TrueBlueGED
-
Posts
29,076 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TrueBlueGED
-
-
17 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Maybe, but I worry less about Ralph, and more about another sweeping rebuild setting the clock back three years again.
There is some value in stability. Just fix what needs to be fixed.
This is a red herring. A GM change doesn't inherently mean a rebuild.
-
24 minutes ago, Curt said:
Very interesting. I honestly thought that Botterill would be safe because he had sold Pegula on a slow rebuild. Obviously that is just a feeling that I’ve had. We’ll see how this unfolds.
I’m one of those people. I’ve got no spin. I thought Botterill would probably be safe, maybe that’s not the case. We’ll see. I’m not much of a Botterill apologists. I liked his overall stated plan when he came on, but the execution has certainly been mixed and the results haven’t been good.
My post was snarkier than I intended it to be. Sorry about that. I just never understood the idea that a GM could be safe in spite of poor results regardless of what the initial plan was, especially when this owner fired a GM for flawlessly executing a plan he sold him on to suffer (Regier).
4 minutes ago, dudacek said:I'm on board with this. I think the Pegulas like Ralph as well, and very few are blaming him for the state of the Sabres. I think ownership will ask any new guy to at least seriously consider keeping the coach.
On the other hand, taking away the new guy's ability to pick his own guy is a bad way to start a relationship.
In my ideal world, the new guy would recognize the obvious flaws of the lineup and will be knowledgeable and connected enough to move decisively to fix them.
This needs to be the case. Terry's not a rookie any more and he doesn't need a six week exhaustive search. They don't have to have their guy already, but they have to have a vetted short list and the desire to move quickly.
Meh. Ralph is fine, but I think he's one of countless coaches in the mushy middle of competence. He's utterly replaceable.
-
13 minutes ago, jahnyc said:
I would hope before the Pegulas fire JBot that they have a plan in place and know that they have a GM replacement (and maybe President) who will be an unquestioned upgrade over what we currently have.
You don't keep someone who is bad at their job just because you can't guarantee the replacement is better.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, darksabre said:
Man, I don't know if firing Botterill is the right idea, but I don't know if it's the wrong idea either. I'm firmly on the fence.
I think if Krueger wasn't the coach I'd be off the fence. But I like Krueger.
Keeping the GM because you like the coach is like keeping a car without an engine because it has a comfy seat.
-
2
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Brawndo said:
I eagerly await everyone who said "Botterill is totally safe because he sold the Pegulas on a 5 year plan" spinning this. It'll be fun.
-
20 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Botterill’s plan is fine.
It’s his player evaluation and acquisition skills that have not measured up.The thing that's killing me about these defenses of Botterill is he has failed by his own metric for success. He said the goal was to be playing meaningful games in March. The team isn't. He has a plan and he failed. That tends to be when executives lose jobs.
-
4
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, dudacek said:
This is fair comment in that the Sedins and most of the rest of their core were there when he got there, and that he would be inheriting a similar situation here, but I think there’s some gaps too. His drafting record was poor and his trades generally good. He took over an 88-point team and led it to what would have been five straight 100-point seasons if not for the the lockout.
He is big on analytics, sports science and creative with the cap, all of which I would think would appeal to you. Some good stuff on that here:
He did a real good interview a while back on his Canucks tenure. Here’s a recap, plus the whole two-hour interview that’s worth a listen if his name ever surfaces I connection with the Sabres.
https://theathletic.com/583660/2018/10/11/the-final-word-on-mike-gillis-time-with-the-canucks/
Thanks for the good reads.
31 minutes ago, nfreeman said:@dudacek’s response is far superior, but I’ll note that Gillis took over a team that had missed the playoffs 2 out of the prior 3 years (not just the year before as I had posted previously) and immediately got them to the playoffs 5 years in a row.
Water wet. Sky blue. And so on ?
I wouldn't hate the idea, and among retreads, he gives me a lot more hope for a successful second act than somebody like Ray Shero. I just wouldn't be giddy or anything given what he started with in Van.
-
3 hours ago, dudacek said:
Mike Gillis was thoroughly hated by the time he was ousted in Vancouver. Five years later people reconsidered as it started to dawn on them that he oversaw the best team that city ever had.
Mike seems prickly and arrogant and extremely intelligent. An experienced GM but far from the old boy’s network, he will do things his way and that won’t necessarily be conventional way. You’d definitely see him exploring and implementing new ways of doing things.
He can hold his own in the corporate venue through sheer competence, but you won’t get the cliches that seem to be Jason’s calling card.
If he’s learned some humility and relationship skills, he would be a very intriguing hire.
