Jump to content

TrueBlueGED

Members
  • Posts

    29,076
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TrueBlueGED

  1. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I would be disappointed. I don't think we have the firepower to effectively fill our needs only through trades, which means we're left hoping for some unexpected help from within coupled with growth. Again. I want to be able to look at the roster and think it's a playoff team, not think it could be a playoff team if 5 things fall correctly into place at once.
  2. Fine. I accepted his surrender like Michael Jordan accepted induction into the HoF. But when Liger goes off the deep end like he tends to do here and there, what other option did I have?!?!
  3. I can and I have. Here and elsewhere, even if not during this particular conversation. The obvious two in Tampa (Miller and Johnson...strongish preference for Miller), Karlsson, Hayes, Duchene, Turris (only for cheap and/or salary retained). Bring me one. I definitely think he was a contributing factor. But it's not his fault his options at 2C were a smorgasbord of AHLers. Edit: Moreover, we'll find out this year, right? If the team sucks again, are you really willing to blame the coach again? When is it a roster problem?
  4. I'd like some continuity too. But if we're not even sniffing the playoffs again, I find a hard time with continuity being a compelling reason to stay the course. Driving around the mountains can be tiresome but that doesn't mean the solution is to go straight and hop the guard rail.
  5. I don't have a specific player in mind, honestly. I have some names for 2C I think are attainable and would help fill the void, but I don't really care who it is so long as it works to the tune of the playoffs. If we're not within a game or two of the playoffs (preferably in the playoffs) then I'll be on the fire Botterill bandwagon. Again, barring circumstances out of his control.
  6. You're posting a lot for someone who doesn't care ?
  7. Do you honestly think it's that simple? He had more points, therefore tried harder?
  8. It moves it some, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong, but part of your argument is Eichel and O'Reilly couldn't co-exist in the leadership group because making it Eichel's team would inherently mean a demotion of sorts for O'Reilly. But it was never O'Reilly's team in any formal sense. Maybe O'Reilly wanted the C, knew he wasn't getting it, and that caused friction. Maybe other players did get tired of O'Reilly being negative. But man, aren't those things relatively minor in the grand scheme? Is any of that so big that building up the room and icing a better roster (thus, winning) wouldn't have been able to work it out? I just find it all really hard to believe. There are some situations where yes, you simply have to get a guy out. The whole thing a year ago with Hoffman and Karlsson strikes me as such a situation. I don't think the O'Reilly situation comes within a country mile of that severity from what we know.
  9. No, they don't. There is zero way for us to objectively judge how good Botterill's drafting is.
  10. Is it? Murray's last two seasons yielded 402 goals, Botterill's first two yielded 425. But how much of that is a result of Botterill's moves versus the natural development of Eichel and Reinhart? Moderate goal output increase, questionable causal chain. That of course also has to be balanced by the worsening team defense. Botterill's teams gave up 551 goals to Murray's teams' 459. Combining these two figures, we're a whopping 69 goals in the red. Again, this team can have a future, but there is no evidence saying it does. Your belief is not evidence. Oh, and this team has 3 bad contracts: Bogosian, Scandella, Okposo, and Sobotka, of which only two were inherited. We'd have a 5th if Botterill didn't luck into Berglund quitting.
  11. Your ability to get worked up over mid-round picks never ceases to amaze me. I don't mean that critically, either. You obviously enjoy deep diving the draft, so good on you. I just can't get myself to care about draft picks after maybe pick 15 in the first round. All these guys are 3+ years away from mattering.
  12. I think there's considerable value in understanding the processes that led to making, and subsequently losing, the trade. That can inform evaluations and discussion of other moves, both actual and potential.
  13. So move a Rochester goalie to the ECHL, Siberia, or the Atlantic ocean. I don't really care. The AHL depth chart should have zero effect on trying to improve the NHL goaltending.
  14. 1) There may have been an order from the top to trade him before he got paid the bonus, but that doesn't mean that the order to trade in the first place originated at the top. I think it's likely Botterill decided to trade him (for whatever reason) and at that point was told he had better do it before the bonus. But we'll never know. Anyway, I don't think there's a way to look at the trade that makes either Botterill or Pegula look good--it's bad all 'round. However the trade came to be, it's incumbent upon Botterill to fill the giant hole it created. 2) Sir, the collapse already happened. The question is whether Botterill can reconstruct fast enough.
  15. Right. The problem comes in when knowing somebody leads you to have undue confidence in them. That doesn't appear to be the case here. Then maybe one of the three won't be smoldering garbage. May the best two win.
  16. You're not being objective, though. You clearly believe in Botterill and think it's going to work out long term, but if we're looking at objectivity, his first two seasons as GM have objectively been worse than Murray's last two. Murray's Sabres finished 23rd with 81 points and 26th with 78 points. Botterill has iced 31st in the league with 62 points and 27th in the league with 76 points. At best, they're in the same place. There is simply no evidence the team is moving in the right direction. You are free to believe it is, but that's not objectivity.
  17. Correct. Barring unusual circumstances (injuries, stupidly bad puck luck, etc.) I'd go one farther and say they have to be a playoff team. Or so stupidly close they miss out on the final day of the season via shootout or something. Botterill has iced two teams worse than Murray did, one of which was tank-worthy while trying to win. Woof. There's no way to know how thin his ice is with Pegula, but I can't imagine he has much of any rope left with fans.
  18. I have full confidence in your ability to be an outlier ?
  19. I think this is a fair assessment given what he's done so far. I think he was seriously constrained by market forces with respect to the Kane trade, but it's not like we have a lot to go on other than that and O'Reilly.
  20. Myers didn't play in the NHL in his draft season. He also did that on a functional team with a good coach (no, 11 has not taken control of my keyboard). He also wasn't talked about as the next great defensive prospect since he was 16. I understand not wanting to be burned again, but the circumstances really aren't all that similar.
  21. For me, saying he's incredible has those things baked into it, but I get what you're saying. And he was more than just very good for an 18 year old defenseman. He had one of the best seasons ever for an 18 year old defenseman, and he did it on a bad team. It's this part that I don't think a lot of people fully appreciate. It would be pretty shocking if he doesn't end up in the Norris conversation within a few years given what he was at 18.
  22. Conceptually, I just don't think you need to put your best two defenseman on the top pair. I also don't think the minutes that Risto plays have to exist. Balance things across the top-4 rather than saddling one pair with it. That would be my approach.
×
×
  • Create New...