DarthEbriate

Even from 2007 we've made enormous advancements in storage, bandwidth, and video capture technology. If a team today went solely to video scouting it'd still be controversial, even if it's now possible.

Nah. The last 3 years we had Hutton. We didn't need to change anything. 🍺😇

Drieger is interesting. He's ascending. But he's also only played 38 NHL games (35 in the last 2 seasons with a very defensively sound FLA squad). It is a very small sample size. He's due for something like Ullmark's expiring bridge contract... $2.6M. So in the $2.5-$3M range. The question becomes: do you offer him that to be a 1B? Or do you think he's sound enough for a true median starter in the #3.8-$4.5M range, and then spend the $2.5M on someone else to be the 1B?

Of course, in 2001 the available video would have been someone with a JVC and needed to be copied/moved, etc. Today, everyone has a hi-def camera on their phone with the ability to upload to the interwebs directly. We have a more extensive video scouting library available to us on YouTube (without even subscribing to any premier video services) than xGMDR would have had available. As a result, that video drafting dragged the Sabres down (as well as many other factors), whereas today I'd argue a team could probably get away with video for the bulk of the work. You'd still need the scouts for conversations on your targeted players. Off-ice, character, practice habits, etc.

We’re a month from the expansion draft so I want to make sure I've got things in order. Everything changes if any of Eichel, Ristolainen, or Reinhart are moved, but there’s a good chance that GMs are happy where they’re at for expansion (because they’ve been planning for it for years) and therefore will wait until between the expansion draft and rookie draft to make any blockbuster trades with the Sabres. Here are my protections: F: Skinner, Eichel, Reinhart, Mittelstadt, Olofsson, Asplund, Thompson BjorkBjorkBjork is the odd one out for me. Sure, he kills penalties and hustles, but he lacks Asplund’s hands and doesn’t have Thompson’s ceiling (height jokes!). However, any of Asplund, Thompson, or Bjork is a sweetener to get a top-end prospect in a deal. My guess is GM Sheevyn protects Bjork because he was acquired in the Hall trade. D - Dahlin, Jokiharju, Ristolainen I like Borgen, but right now Risto has greater trade value. My counterargument is Seattle doesn't like Risto's metrics or salary and JBott knows exactly what other teams were offering for Risto and he'll never garner anything more than a single 2nd at the deadline. G: I offer Ullmark 3x$5M this month to get him and us through the flat cap seasons. Then I hunt for a 2-year backup. However, if Linus wants to go UFA, more power to him, and I protect the Toker. Incentives: 10 draft picks is a bunch. So I offer Seattle the 2021 MTL 5th (from Staal trade) to pick C Cody Eakin or the 2021 COL 6th (from JJ trade) to pick D Colin Miller. Either pick gives JBott the chance to tell his new master about his latest William Worge-Kreu. I also check with Seattle on anyone JBott really loves in our system and might want to acquire. Think XGMTM going back for some Ottawa folks (Lehner). Maybe we can do a little dance with the Kraken. For example, Laaksonen for the 2nd overall pick….

The good news from an Isles perspective is that it was not the closing game of the series. A game 6 win and this is forgotten. Unlike say... what we did to the Flyers in the '01 quarters. The Flyers have to live with that shameful beatdown forever. Forever.

And a happy Poof to you as well.

The Tampa skaters were all on ice for a shot on goal, so their Corsi has that going for them. Which is nice.

It was the best of hockey and just a continuous one-upping of great efforts. Killorn pinches the puck and gets it to Kucherov. Kucherov with a beautiful chip to get that puck in front to the wide-open McDonagh. Varlamov knows there's time for one shot and charges out -- there's nothing to shoot at on the forehand, especially with a great dive by Nelson. Aha! But McDonagh out-greats them and tries spinning (I have it on good authority that that's a good trick) to the backhand for that one shot. It's away! Negative. It didn't go in. Just impacted on the Pulock. The greatest effort of them all... Pulock sees McDonagh go to the spin and crashes to the ice to take away the goal. I love hockey.

This current Sabres squad needs a Peca/Kadri/Perry in the very worst way. And it can't be a DLo, or a Kaleta, or a ... Pekar... or even an Angry Larry. It can't be a 4th-line guy. It needs to be someone in the top-6 who's just simply tough to play against on every shift and is going to cause chaos. And can score 20+.

I had been known to yell "Speed kills!" at the TV when we played Philly in those days while we skated circles around those lumbering oafs. Holzinger and Sanderson had elite speed. Primeau, Rasmussen, Brown, etc. were fast young guys. But defensively, they all relied on clutching-and-grabbing just as much as the opposition did on them. That's the re-learning. What concerns me more when I really think on it are ... Peca. Peca was borderline then. We can't have our captain getting suspended left and right. Today, he'd be worse than Kadri. And Smehlik. Smehlik would be in trouble in today's game.

Ahhh... this trade: D McNabb, F Jonathan Parker, and two 2nd round picks (both from LA) to LA for LW Nicolas Deslauriers (AHL), W Hudson Fasching (NCAA B1G Minn) I always liked Fasching's potential as a middle-6 power forward. DLo was a good 4W. But how is that worth a potential 2nd-pairing D and 2 2nds? (And Parker to free up a roster spot.) The real error here was McNabb would have been with the Sabres the following season -- thereby keeping Ristolainen/Zadorov in Rochester where they belonged. Moving him set up a chain reaction that led to rushing kids up when they could have been a) playing top minutes and learning the craft because they were nowhere near polished prospects, b) not brought into a tank situation.

