mjd1001

I don't feel the same way. I know I'm not taking a stand, but next year (in a full season), I could see them finishing with 80 points and getting everyone fired, or I could also see them with 100 points and in the playoffs pretty easily. For years, many lamented not having those big time star players. If, IF, Dahlin continues to develop into a top-10 NHL D-man, Eichel gives you top 10 points and you get 80+ goals from Reinhart, Skinner, and Olofson......then you just need some 'luck' with the middle 6 and you could be there. I'm not saying they WILL be there, but I can see it as a possibility....while they may finish 25th in the league again, I don't think they are doomed to that.

It could work of course, but what level of play are you expecting. If it was a Canadian league vs a U. S. league..it would be interesting. Money, of course, is where it is going to be at. The NHL brings in a really good amount of dollars from the Canadian national TV deal...so that is a plus for the Canadian side of things. They would AT least be competitive with the American league, if not ahead of it. As far as total revenue generation outside of a TV deal..if I remember correctly as of 2017, The Rangers were the highest...but Toronto and Montreal were in the top 5. But after that...there were no other Canadian teams in the top 10 in revenue, not even Vancouver (when translated to the same currency, U.S. dollars) So could it work? Yes Could it be competitive with the U.S. league? Yes. But would it exist as the premium league to the U.S. league? Probably not...and over the long run it may fall slightly to 2nd tier status (eventually).

I'm not that upset by it.. -Botterill? I thought he was going to be back anyway. -Core set? Depends on what you mean by 'core'. Eichell, Reinhart, Skinner, Dahlin, and Oloffson is your core..then I get it. -Girgensons and Larsson back? I have NO problem with that if their salary is reasonable. They, with Okposo, make up an average-to-above average 4th line. -Sabres might keep Hutton? Eh, whatever. if he plays 25 games or less, oh well. -going to lose Montour? once again whatever..if he stays good, if not...oh well.

So far close to it..yes. I'm talking about what we are seeing and hearing now. On one side people who want to keep extending unemployment benefits on and on and on with keeping things 100% closed down and not even trying to reopen anything until cases are down close to zero...and on the other side people who refuse to wear a mask even though it might be a local law and are threatening (and shooting/killing) people who try to enforce those laws. So far, up to this very point..we probably have taken a middle ground...but there are more and more voices on the extreme of both sides that are shouting louder and louder to be heard....and not just be heard but to take the law into their own hands if they don't get what they want.

I agree. There is no compromise. More and more people want 100% of what they want...and will not budge or compromise on it. For example...re-opening the economy.....Some want things locked down until a vaccine is developed..others want everything open right away with no restrictions or masks? How about a slow re-opening with reading the data that comes from that and having a plan to move forward? It seems like the 'common sense' middle approach doesn't exist...it has been killed as collateral damage in the crossfire between the 2 opposing sides unwilling to compromise.

I just wish leagues would change the definition to 'player of the year' or something like that. If there were 2 awards...one for 'player of the year/best player' and the other for 'player who may not be the best, but who is the most valuable to his individual team', I know I would care for the 'player of the year' award much, much more than the other.

I have visited in the last week(for a snack or a quick drink) 7-11 stores in Lockport, Niagara Falls, and Amherst. All have had hand sanitizer at the front near the register....some brand i never heard of before...and it is a little pricey...but it is there (including today at the store in Lockport I was at this morning).

FYI, I'm not sure if anyone is having a hard time finding hand sanitizer, but... I travel for work and am out in retail stores almost everyday. most 7-11 convenience stores have a pretty good amount of sanitizer for sale, for the last couple weeks now. Supermarkets and Walmart is still hit and miss. Get there early enough and you might find it, but not for sure.

I don't see a major cap problem here like some do...it all depends on how you fill the holes you have. It is up to you right now whether you want to pay/overpay Sam, he is not on the books for next year yet. Jacks contract is fine. Okposo and Skinner are overpayed for what they looked like this year....but not much more than what most other teams have in bad contracts (almost everyone has a few). Montour? like Sam above...don't 'calculate' an estimate for him against the cap until you work something out...and if you don't like what he is asking..then don't sign him. This team might be a disaster against the cap if a bunch of bad decisions are made in the offseason...but right now they have more flexibility to stay out of trouble (or get back into it) than most teams.

That is the main problem I might have with the trade. I wasn't, and still am not totally against trading him. The team wasnt' much, if any better with him on it (at least as far as results go). The problem I have is...there were too many reports, too many rumors....on message board, twitter, and news reports from mostly credible reporters...that said if the Sabres paid his bonus they could have gotten a much better return. I have to think that one of those reports/rumors were true (particularly that Carolina came up a lot)...and getting less in the trade than you could have gotten if you had paid the bonus...that is as much on ownership as on the GM.

