mjd1001

I said about a month ago I would be OK with the status quo PLUS 1 legit top 4 D-man and another prospect D-man for Rochester who is good enough to play for the Sabres in a pinch. Anything else, a big goalie move being what is a big topic right now on this board....isn't that big of a deal for me. Just get a legit top-4 Dman and bringing back the rest of the gang is fine. Girgensonss and Okposo aren't likely to be here next year, certainly not both of them, so the young guys will get their shot eventually. If they force their way on to the team early by being light-out in a good way in camp so be it.

I know this was not directed at me, but I feel the same way (I am not eager to make trades and if its not a clear 'win' I'm likely not interested -- at this time). Why? I think making trades that you might not win, taking chances for something that might be a big reward....those type of deals I could get behind when your team is really 'stuck in the mud', so to speak. If you are going no-where or have an attitude in the room that needs to get changed, go ahead and make some big changes. However, I feel good about the direction of the current team. I LIKE the players on the current team. I think there is a chance that all of the goaltenders on the roster play better this year and that Levi could be a long term solution and he is here already. I think if you made NO moves (which I do not want NO moves) the team would still be better if no major moves were made. With that said, I want a move for a top-4 D-man and if that means trading assets (including a former 1st rounder) than that is what I'd be comfortable with.

This is a topic that keeps on coming up. It is short-term thinking by the sabers or maybe the NHL. I'll bring up a few people... My daughter and her boyfriend who are in their middle 20s, two nieces who are in their middle 20s, and a nephew who is in his early 20s. Those are the people in that age bracket in my life who have now moved out of their parents house and are living on their own. Every single one of them was a fan of the sabres growing up, and went to games, and watched them on television. My youngest nephew as a teenager had a collection of sabres jerseys. I verified with my nephew and niece when I saw them last over the holidays but none of them have traditional cable television where they get the MSG network, so none of them watch sabres games anymore. They are still fans of the team, but they don't go to any games, buy jerseys anymore, and they want them to do well but they watch the games much less than they did when they were readily available. My nephew was more of a sabres fan growing up but now he's more into the bills.... Why? He can watch all the games. I'm sure it's not the same with everyone in that age group, but to me it's obvious that to make a little bit more money with your cable television partners, you are shutting out a large segment of people who are going to be less fans of your product, buy less merchandise, and is there overall interest drops go to less games.

It is the same in nominal terms. Whether the cap goes up is the thing you have to decide if the nominal makes it worth it. The point of my post is do you break the contract down the way you do knowing the nominal, but not knowing the other things. Plus for me, I guess the numbers being as high as everyone is throwing out there, those numbers are good for Dahlin, I'm not sure sure for Power. I think Dahlin has a higher likely ceiling than Power. My personal opinion is Dahlin is/should be in the Norris trophy discussion every year for the next Decade. I think Power, while very very good, might be more likely to be 'all star' caliber, but a notch below Norris caliber.

Doing the math...3 at 5.5 is 15.5 total 8 at 8.5 is 68 total. If you do the 8 year version instead of the 3 year bridge you are basically deciding to pay 52.5 million for the remaining 5 tears beyond the bridge. For those saying 8 years at 8.5...mathematically you are saying that instead of 3 at 5.5....you would take that 3 at 5.5 and add on 5 more at 10.5 per year after. I'm not so sure I would sign him for 8 at 8.5....IF 3 at 5.5 is an option. I might just take the 3 at 5.5 and then re-evaluate at the end of that deal, not thinking that it will cost MUCH more than what it would be if you broke it down. Again, if those are the options, we are throwing out a lot of guesses at the moment.

I hope so. I like Power a lot and as a young rookie for a D-man, he played great. But from what I saw, great FOR A ROOKIE. He wasn't playing at an all-star level yet and he has the tools to be a great D-man but his play wasn't close to a guy you can say is a lock to be a Norris candidate in the future. He is good now. VERY good for his age. He has the tools to be great, but by no means is he a lock (yet) to be a top 10 d-man in the league.

Not a buch of open spots, but a bunch of young guys that have future NHL potential that us fans are speculating on where they are in the organization is what I meant. While few of them may make the team, I think it'll be great to see who is paired with who (among the young guys), how much time they get, how many preseason games they get. How the coaches talk about them. How late they stick around in camp. So you are likely correct that few of the young guys will make the team, us as fans should have a lot more visibility of just where they are in the organization.

