so the players get trained. It's systemic in the organization.
2 hours ago, JustOneParade said:So … a true feeder system preparing for the big club.
Aaaaaand yep.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:
So unless you jettison someone from his job, you are tolerating the behavior?
It's an easier sell when it comes to "canceling" someone with millions of dollars. Lucic would be fine. Should an architect convicted of domestic violence similarly be fired and prevented from practicing his or her trade? And why stop there? Why should that person ever be employed again in any job?
That would never happen. We just hold professional athletes to a higher standard. It's not fair.
Yes. 100% of the time, every time, without question. It's not an athlete standard. I wouldn't work with someone who engaged in that behavior. If I was managing someone like that I would want them out from under me, out of the company. They are an HR nightmare waiting to happen.
Do they work again? Not my problem. They can go get themselves all the help they need and hope someone gives them a chance. The fear of consequences should weight into decisions to engage in violence.
-
2 hours ago, Curt said:
Not that I condone domestic violence, but what would be the justification for banning someone from a job based on something they did unrelated to the job?
If someone demonstrates the potential to engage in that kind of behavior, do you want it in your organization? Not even just hockey.
3 minutes ago, Curt said:Yeah, I get that, but I don’t totally get it. You know?
I suppose it depends on any specific phrases about “being a role model” type conduct in the CBA.
Especially for an organization that accepts players punching eachother in the face as “part of the game”, an outright banning for something like this is a tough moral hardline to justify. In my eyes at least.
A very poor justification, in my opinion. Issue public statements denouncing the behavior, get him help with therapy or whatever he needs help with. Show some regard for him as a human being instead of simply discarding him, like some people call for.
If you guys can’t tell, I’m not a big fan of cancel culture. I don’t think it does the world any good. It’s easy to discard and denounce people. It’s much harder to make a positive impact on the world.
Cancel culture would be if he said something someone disagreed with. Assaulting another human being is not that. It's easy to discard and denounce people like that because they are scum. I think people should be better with their words and how they treat others, but words are just words. Physical altercations on the other hand are much more than that. They are a direct assault on the personal security everyone should enjoy. It is much harder to make a positive impact in the world. Most people prefer to look at others and analyze them and tear them down. Not many want to engage in introspection and apply the same criteria.
I'm not going to make snide comments on Lucic because there is a victim in this scenario and making light of it, in my opinion, is disrespecting the other party impacted.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
I have one for Rosen but I'm not sure I like it. Haven't done a Kulich yet. Whichever one gets her first I guess I'll use this.
Very nicely done "typo".
In other news.. I'll tune in.. but if they lay the egg and no effort, I'll find something more productive to do. It IS Friday night after all.
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Taro T said:
Those of us that don't go to HF Boards?
Clearly not, since the BS of HF Boards has been brought to us. There are no winners in this, only losers.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
They beat Boston in OT. They beat Carolina, Pittsburgh and Vegas.
I'm not trying to suggest the Ducks are actually any good. They're not. But they were expected to be bad and in full rebuild. We were expected to push for a playoff spot. So scoffing at the Ducks when your own team is floundering is just plain dumb.
I know. I wasn't attempting to refute you either. Straight away I merely said that looking at records can be misleading. I think any fan scoffing at another team is just dumb. I would expect Buffalo fans to know this all too well. But apparently not.
But I do dislike surface generalizations. When the team isn't doing well it's easy for people to come out of the wood work and begin pointing fingers. The Ducks are a team with nothing to lose. There were low expectations on them and that 100% factors into a team's performance. The Sabres are the opposite, they have a ton of expectation heaped on them and they aren't handling it. I don't make that statement to absolve them of their performance or make excuses. They are a team that needs to play far better than they are.
Calling out their youth and inexperience is fair. Calling out their performance is fair. Calling out the lack of addressing goaltending and team defense is fair. There are issues to be fixed.
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, #freejame said:
I didn’t say more important. As a fan, there’s nothing more to a family emergency, because that’s not our business.
Donny kept the door open. If he didn’t want to say he had a family issue he should have said he’s got some stuff he’s dealing with, which could mean anything but doesn’t imply it’s something that will be addressed at length later. Its the little things.
The gist of my point is that to you, it's the little things. I did not give it a second thought. Other thought of it differently. Each to their own and all, but it's not like there is some consensus opinion that Granato was wrong here. Some people are more attached to their Jump to Conclusion mats than a yoga instructor to their yoga mat.
