LTS

Damn.. pulling out the stats. ? Something needs to change, but my guess is that because players in the league are developed better at a younger age that they are closer to playing in the league at an earlier age. As such, GMs want them in their systems earlier. Think about it.. we're on here talking about the prime being 23-25 now when it has traditionally been 27-29.

So you're saying he took the QEW and not I-90. ?

So... a lot of panic over nothing. It was tough on him making that I-90 drive in the snow though. ?

It's been a long time since i enjoyed the Amerks. I didn't dislike it, but I didn't love to go. I agree with attending hockey games. I might also have some bias given that I spent my first 22 years calling Buffalo home. But yes, I have gone to a few games since Pegula took over and it's noticeable how out of touch things are there. I trust your opinion, you are the die hard fan. I'm half-tempted to reach out to LetsGoAmerks to get his take. Our kids played together for awhile. His still plays for a guy I used to coach with.

It would be, but I think some of the old school GMs are going to scoff at the idea because it could mean diluting their previous Canadian Juniors program. That said, more and more players are coming in from outside that program and with players ultimate goal being to play professionally they are going to head to places where GMs are likely to look for them and select them. If the CHL holds out on this upcoming agreement I could see an even greater spike in kids being chosen from outside the league.

I'm fascinated by the concept of the single shot movie. I saw a quick snippet about how the directors filmed this it was intriguing. I've read more about it in recent days. I'm short on time and probably won't head to the movies to see it, but I'm looking forward to watching it at some point.

Yes, recency bias. Yours is from 1 game earlier. You do realize you are the pot in this story right?

Sorry, I thought you were questioning it. I mean, if Murray gets the right players, things might have been different. If he had post-depression Lehner, it might be quite different.

Absolutely. Despite the standings, what I see from key players on the ice for the Sabres also gives me hope about Ralph. The Sabres just don't have the talent to survive the injuries they've had. Last year the Sabres would spend far more time (seemingly) in their own end and very little time in the opponents end. This year they seem to get out of their own end far more regularly and have periods of time where they control the puck in the opponents end. In order for it to translate into winning however you need goaltending and defense to keep the puck out of your net and you need scoring talent to put the puck in the net. The Sabres are short on both of those.

I'll be there at the game today. Was supposed to be there with my kid, but his Friday game was rescheduled to today... 3 hours after I bought the tickets. So I'm bringing an old friend i haven't seen in a few years. That said... he may have a conflict come up. Anyone interested in joining me, just say so here. No promises, but I'll know by noon if he's gotta bail on me.

It's both. The coach manages the game and puts players out there but he can only choose from what he has. So he works with the GM to discuss what players could make a difference and which ones are not. In this case, Mittlestadt was not doing anything and they finally sent him down. Some players don't need the AHL. Most benefit from it. But yes, you want players to be put into a place where they can succeed. You can only do that if you have enough talent, properly distributed. The Sabres, by virtue of trading away the ability to build that talent pool, caused a situation where the talent was forced to play at a higher level than they were prepared to do. As such, you get failing throughout the organization. This is why the Sabres are STILL recovering. You need competition for every position, if you don't have it then people get complacent. Relatively few people are self-motivated to the degree that they never need anyone pushing them. Professional athletes are more motivated than others, but once they are around other professionals the differences in self-motivation are tiny, but do manifest themselves in noticeable ways.

Well, is he? The Western Conference is a pushover this season. 10 of the top 15 teams in the league are from the Eastern Conference. That puts them 5th in the Western Conference but if they were in the East they'd be tied with Florida for 10th. And he has the top two scorers in the league. I'm not saying he's terrible, I think he's been great and I have respect for him, but I don't think Edmonton is all that.. not yet.

I would not be surprised if the the Pegula's aren't looking for a reason to move the Amerks to Buffalo and consolidate hockey in that city. Rochester, in general, has not cared about the Amerks for a long time. I don't even have a desire to go to a game. The concessions are terrible, they always have been frankly, even a few years ago. They were awful compared to Frontier Field and they charged the same amount. Now they charge more. The only way I go to an Amerks game is if someone gives me a ticket, and even then, It's a hard sell. Given what Ogre was posting I am surprised anyone wants to be there. Check off the list the last time i was there... The sound in the arena sucked The scoreboard in the arena was terrible Concessions are sub-sub par and expensive Seating is uncomfortable Parking is expensive Yeah.. I'm just getting worked up thinking about how bad the Amerks are. Hell, I'm glad my kid is past the "skate during intermission" garbage that local hockey clubs like to force on their parents. I felt slimy just trying to get people to buy tickets so the kids could get on the ice for 3 minutes.