I also always state not to underestimate that 1999 team. But I've got to give the caveat -- the post trade deadline 1999 squad. Because on the shoestring budget of Hasek + some guys... they got to the 7 seed. Swapping Barnaby for Stu Barnes, swapping Wilson for Rhett Warrener, getting Joe Juneau for (...I had to research... Tezikov? Tezikov!). The final iteration was really solid. Kicking Rob Ray and Paul Kruse out of the lineup. I don't know if I'd swap the '99 squad sans Hasek for today's roster. I'd take the '99 squad plus prime-Hasek. 🍺They'd have to learn a different non-clutch-and-grab game. But yes, we'd be entertained. This, too. That was a frustrating team to watch. But oh so very entertaining.

Yes. And it was a disappointment both times. (Gah... Vanek's leg... ). But that's also just the way it goes once you make the playoffs. TBL lost in the first round against Columbus a few years ago. In '05-'06, Detroit lost in the first round (while we were a juggernaut 4 seed). In 1998-1999 we were the 7 seed, in 97-98 we were the 6 seed. Just gotta get to the playoffs -- then live it day-by-day.

Then he needs to stop authorizing paying top-dollar on the UFA market to get the likes of Leino, Ehrhoff, Moulson, Skinner, and Hall (and then buy them out). Instead, go get a Tyler Toffoli + Jake Allen combo. But that's not sexy. Maybe TPeg just read lately that none of the remaining teams in the playoffs has a double-digit million dollar salary on its roster. That'll be the shiny new focus.

I always forget that Leopold scored that one. I just always [edit: remember it as] thought it was simply Foligno willing the puck in via Komisarek completely losing his head.

For myself, the hope is that it's still a veteran roster and most importantly, they had the goaltending. Drafting poorly, Leino... gah. (I still love the Ehrhoff signing and cap hit,just not the front-loading that turned it into a horrible contract.) You get into the playoffs and let the chips fall where they may. We've seen wild runs before and underdogs advance a couple rounds all the time. (You could get a Hamburglar/Binnington playing lights-out, you could get a team missing a bunch of key players, you could win on some bounces in OT.) But if you don't give your team the opportunity to even make the playoffs, then you're casting all hope solely to the future that isn't even there yet. And of course, the tank was successful. The hope was rightfully there and re-established around a new youthful core. Hope can never be the strategy. It must always be there... whether you're the #1 team in the league or the #32. You can expect to compete for a championship, but the expectation of a championship is also not a strategy (and is unfounded because of how these seasons and the playoffs in the NHL play out). We had him right in our sights. (Or White or Samsonov or Beauvillier, etc.)

I count the tank starting point at the "suffering" press conference. We know we have no centers -- Grigs and Girgs are drafted but years away from playing (ideally), Leino is not a C, Roy is traded, Hecht is best-suited as a wing and not part of the future, and Hodgson and Ennis are going to top out at 2Cs at their best. We're going to suffer to get those top centers in the draft. McDavid is looming. I had to go back to check it -- 4/29/2013 is the press conference (or 4/28, if the articles came out the next day). We'd just finished the lockout season 21-21-6. That's where I start the tank. Others may not agree with me. But my tank begins with "suffering" and the nosedive 2013-2014 to get Reinhart and then the continued stall to get McD/Eichel. Prior to that, we're in a XGM Regier rebuild --- is it working? Meh. We're trending downward as the core ages. But the previous three seasons had resulted in 1st in division - playoff berth (09-10), 2nd in division - playoff berth (10-11), and 3rd in division (11-12) and a heroic charge to 9th. Good enough? No. Stuck in no-man's land and faltering? Yes. Were those three seasons suffering? Gosh no.

The decision to tank (for Eichel/McDavid) and dismantle the organizational depth down to the studs --- to the extent that both Buffalo and Rochester were bottom-dwellers in their respective leagues --- is the reason this team has sucked for a decade. So I guess, maybe we could blame Eichel/McDavid for that. But really that's on TPegs and whoever sold it to XGMDR. Was it Eichel on the ice? Absolutely not. Trading a 1C in ROR while Eichel was still becoming a solid 2C was horrible. Having consistently-below-average goaltending behind a youthful roster... horrible. Hiring a coach who wanted to play a defensive shell 100% of the time and sit solely on the PP as the means of offense... horrible. Tons of reasons beyond Eichel for this team being terrible on ice.

When GM Sheevyn's phantom menace coup finally reached its realization, all that was needed was to remove the one final viable competition from a position of power. That last thread is Jack-ikin Eichwalker. He's more machine now than man, and soon will be traded to some star cruiser in Outer Rim to waste away, from from the city-planet of KeyBank Center. Every GM gets at least 3 years to make over the roster in their own choosing. Except here... here it's sometimes shorter.

It's time to write, direct, and produce another trilogy.

I think it'd be worth the Canadiens' 5th or our 6th to get Seattle to bite on Miller instead of Borgen/Bjork. Simply because they're NHLers and the 6th Seattle could use to stock their farm. Remember, they have to put together an entire AHL roster, and in a season or so, they'll partner with an ECHL team as well. Or this. Particularly if you pick up a D in a near-same-day Eichel move.

They became Deslauriers and Fasching. *zing*

I also believe this trade is really close. Maybe ensure that that 2022 1st is lottery-unprotected (unconditional). Maybe another toss-in prospect who projects more to AHL/4th liner. But it has the constituent parts. And I'm hoping if that's the offer, that GM Sheevyn says "Nope. Where's the Zegras/Drysdale?"

You're not going to die in childbirth trade Eichel just for the 3, Gibson, the rights to Lundestrom, and Derek Grant, @Randall Flagg, I promise. No, I promise you!