He said he would have more on Monday and he did. That's about as straightforward as one can get.
-
10 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
Ducks (picked to be near last) 9-7, Sabres (picked to finally turn it around) 7-8-1.
Keep laughing.
Not that this wouldn't ultimately have merit, but the problem with a sample size like this or record comparison's overall is that you really have to account for strength of schedule during the time frame being evaluated.
Granted, in the full picture, the number of points is the number of points, but deeper analysis might show that the Sabres have played higher quality competition, or have played teams who were playing better at the time they met.
Again, I'm not doing the analysis here because I don't have time nor desire. But just saying that putting something like this out there doesn't hold much water for me because I don't know that their records being so similar is necessarily a negative thing (if you look into it deeper).
At quick glance though, the Ducks play in a conference where 7 teams have point totals below them. The Sabres conference has 3. it would appear that the Eastern Conference presents a greater challenge than the West. But of course it matters who they've played.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Carmel Corn said:
Whatever I guess, but Granato's post game presser seemed to suggest more information would be coming early this week. Fast forward to the "family issues" comment, seems like he could have just as easily said that in the post game presser vs. waiting 2 or three 3 days to give us a nothing burger.
In other words, he injected more potential drama than he needed to. Completely unnecessary if you ask me....unless the family issues is made up.
Unless at the time there was a situation that needed to play out more before they felt comfortable saying "family issues" which would immediately trigger the media to begin looking for what those family issues were.
20 hours ago, #freejame said:It implied there was more to it than family emergency. If it’s a family emergency just say it’s a family emergency. Don’t say it’s something you’ll address another time. That’s stupid and unfair to Krebs.
Implications are your interpretations. Some people thought he went out drinking with Savoie. I would not put that at more than a family emergency. Some people thought he was being traded. I would not put that as more than a family emergency.
What would be more than a family emergency?
What is more personal that one's family? What is more important?
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
I also think it's a mistake to assume the Granato we see is the Granato the players see.
There's an assumption that yelling and screaming make a difference.
I worked for a leader who used to nitpick everything and make bombastic statements, threaten my job. I never once listened to what he had to say. He was a moron and it showed. He tried to manage out of fear and I just tuned him out. After awhile I wanted him to fire me. Eventually I forced his hand.
I also worked for a leader who managed thoughtfully. He didn't berate or insult or threaten. He put me in my place once and I didn't even realize it happened until 5 minutes after he walked out of the room. I was standing there and hit it me.. hard.
Bottom line, just because Granato doesn't fiery words or demonstrate the hard ass demeanor... does not mean he can't make an impact.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Could be Gallant... almost positive it will be someone with years of experience. I'm not a huge Gallant fan as others are. I don't know that Bruce is the right guy either.
I don't think the coach is the biggest problem in Edmonton... the GM? Yeah.. that's where I'd be looking for a change.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, pastajoe said:
The guy’s known for his power play abilities. They couldn’t even give him a chance given how bad the PP has been this season? Please. 😒
You just keep pushing that rock up the hill.
You've been given so many reasons as to why he was sent down. The most immediate being the need to clear a roster spot. He wasn't going to be the answer this year, a second game would not have changed anything. So, he was moved down so they didn't have to risk a player on waivers, etc.
Sometimes the decision that has to be made is choosing the best worst option. it's not all Happily Ever After all the time.
-
1
-
1
-
-
There was a clip of him walking off the ice after losing to San Jose and the lip readers thought he said "I think that's it". They know.. the win wasn't going to change things. it was time.
Could it be "Bruce, there it is!" for replacement? 🙂
-
If the situation is that Buffalo is going to make a trade to demonstrate they are all in and get Kane then I am fine with it. They need to shake something up and bring in some more veteran leadership to drive the kids.
I feel like a Kane - Mitts - Greenway line could be fun. That sets up Tuch-Thompson-Skinner, and then Cozens-Peterka-(placeholder- Biro?) until Quinn is ready.
Your 4th is Rousek/Jost - Girgensons - Okposo.
Anyway... it's something.
-
2
-
Benson - Keep him here
in The Aud Club
Posted
If the Sabres have no other plans to do anything to this roster this year there is no point in having Benson burn a year of his contract, from a pure business decision standpoint.
Personally, I would still send him down. He's not the answer to turn this team around this year. I wish he was. I really wish he was. I think he's going to make a massive impact to this roster within the next few years, but not this year.
I'm not sold on more youth is the answer right now.