I mean.. if your fingers feel dirty talking about Marchand it has to be really bad... given some of the things you say on here. ?

I love your passion. I disagree with you about Ralph. I think he's made the team better, it doesn't show in the standings to be certain, but overall they play a better game. The team often looks like its on the same page. I think its the lack of talent that gets it done. You point to Detroit beating them. Detroit beat Boston too. Those kinds of games are going to happen. The depth isn't there and the injury to Olofsson is having a major impact on the team. Dahlin out hurts the team too. I do think there are areas that can be improved in the coaching... I'm still struggling to understand how our PK can be so bad when we basically have the same guys as years before out there. It makes you wonder. The power play as well... those areas need to be improved and that's on Ralph without a doubt.

For blocked shots I think it would make more sense to track the number of blocked shots / shots allowed (or possibly even opponent shot attempts, but that could be really tough). Naturally, as you said, teams that give up a lot of shots (ie. don't have the puck) are likely to show higher shot block totals. Of course, it might still end up looking the same when you plot it out. Cool stuff though... thanks for doing the leg work.

I have trouble believing that anyone competent enough to do the GM job wouldn't look at the situation the Sabres are currently in and politely decline. It might be different at this point mind you. There is Skinner, Dahlin, Cozens (promise of a future). But if you, as a GM coming, look at the Sabres depth (which gets blasted on here quite often) do you think you can be successful in a couple of years? Perhaps you can, with this off season having as much open cap space as it does. But then you have to believe the owner isn't going to be a problem. This is true. But they were pretty bad at the time.. all 3 belonging to players who people have lamented taking up space on this roster (although I suppose 55 might have changed some peoples minds this year). (Because unless I am missing it it's Risto, Bogo, and Okposo right?) That said, the cupboard was pretty damn bare as well. So, you slowly have to rebuild, draft well (we'll see about that), and incrementally build the team. I don't know how we keep avoiding the logic flaw. The team had no prospects. The team has no talent. Somehow, a GM is supposed to turn that into talent overnight. We saw that attempt in Tim Murray. It failed. Miserably. You can try and sign UFAs... of course, why does a UFA want to come here? Because a GM will overpay them? Then how does that benefit the team? Because a UFA is desperate because no one wants them? They aren't the player we're looking for... unless we get lucky. The contracts Botterill has signed have all been to keep known players around just long enough. The only players here long term are the ones he wants long term or has no control over (Okposo/Risto). Slowly build the talent pool, then find the right players to bring in. No more debating it I suppose. You either believe he's incapable or you aren't sold on the idea yet. I'm not saying he will be the right GM, I am just not at the point where I believe he's not the right GM.

1. You might not be getting paid, true. But you have money. It's not like these guys are desperate. Hell, they could be hired as "special advisors" somewhere. 2. You ever try to lead an incompetent leader? Yeah.. that doesn't work. 3. There's a short list, and if my name is someone like Lou Lamoriello or Peter Laviolette, then yes, I am getting a call. We're talking about the established hockey people here, those with good reputations. Not the one shot assistants who failed. Those are the guys who took their shots, failed, perhaps because of incompetent owners, and now have to hope like hell they get another shot. Yet those guys might be gun shy to go try and lead again with another incompetent owner, because if that owner leads them to failure again, now they are a two time failure. 4. Botterill says no to Pegula he gets the LaFontaine treatment. Then he has to choose whether he calls out the owner or stays silent. You call out the owner and every other owner is going to look at that and say, "This guy is only out for himself. I'm not hiring him." 5. I think a guy who is well established is not going to walk into a situation with an incompetent owner and spend the energy to try and overcome that incompetence. It's like saying the old guy wants to train the young snot nosed brat. That narrative works in the movies, not in real life. 6. See my point on #4. You get your one shot you have to make it work. You tell owners to stick it and they fire you. You get to play the game of calling out the owner or being the company guy and falling on your sword. You may want to be that guy who says "Dude, this owner was a clueless *****." You'll get to say it... then you'll not work again because the owners... they don't want someone who tells them they are idiots. It doesn't end well for those guys... in any sport... hell... in any job in the world. Tell your boss he's an idiot and see what happens next.