This is why camp is so much fun/so important this year. The Sabres have a bunch of young guys that could be ready for the NHL or might be a year or two away. For fans, it's going to be an opportunity to see what the coaches think of the talent level and development of all these young guys we are just speculating on.

That seems like a typical message board offer. "Give me one of your good players and I'll give you 3 things that each have 10% the value of what you are giving me." VO may have more value than that, but Career AHL guys and 3rd round picks are not things that net you legit very good NHL players.

Not really. Is he "done"? maybe. I also think having a bounce back season isn't out of the question. The issue is, a 'bounce back' season is a possibility, not a certainty. AND he is going to be 32 at the start of this season...which for a D-man isn't always all that bad (D-men seem to mature a bit later than Forwards and stay 'good' for a bit longer than forwards), BUT I'd be OK with an older-stay at home type guy, not an offensive puck moving guy on the back end who is aging. And its not just age. In the last 10 years he is like 7th or 9th in the entire NHL in tersm of time on ice...lots of miles on the tires with him.

I'd be interested in knowing the Metrics used for the categories. Climate. For all those jokes about Buffalo weather and for the people who think it is the WORST Place in the USA (maybe all of North America) to live...yet behind Buffalo in climate is: Chicago, Detroit, Toronto, Denver, Montreal, Minneapolis, Ottawa, Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg. It almost looks like the 'climate' rating is how many degrees your average temperature is away from 70 (in either direction) during the hockey season.

When I was a little kid I loved Miracle whip and couldnt tolerate regular mayo at all. Now as an adult I'm flipped. I can have mayo on any sandwich, but Miracle whip I hate. Not sure why or how that flipped for me.

The less someone knows, the louder they yell. But then again, there is a large segment of the population that seems drawn to people who yell the loudest, regardless of what they are saying. We see it in all aspects of life, at our jobs, with our bosses, politics, sports, just about everywhere. The times of 'quiet confidence' are gone.

After about 25 years with my sturdy, heavy, durable computer desk, its time for a new one. I just want something in a light maple or white, medium length, sturdy, with a keyboard try or the ability to clamp on on to it. Looks decent, not something out of an industrial office. Basic. Shouldn't be too hard right? Hours of searching online I have found gaming desks that are huge. Desks that adjust in height that are motorized. Multi level desks. Desks with cable management systems built in, led lights built in. Desks where the entire top is a fabric like a mouse pad. Desks that are multi-colored. Desks where the surface is multiple pieces with a seam (or many) seams in them. Desks that cost $300, $400, up to $1000 and more. The FEW that I have found that fit what i want are usually under $100 and all reviews say to 'stay away' as they are made out of fiber board and fall apart within months. It shouldn't be this hard to get something that is both quality and somewhat basic in design.

Pittsburgh is now years away from being a legit cup contender. If they 'keep the band together' they have 1, maybe 2 year of simply contending for a wild card spot. But that franchise needs a LOT of work. They have a total of 2 (TWO!) players that were first round draft picks by them in their system (Sam Poulin and Owen Pickering). Neither was a top of the round pick, neither is even lighting it up in juniors/AHL. Most place that talk about farm systems have them ranked in the bottom 3. They have a 1st rounder this year but they don't have their 2nd or 3rd. As bad as Philly has been and in need of a total teardown, Pittsburgh might be looking at something worse, just a year or two behind Philly. The team is aging out of playoff contention and for a rebuild, there are no 'workers or tools' anywhere to be seen for that rebuild.

If, and this is a big IF, Beane and McDermott are going to be around here for 5+ more years....I wonder if they have 2nd thoughts about bringing in players that are more outspoken, more likely to be active on social media in a way they aren't comfortable with?

I have a similar feeling. I think that when he was drafted, and his first few years hear, even his 'on pace for MVP season' he was having at one point, I never really connected with him like fans do with their franchise player. If you follow the maple leafs fanbase you get a lot of the same vibes from them about their entire 'core'...they root for them becasue they are leafs and they are stars, but they aren't all that likeable to many. For example, when I was out of town and talking to people outside of Buffalo about sports, I never really felt the need to talk about Jack and say "that's my guy!", certainly not the way I feel about Josh Allen. Or I did about Hasek. Even how I did about Ryan Miller.