Agreed. Right now we don't know what things will be like in the future. Next year at this time, things might be 100% normal, the way they have been for years. Or, next year we might be dealing with no Bandits and Lacrosse league..maybe no AHL...an NHL with less teams, a good percentage of college sports teams no longer existing....The truth is probably someplace between those 2 scenarios....but nothing would surprise me now.

As long as the Bills and Sabres are still here, I think most people, including myself, would say no, he stays. However, that is really the biggest and only criteria where I would keep them here. I have said for the last few years there are things about them I don't like, how they run the teams. I just don't think they are that good yet as sport team owners. If you told me you could get rid of the Pegula ownership and replace them with somene else, and the ONLY thing you knew about the new owners was that they would keep the teams in WNY, then I would say yes, make that move.

I posted something a few days ago very close to what you are saying. I like the discussion, I like thinking about and projecting 'possibilities' as far as how well the team is doing, but I have lost most of the rest of my 'love' or even 'like' for these teams. All things being equal, I want the Bills and Sabres to win. But I truly, truly just don't care that much anymore. Except for the few members of these forums who seem to always be looking to prove themself right all the time...I like the discussion more than the actual games....and I really don't feel any kind of need to support the teams anymore (or most pro sports teams, pro athletes, drivers, etc.)

I can see that as being a 'loose' plan or hope at this time, but when it comes to make the decision I don't think it will be the case. Too much is uncertain and almost all of it leads to less revenue: -When will the season start? Will games this season be permanently lost? Will the season have a late start or games lost next year. Every one of those is a loss of revenue. -Merch sales and concessions, that is a lot of money that is already lost. That number will continue to go down/be a loss for every fan that doesn't attend a game again next season. Plus parking, plus other items. -Advertisers. Even IF they could start next season on time and the buildings were full, some companies are in bad shape and will cut back on advertising. Do you think every ad on the boards or the ice in every Arena around the league...that every single one of those companies will keep spending the same or more money next year? Then add in game over-the-speakers ads, banner ads, ads in the buildings, local ads (including restaurants and small businesses) that may buy a 30 second spot during the local broadcast. ANY reduction in that will be a reduction in revenue. -Ticket sales. Once again, how long before we can have people in the seats, and will it be the same? Some fans may not want to come back at all. What about paying for improvements to the Arena (extra cleaning, more space in restrooms/concessions). I have heard from more than one source that entertainment venues AT FIRST may only allow people in every other row, or every 2nd or 3rd seat must be empty. That may be how they start this. -National broadcasts. Not as big of a slice of the revenue pie as in the NFL, but will some major advertisers stop (or ask for reduced rates) because they have less money to work with? -Finally, we all hear there are a lot of teams losing money, and relying on revenue sharing. How many teams that were 'barely' making money will now move to the 'losing' money side of the ledger, and how many teams that were losing are going to get a lot worse? I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things. Bottom line is, there is going to be lost revenue, and maybe a LOT Of lost revenue. I can't see the actual cap being the same without the league asking for major concessions on player salaries. When revenue goes down....or even when your visibility of potential future revenue goes down, you have to cut expenses. Player salaries are the largest expense by far. The only hope I think the players have medium to long term as that all this stimulus money (and maybe a lot more being created by it being funneled through the banks instead of directly to small businesses, letting banks use that trick of 'fractional reserve baking to loan out even MORE than they are getting)...that this money creates so much in the system that all the dollars have to go somewhere. If that happens a lot of people will 'get their money' but that money might be worth a lot less. Of course, economists have been saying that is possible for decades now and it never really happened (that type of inflation) but if M3 money supply skyrockets this year by close to $6-$8 Trillion, then maybe (but that is an entirely different discussion) Who knows, maybe Bettman knows of a potential 'bailiout' for entertainment purposes. The pro sports leagues can argue its not about the owners and the players, but how many other 'jobs' are tied to their existence. In Canada, I'm sure a lot of citizens wouldn't mind some money supporting their teams....and in the U.S. with just one bill giving over $2,000,000,000,000 so far....finding 'money for all those tied to the entertainment industry...a 'bailout' of $20,000,000 to each us team would be just 1/1000 of one percent of what was spent in that one single bill? I hope not. -

I thought about after reading your reply. I really don't miss the actual games that much....The Sabres/NHL, the NFL, baseball, etc. I miss them a LITTLE, but not a lot. What I do miss is the discussion about them, thinking about the matchups, pondering how an offseason move will translate to the stats and win-loss record in the upcoming season. The actual process of 'watching' the 7:00pm hockey game or 1pm football game I don't miss. Why? Because for the most part in watching a game, 98% of what I'm going to see, I have already seen something very similar. I'm not a regular fantasy football or baseball player, but as time goes on and I have seen more and more games i my life...very little I see in a a game is new. The only thing that really changes are the names involved and the results (and coaching trends) so I tend to follow sports now more like a fantasy player (keep me updated on scores and stats, with an occasional highlight) so I don't have to sit through 3 hours of a game where nothing exciting happens in 2.5 of those 3 hours.