Perhaps because I refuted your statement of why wouldn't someone want 1 of 32 jobs. And yes, you have stated your position, and yes I have spoke about Eeyore ad nauseum. So we can end the discussion and that's fine. But, at least go one step further than just posting "nope". I think the only thing that would have been more dismissive would have been to post some a GIF of some guy with bad hair saying "WRONG".

Should have expected this. Tried to give you credit, you devolved into what others always call you out for. Good day.

The team's system has been better this year. The results have been bad. You think a coach would make these players (the ones everyone says suck) a better team? I don't think so. I'm all for changing things up, just so everyone can realize that continual change is not the answer. But those who clamor for it are always looking for the next answer without accepting that the answer is to not take drastic action. Fire everyone.. let's see what happens. I'll put my money on the fan base only being more incendiary next year and the year after that and the year after that. I get the passion to change things. Change doesn't always happen overnight. We are seeing the results of incompetent ownership. The people you want to fix things aren't going to sign up to work for incompetent owners. So you have to hope you get lucky with the next tier of people who are willing to sign up for the job. It's like hoping your 3rd round draft picks turn into NHL super stars.

Yes. I said it in another thread when Lou Lamoriello was brought up. Lou is a free agent GM. Why on Earth is he coming to Buffalo? He's not. If you are an established hockey leader, you don't take jobs like the ones in Buffalo. You don't go work for an owner who has shown incompetence. You don't do this for quite a few reasons: 1. You are still getting paid from the last job you had. 2. You built your brand and reputation as a competent leader and that could be undone working for an incompetent owner. 3. You are on the short list of EVERY GM/coaching vacancy that comes up. You can afford to skip this year because next year there will be 3 more. Now you are being as irrational as the people you railed about in another thread. The ROR situation was a disaster. ROR forced the situation with his damn Eeyore tactics and the owner wanted him to get rid of him. He ties the GMs hands. Which, by the way, is a good indication of why an established GM might not want to come work for the Pegulas. That said, keeping Eeyore wasn't going to help the team. He thought the fans were against him. He didn't like hockey anymore. He's certainly the mentally tough person the Sabres needed. Botterill should have turned down the job too. I would at this point. Why would I want my first foray into being a GM to be at the mercy of an ownership group that is likely going to make me look stupid and incompetent? Just because it's 1 of 32 jobs? Not good enough. You work your way up in the industry to get a shot you don't want to throw away years of work in building your reputation to have it tarnished by being put in a no win situation. I guess I'll practice what I preached in the other thread at this point.

Keep fighting that air. You should be sorry to believe what you believe because while you are sitting there being completely irrational about the Sabres lack of organizational competence you are also throwing every other team in the league in with them. Goalies are in charge of what is on their masks and pads, not the teams. You may want it different, but in the NHL that's now how it works. It's not an indictment on the Sabres, no matter how hard you try to make it one. You can pin this on the goalie if you'd like. Perhaps he should get his mask repainted (at his expense). It's not often that people on here are flat out wrong, and I admire your fortitude in sticking to the point, but it's undeniable that teams don't get into the goalie's mask unless there is going to be a potential legal concern.

If anyone wants me to say it.. Botterill is not the problem, not yet. The problem is recovering from the mistakes that were made prior. This off-season is the critical off-season for him. This is when so many salaries come off the books. The roster can be remade as he would like. If he fails at that, then he should be gone. If he even looks like he is failing at that then he should be gone. But at the moment, I can't fire the guy. Pegulas are to blame for this mess. Instability in the front office in the first few years of ownership and a clear lack of understanding of the game of hockey kept the Sabres from getting any big names (although Botterill was considered an up and comer). Firing him now would only enhance that image. I can only imagine who would want to come lead the Sabres at that point.

He'll get knocked over once and people will say we should trade him for someone who gets 450 PIMs... because "culture".