3 hours ago, nfreeman said:Mike Gillis was GM in Vancouver for 6 seasons. After missing the playoffs the season before hiring him, they made the playoffs in his 1st 5 seasons, including winning the first round in his 1st 2 seasons, winning the President's Trophy and making the SCF in his 3rd season, and then getting bounced in the 1st round in his 4th and 5th seasons. He got canned after missing the playoffs in his 6th season.
Holy mackerel does that sound like a massive improvement for the Sabres.
Yes please.
My memory could be off, but what did Gillis actually do? Didn't he inherit nearly everything about those teams that made them so good? Granted, he'd be inheriting pieces here that could make the situations comparable and maybe he could make similar supplementary moves. But I wouldn't exactly be doing cartwheels.
-
13 hours ago, Weave said:
I really don't udnerstand the criticism for the deadline day moves. We got Simmonds for a next to nothing draft pick and moved two guys that noone saw as having a future on the team for a guy that does have a future on the team.
Jbott's had plenty of opportunity, but deadline day 2020 isn't an example of it.
I don't think anyone should really care in a vacuum because the cost was so low, but I also don't think it's a huge leap to look at Simmonds as another example of poor pro player evaluation. Botterill thought enough of him that he was worth acquiring and putting us into a cap overage that faces penalty on next season's cap. It's not a big deal, but the cumulative evidence suggests we're likely to see more bad players brought in going forward, and Simmonds only adds to the evidence.
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Casey’s past of playing mostly against inferior competition shaped him into a player whose game is built around beating people one-on-one.
His future will largely depend on how well he develops his ability to create and prevent two-on-ones.
Fortunately, the majority picked in the top 10, however, do.
I'm not sure that's accurate. After pick #3, the success rate is basically a coin flip. An article a few years back pegged picks 4-15 as equally likely to produce a half point per game NHLer, on average. And now that Casey is 3 years past his draft year, we can probably stop using his draft position as a good indicator of how he projects as a player.
Substantively, I'm exactly where @nfreeman is at on Mittelstadt. And for the purposes of asset utilization, I think it's better to accept some risk and decide a year early on a player than a year late when the league has caught up. If I were GM I'd be actively looking to move him this offseason in a package, but I'm not dumping him for a 4th or anything like that.
-
2 hours ago, Zamboni said:
To me, he looks like a inconsistent developing young player. Nothing too alarming IMO. If he’s making the same frequency of mistakes next season AND the following season, then I’ll start to have a little concern. My prediction is next season he’ll still make those mistakes, just less of them. And that’s due to developing and experience. At 21 ... there’s almost no chance he doesn’t develop and improve. Who the heck honestly thinks a 21 year old player won’t.
Except a whole lot of 21 year olds don't improve to become NHLers. The majority don't.
-
43 minutes ago, Weave said:
Are you expecting someone to make an unprovable claim of additional games won? I mean, this seems like something you should know better than to expect.
Just some general expectations; I'm not going to quibble over two points here or there because hockey is so flukey. But if organizational message has real value, you'd think we could approximately hold serve (6 points out), right? If the team shoots/saves crazy percentages (good or bad) over the final 20, obviously the final standings results would be quite a bit different. But if they shoot/save at rates representative of the first 62 games, 4-8 points out would be holding serve, 3 or less an improvement 9 or more the proverbial sprint to the golf course.
-
54 minutes ago, ... said:
That's the hope. Is that how it works leading teams of people? If you know, you should write a book.
I just feel I've read enough about culture and expectations of winning needing to come from the organization that something tangible should come of it.
51 minutes ago, Brawndo said:FWIW
48 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:I'm glad they
a.) inquired
b.) didn't go further than what Carolina got him forI wonder if it was just Tallon doing the old school thing and not trading within the division.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, darksabre said:
For the record, I don't think there's any chance this team makes the playoffs. But I appreciate that they're being given the opportunity to try.
Posted this in a trade thread, but probably more appropriate here: if the messaging from the top truly matters, we should see commensurate on ice results, right?
-
Good move so long as Botterill doesn't head into the offseason thinking this is the 2C bridge to Mitts/Cozens being ready.
Overall I think the deadline will be an interesting case study on the impact of not selling off for picks. If the message of competing for the final playoff spot has value, we should see something here, right?
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, ... said:
Why are we posting Sabres sutff in the NON SABRES DEADLINE THREAD? Why is the Sabres's one closed?
We've taken the Jason Botterill approach to thread utilization.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
Simmonds was fried 2 years ago. If we extend him, man.
Where there's a Botterill, there's a way.
6 minutes ago, Zamboni said:He produces way way more than your “typical” 4th liner. He is still a solid 3rd liner who can get in on a PP in front. I get you don’t like him, but there is noooo way he signs with any team for 1 mil.