I'm actually the opposite. I am getting by better than I thought. Would I like them back? Sure. Are a lot of other things gone like movies and dining out and everything else, sure. But I don't wake up or live my day to day live missing watching sports all that much.

Well, if you knew you were getting someone as good as Forsberg, then yes. The problem is, if you get another 'top-5' pick in return...are you getting Forsberg? Or Pat Faloon. If you are getting that 'haul', you didn't know what Forsberg would turn into. With tht in mind...No, I wouldn't do it.

Jack, VO, Reinhart, Skinner, Kahun, Lazar, Mitts, Cozens and Johanson....I'm ok with the best 6 or 7 of them being in the top 9. But I think this team needs to add 2 or 3 more quality players to the top 9. Girgensons, Larsson, Asplund, Okposo...I'm good with 3 of those 4 being on the 4th line. The question is..who are those 2 or 3 more forwards for the top 9, and what are they going to cost you? What I don't want is to overpay for a free agent just to fill the spot...or to sign/trade for a player that if EVERYTHING goes right they will be an improvement, but with the odds you are likely not getting what you want from them. I don't know the solution, the bad part is the most likely way to success is patience....waiting...not 'doing whatever is possible' to fill those holes right away.

Of everything I have read in the last week or so, I agree with this the most. Its not much change again though. Unless Dahlin takes a huge leap forward, Mitts/Cozens/Thompson do the same...its hard to see how this lineup does all that well.

I don't really know enough about the nhl game and positioning, coaching, etc to really have a great idea how he is doing. However, it seems that D-Men usually need more time than Forwards to reach their potential. With that said, I'm still hopefully he can/will be a Norris trophy caliber D-man eventually. For now, I just want him to get better every year. I really don't care if he kills penalties..but by next year I hope he is good enough to be leading the D-men in even strength and PP ice time.

I actually don't mind Dunleavy. He isn't 'flashy' and sometimes it takes a second or two for me to register if a goal was scored, but overall I prefer him to a lot of other people I hear doing play-by-play. Of course, I must say that I am NOT a fan of guys that get overly excited....RJ's calls to me are a bit too over the top. But I'd be perfectly content/happy with Dunleavy going forward.

As far as a goalie goes, you can't have a bad one. You can get away with having a bad line on your team....or a bad D-pairing...but because there is only one goalie, your starter can't be 'bad'. With that said though, I don't think you need a great one. Just get someone who is just above 'middle of the pack', but has the potential every year to go on a good run. If you can get that and NOT pay him top 5 goalie dollars, I think you are set in net.

Don't forget Montreal. I think there are 5 or 6 games left where Florida/Montreal/Toronto play each other. If one team tanks, it is likely the others will pick up some of those points from each other. According to NHL.com...remaining strength of schedule for the rest of the year.... Sabres, 4th most difficult remaining schedule in the league. Montreal, 15th most difficult Toronto, 17th most difficult Florida, 21st most difficult There are also alot of sites out there which tell you how likely a team is to make the playoffs, factoring in probabilities both based on 50-50 odds in each game..and others with strength of schedule..and others using very complicated methods like Sagarin's ratings. Of the ones I follow and find have been the most accurate in the past....they have the Sabres at 1-3% chance of playoffs as of today, Montreal at 1-2%, Florida at anywhere from 40-70%, and Toronto most of them all have right near that 55-58% chance. I don't think the Sabres are making it...but if they can reach/beat 88 points on the year (taking into considerations their upcoming schedule) and have a neutral or positive goal differential the rest of the year...I'll be content with the ending of the season they had.

It is an improvement over last year. The sad thing is, it would be their best season since 2011-2012 when they had 89 points (They still have a chance of beating that season) How long go was that? That team featured.......Tyler Ennis was only 21 years old...So was Luke Adam who scored 10 goals in just over half a season...Jordan Leopold and Robyn Regehr lead the D-unit in games played. I really hope this team with Eichel having his great year can top that team and get 90 points.

plus they are actually producing this year....more goal than usual for them. I think Larsson and Girgs are actually pretty valuable as 4th line players on 4th line contracts.