Like I said in my other post maybe I just don't care as much about the bills as I used to and as much as other people do. For me they are a fun diversion from life . And with football I don't like too much drama in my entertainment. I like it to be pure fun with minimal stress level. If it's something I have to think too much about or worry too much about I kind of check out of the NFL now. With that said, I'm not saying he's not a very good or great wide receiver, I just don't think he's indispensable. Teams survive and move on and sometimes even do very well when they lose their 30-year-old star receivers. I know based on your response you disagree with me and that's fine. We're not going to agree on everything.... But I really think this team needs a healthy Josh Allen who is upright and not injured much more than they need Diggs. I think they can be more successful without digs but with a healthy Allen, compared to last year were you had digs but you had Allen playing injured. In an ideal world you have both, but when players act like he is, it just rubs me the wrong way.

I'm reading and following the Diggs story/situation, but its more of a curiousity. I have posted here before that I have no idea why, but the Bills have gone from my childhood love (season tickets, never miss a game no matter what, know the entire roster, etc) so my #3 or maybe #4 interest in sports. So I'm curious about the story, but it doesn't bother me that much because I don't really care enough. With that said, I still have an opinion. I don't think this team needs Diggs. They need a healthy Josh Allen and I think Allen played most of the 2nd half last year hurt. He was all-world, MVP caliber for the playoffs in 2022, the first half of the 2022-23 regular season...then he gets hurt and doesn't look the same the rest of the year. Now, Diggs is stuck with the Bills and the Bill are stuck with him due to his contract...and YES, he is a very good player and on the field makes the team better. But personally I'd rather he wasn't here doing stuff like this....and the money you paid him you did something else with (Hopkins? for example) and you go forward with a Healthy Josh Allen. Maybe you take Diggs money and invest in a much better OL so Allen is much less likely to take hits in the pocket and stays healthy). Again, I know this isn't an option right now, but i'd rather have a healthy Josh Allen with a little more time in the pocket throwing to a WR unit without Diggs....rather than having Diggs and Allen being banged up a bit more and with a bit less time throwing to him.

Not to mention expansion teams don't have to worry about selling tickets or selling merchandise. If an existing team hasn't been relevant for a while, you might get signings like Taylor hall or other players to try to not only make the team better, but to get some fan support behind you. That can be a recipe for disaster. Expansion teams don't need to think about making money because they can take the long view and fans are still going to show up for a couple of years....and owners love revenue.

Interesting. Maybe, maybe not. Think of this Vegas team without Eichel. But with Tuch, Krebs (on a low line), $5m more in cap space (and what they could do with it) and possibly a major deadline aquisition they could fetch with the 1st or 2nd rounder they gave the Sabres. Points like this are what message boards are for.

Have an exhibition game there. Exactly where I do not know.

I think they made it easier for the expansion teams, but their success is more a different strategy they are taking than expansion teams in the past. It seems over the past few decades most expansion teams went in with the idea they were doing a 'full rebuild', not wanting good players an instead going for all youth. Vegas and Seattle didn't do that. In fact they had an advantage over existing teams becauser they could build their team with all guys in or entering the prime of their careers. With an existing team, the nature of being around for decades and constantly trying to compete means you have some guys past their prime, some in their prime, some young guys not there yet. If you look at Vegas and Seattle's roster, they built their team to have a greater percentage of guys in that 25-30/32 year old bracket than existint teams are able to. Maybe teams in the past didn't do that because the NHL made the expansion draft more restictive. BUT, with more/better players being available now, having a salary cap league AND this strategy, it makes it easier to attempt the 'win now' route. Vegas needs to win now. They are starting to 'age out' of their prime years with many of their players (4 of their top 5 paid forwards are over 30, and 3 of their top 4 D-men are 32 or older). Seattle? They are about to entier their 'prime' window and likely stay there for 3-5 years at least.

The last time Gibson had a good season, Jeff Skinner was getting used to the Sabres as his 'new' team. I don't want a goalie that hasn't been anything but average-to-below average since before the Pandemic. No thanks.

Maybe I'm reaching here, but if you can do that it might be an advantage. We know opposing teams do pretty intense scouting of opponents, knowing each players tendencies and weaknesses. When most of the league has guys on the 'right side', it can be easier for opponents to adjust to. Give them a different look, and it may be to your slight advantage. Kinda like the theory of a left footed punter in the NFL puts an opposite spin on the kicked ball that guys catching it aren't used to. The same may be that 2 guys on the Sabres back end that don't play 'positionally' like most of the league, or even retrieve the puck differnently from the boards or make their break-out passes slightly differently....maybe, just maybe that can give you a 'slight advantage against teams that have to scout you slightly differently than everyone else. I know that might be a reach, but try to take any slight disadvantage you have and see if you can turn it into an advantage.