LTS

The same schtick they do at baseball games. Kids love it.

There's always opportunity cost. It goes both ways. You are playing with the power of hindsight. There are so many factors that come into play. The only people who know what could have been done and what wasn't done are those involved. When Botterill acquired Miller perhaps he thought he would be able to move one of the other defense? But then it didn't happen. So now you have more defense than you need and as a result you have to deal with that. Now you have to play Bogosian and you hope he shows some signs of life so you can make a move, but he doesn't. Now you are stuck with him. I could easily justify Miller by saying that you acquire an asset whose value will be realized when you move Ristolainen. Until then, you have to have some level of roster flexibility and sometimes players have to sit. There are all kinds of possibilities, but in the world of the NHL trades that only happened within the past year might not always realize their full value until a few seasons later. Then you look at what transpired and perhaps you can make some guesses as to what and wasn't possible or what a GM was trying to do. The Sabres might have been able to make the moves you made. It might have led to success. It also would have opened up any number of other potential negative outcomes in the future. It might not have. That's the way it goes. I think there's reasonable counter points so that nothing should be considered a slam dunk in either direction.

For every trade made. Anyone who asserts the Sabres should have made that trade needs to deliver a proposal that would beat the trade that was made. Otherwise, it's hot air.

Hindsight is dangerous. Let's run through your scenarios. The Avs traded a 2020 2nd and 3rd plus an AHL forward for Burkovsky. The Sabres traded a 2021 2nd and a 2022 5th for Miller. Ostensibly you are saying the Sabres should have traded their 2020 2nd and 3rd. The 2020 3rd they don't have because they used that to get Jeff Skinner. The same 3rd round pick people now want back so the Sabres can offer sheet Cirelli? Which, if they traded their 2020 2nd round pick would be even harder to do. Let's look at JT Miller (I've broken this one down before) Vancouver traded a conditional 2020 first, a 2019 third, and a goalie. Buffalo traded a 2019 first, and Brendan Guhle. The timing here matters as well as this trade occurred well before JT Miller was on the market. So, in hindsight, you'd be saying Botterill should not have made a move back then because those assets, in theory, could be used to get something a few months later. Nevermind, and I argued why, Tampa didn't care about a 2019 1st round pick. Or Montour to get Kadri Avs traded Barrie, Kerfoot, and a 2020 6th and retained salary Buffalo would have traded Montour and whom? and retained salary to get Kadri? And he would help how? You believe Scandella at the deadline gets more than a 4th but Scandella doesn't get more than a 4th when the team acquiring him does so long before the deadline? I don't think that's how it works. Scandella, before the deadline, was ONLY worth a 4th, and he'd be worth less later. And that 4th only gets you Frolik... that's it. The Sabres don't have an embarassment of riches on defense, they just have a lot of defense. Ristolainen's value before this season was crap. He's improved it quite a bit I would think and perhaps he gets moved, but it might not be during the season because those big moves don't usually happen until the off-season. Montour? Hard to say, you could move him. You are then banking on Jokiharju stepping up more.. if that doesn't happen then you get fans criticizing the GM for putting faith in a D player when he clearly should have known he would suck (just like talking about Bogo). Hindsight is dangerous... because you have to remove yourself and the knowledge you have now to understand the knowledge you had at the time. By your logic on the JT Miller trade, perhaps Botterill is holding onto his assets now so he can make a JT Miller like trade in the off-season.

Yes, he clearly has mental health issues as a result of playing hockey. That is not in question. He should not be chiming in on situations like this. Simply because people will bring up incidents from his past, prior to his current mental health state, that are not explained away so easily. Carcillo was always about the drama. He played it up on the ice when he played. I'm not going to dismiss his drama now because of it. It would be different if he had always been a nice guy and now was suddenly acting completely different. In this case, he's acting in line with how he's acted in the past. Perhaps he's always had mental health issues, but that won't change that he should just be quiet.

Co-worker and customer problems... they are real.

I think I might have titled this game as Buffalo @ Toronto (South). This is yet another game where we get to listen to the damn Leafs fans at a home game. No need to debate this, season ticket holders can do whatever they want with their tickets. It doesn't change the outcome. You can blame the Sabres for sucking, but I think know that good portion of ticket holders would sell these games anyway just because of the premium they demand. And so... bring on the Leafs, and their fans. Good news is, if the Sabres give the Leafs fans reason to cheer I'll find it easier to turn the game off. And yes, it's Sunday and I've not had my coffee yet. ?

If Carcillo wants to stick with the high ground theme against the NHL in how it is their fault for not protecting players then he needs to also NOT tweet stupid stuff like this. But.. Dan Carcillo. Just continuing being the drama king as he was when he played.

Hutton injured.. this is why.

I wouldn't agree to that, ever. The government has been proven to distort truth and outright lie. I trust US governmental information as much as I would a stock tip from a homeless guy. I also wouldn't look at this article and the end all be all. The truth, as always, is usually somewhere in between. You have to look at the prevailing commentary and begin to decipher the patterns of information that are coming out. Weigh each one, and then decide which way you want to be swayed. Very few sources of information are not subject to marketing or spin or at least an unconcious or conscious bias.

Gilmour replaces Bogosian? Hammond replaces Johansson? (probably should confirm if the Jonas and Marcus spell their names the same)

Ryan Miller... he's human

A key point... and look at how Eichel has responded this year. I mean, there's natural progression, but by and large Eichel has been a very different player overall. His skills were there, but his attitude was crap. That seems to have changed. The talent on the team still hasn't changed enough.

Which one shows up in Minnesota next week? Who has ties to Guerin? ?