If he's a solid 3rd liner, then so is Kyle Okposo. And I honestly think Okposo is better, salary aside. Good teams don't have Simmonds-caliber players getting meaningful minutes.
5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:Well this is his tryout then, lets see what he has left in the tank, but I don't see us giving him more than 1 mill a year.
I hope we're not putting that much stock in 20 games when there's hundreds in recent years to look at.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Gaudreau for Simmonds would be one way for Botterill to win me back ?
-
4
-
-
16 minutes ago, Sherman said:
I actually like the message this is sending to the team. Regardless of how bad they’ve been at times they’re not far from the playoffs.
Botterill wants to change the culture and this is the kind of move that says we should be competitive and the organization believes in what they’re building. That’s how I see this move. Make the playoffs and your smart for believing in your team. Selling when your this close sends a message that they’re trying to reverse.
I don't think acquiring bad hockey players does that. I certainly don't care about a 5th in 2021 for a pending UFA, but I will certainly argue against the notion it sends a meaningful message.
10 minutes ago, darksabre said:It's true though. We've been trying to figure out all season what, exactly, Botterill wanted to see from this team this year. It's been really hard to tell what is going on.
This makes sense considering Botterill himself probably doesn't know what he wanted from the team.
*dons tinfoil hat*
This is the move of a GM who thinks he might be on the outs and wants to have a palatable enough finish to the season to keep his job without surrendering a meaningful asset he'd like to use while keeping the job.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:
To be determined on the system. Without Eichel and Olofsson's raw shooting talent, you'd notice a lot more that we are the worst team at getting dangerous offensive chances in the entire nhl
the slot is still a barren wasteland for the Sabres
Paging @inkman to the fire Botterill thread. Inkman please pick up the red courtesy phone.
-
55 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
Short memory I see. Moulson, Gorges, Lehner, ROR, Ennis, Foligno and Kane were all here and under contract or RFAs in addition to your 3; plus he had to re-sign Eichel for big $.
He did have some cap room initially which he used some of it to get out from under Ennis’ deal by trading Foligno and Ennis to get Scandella and Pommers which was a good trade.
So excuse Botterill's first season, not 3 years later. 3 current contracts were signed by Murray, and I believe you like one if them (Risto). That's not cap hell. Tim Murray didn't make Botterill decide Sobotka, Berglund, Vesey, etc were worthy of acquisition.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
If TP didn’t want to pay the bonus which is probably true, then what was Jbot supposed to do?
I went back and looked at the trade reviews at the time. While Jbot looks like he made a bad deal now, the talking heads thought he did pretty well then. Here is one example. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportingnews.com/us/amp/nhl/news/ryan-oreilly-trade-grades-details-sabres-blues-draft-picks-patrik-berglund/jb179og12xvh1dttn0s5c9g1i
This is what LeBrun called the trade on Twitter at the time.
1st 2019. 2nd 2021. Tage Thompson. Sobotka. Berglund. That is a major return for the Sabres. I get why the Blues did it, they add ROR and Bozak today and they're a better team. But given the midnight pressure to deal ROR, impressive by Jason Botterill
Not decide to trade him in the first place.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
How exactly is Jbot responsible for the mistakes made before he got here?
By what objective measures is Jbot incompetent? Have the Amerks improved since he got here? Yes. Is his drafting poor? We don’t know yet but it is showing promise. Is the pipeline better? I believe it is, especially at D and goaltending. Cap management? Not perfect but considering this will be the first offseason with substantial cap space since TM spent us in oblivion, I’d say a passing grade. What about trades? Mixed, some great ( Joker and Skinner) some good (Scandella in), some below average (Scandella out and Kane) and one terrible so far (ROR).
The next and most important question is are the Sabres better? They are on their highest point pace since before TM. They are scoring more goals in real and adjusted terms and giving up less in real and adjusted terms since before TM.
This team is far from complete and Jbot has made some big errors (like not replacing ROR quickly) but the trend is in the right direction. At worst he deserves another season to see if he can get the team into the playoffs.
FYI Snow was GM with the Islanders for 12 years and Milbury for 11 years. Not really legit comparisons with Jbot but posting without doing research is a habit around here.
Funny you say that when you continue to incorrectly assert that Murray left Botterill with a cap mess. 3 contracts: Risto, Bogo, Okposo. That's it. Botterill made his own mess by paying bad hockey players.
-
Key to happiness: find someone who loves you as much as @Randall Flagg hates NHL talking heads.
-
5
-
1
-
Rumor: About Botterill’s Future Being in Doubt
in The Aud Club
Posted
No. Changing GMs may mean a rebuild is more likely than it is with keeping the same GM, but that doesn't put the probability of a rebuild at 51%+.