Jack is out on those situations because he has a long reach, can move fast and his accurate the length of the ice. When there are 6 attackers on the ice and only 5 defenders there is a guy who is going to be open. That's how it works. The play was perfectly executed and that pass threaded a hell of a needle. I don't blame Jack that much on it. However, if you watch.. Jack stands in the crease and accepts the blame in a conversation to Hutton. I thought that was real leadership right there. And then he went out and made up for it.

Yep. We had a kid do it in a game a few years ago and get caught. A few years before that I had a kid on my team who kicked at a players face. No call on the ice. I benched him for 3 games because of it. There can be no tolerance for that kind of recklessness. Players lay on each other all the time. They don't kick each other with skates because of it. Kassian is a freakin jackhole for doing it. It's insanely reckless. Cernak slips, moves the wrong way and that skate blade hits in a spot that cuts him wide open.... no bueno.

Well, you're not wr.... errrrrrr. ? But you are still here. Why do you do this to yourself? Find something that makes you happy. Let me just say this... ERod did say in his postgame interview "They came hard". Did you stick around to hear that? If you did, I figured you might at least be inspired that phrase. Dude was bustin it. As well. Yes.. his hands.. they could be magic. (See Inky, I'm still trying to help you out here).

That's where I sat on Sunday. Row 9.. seat 5.

Zero proof of this. Zero. You are telling me at the trade deadline that Skinner would tell Botterill, "Hell yah dude, we're on the verge of setting a new record for pathetic by going from first to worst. I'm totally in for next season."? I don't think so. Then they fire Housley.... that only makes it more uncertain what will happen in Buffalo the next year. I would bet money that Skinner's agent was like.. "Pay up, it's your only choice to not look like a fool. Right now your claim to fame is trading away the Conn Smythe trophy winner. Why on Earth does anyone want to play there? Oh yeah, my other clients all have Buffalo on their NTC/NMC. Skinner is throwing you a bone. Pay up." That said $9M wasn't REALLY out of line for someone who scored so many ES goals. It's unfortunate he's not scoring them this year however.

Thanks? He's been building for awhile. Tensions are high. Everyone is frustrated.. the fans, the owner, the players, the GM... its when people explode. Well, we don't know that he didn't. It's not like they need to announce they said something to him. I've been warned before too. It's all good. People are going to pop off once in awhile. It's what they do outside of those moments that are what matter to me. Lots of really good stuff posted? So be it. Always blowing up? Another story. I actually found it somewhat amusing. Perhaps because at this particular point in time I have more stressful things happening outside of here so I have a different point of view. Of course, I've been where he is on here too... sooooooo I'm not saying nothing.

Well, tearing it down now would be easy. There are 18 players with no contract for next year. Of the ones remaining, only 2 will get you anything of major value. 1 will get you a mediocre player and perhaps a pick. So... no, it would be a monumentally bad idea. But I'm, not convinced that back then it was all bad. It wasn't all bad until they followed it up with what turned out to be a monumentally stupid "hold my beer" move. So yes, and 3 of those players are still here. 1 didn't really want to be here at all and the other one found his buddies Pooh, Piglet, and Christopher Robbin. But.. yes, this team isn't good enough. The results tell us that. I just don't think the team had the resources to make it any better. Perhaps we should be thankful we lucked into Dahlin and Skinner (despite the contract). Imagine if we didn't get them? People now say we should have let Skinner walk instead of pay him. Could you imagine not having him right now? That roster.... but yes, because Buffalo.. you have to overpay him to be here. Otherwise we'd have $9M in cap space and still no players who wanted to sign here.

Do you think those that are blasting Skinner will bring up how he will progress to the mean? ?

Here's the thing. Trading away those assets that started the tank wasn't necessarily a bad thing. The team obtained the components it needed to start a rebuild. The problem was then taking those assets and using them to acquire players that aren't even here anymore. It basically wasted 3-5 years of this franchises existence. I know you hate the tank. I'm not sure I loved the concept, but trading those players was the kind of direct, decisive move, that people want from Botterill right now. And of course the Sabres had talented players to trade away back then. They don't now. Meh.. the history is the history. I don't worry about it. This off-season is what matters to me. Everything that happens between now and Oct. 6 2020 will let me know if I need to concern myself with Sabres hockey for the next few years... ?

Queue the comments... The same ones from the last game... although at least Johansson is back.

It's what a series of idiotic decisions by the ownership led to. You can call it precipitated by the "tank" but the decisions to bring in Bylsma and Murray and fire LaFontaine were the precursors. Then the desire to stop tanking overnight by bringing players and trading away prospects and picks... then realizing your boozehound GM and bad choice at coach needed to go... It's been a series of events and not any one in particular that caused this problem. It's a continual go left, go right, mentality. It's disruptive to everything and in the NHL it takes awhile to recover from that. It just does. The last point is the most salient. The instability and continued lack of success has led players to NOT want to be here. There is nothing any GM can do about that. I don't think they don't want to be here because of the GM, I think its because of the owner. Because of the lack of success. The same reason players don't want to come here is the same reason fans are all out sorts. Losing is not easy to overcome. It takes a specific mindset to accept the position and then want to be part of turning that around. Given the choice between a winning team and a losing team, not many are going to opt for the losing team (not those with options). It's how it goes. You don't build a brand as a winner by constantly playing/working for a loser. Overall, out of the gate, I think players come in refreshed and ready to try and turn things around. At this point in the season you are seeing fatigue of trying to be positive all the time set in. Jack looks nothing like he did a month ago. He looks checked out. He's frustrated. Others are too.. it's why Reinhart spoke up. The players, owners, fans, and GM are all frustrated. It's one big downward spiral. It's what consumed Buffalo last year and is going so again this year. It's going to get worse before it gets better. Because barring a miracle, no trades are going to go Buffalo's way.