msw2112

This is a very clever hack that I might use for some of the NHLN games. It's risky, as I could forget to cancel and end up with a large bill, so I might wait to use it until late in the season when there are (hopefully) critical games being played.

ESPN+ is a great value for out of market games. I'm already paying for YouTubeTV for NFL purposes, and they don't have NHL Network, so I'm out of luck for those handful of games that NHLN broadcasts. Already paying for YTTV, it's not worth it to me to pay for FUBO for a few additional games. I agree that restricting NHLN to a few cable or streaming services is a bad idea for a league that's trying to increase viewership! Obviously, they're asking too much in rights fees for services to add the channel and that's just silly, as they are competing for viewers' attention. Even leagues like the WNBA are getting very popular these days, so the NHL should fight for turf. This sort of poor decision making for the NHL is anything but new.

Obviously, Florida has a great team, as they just won the Stanley Cup, but I see a guy like Matthew Tkachuk being able to put a team on his back and will it to victory. Not only does he have offensive talent, but he has grit, determination, and leadership skills. The guy would put his shoulder through a brick wall to win and the rest of the guys would follow along. (The Sabres once had a player drive a truck into a brick wall at Tim Horton's, but I digress.) I'd see Tkachuk having the quality more than Matthews, but your point is taken. A prolific scorer like Matthews can make up for the loss of other scorers. Gabriel Landeskog may be a better all around player than anyone the Sabres have and was his team's captain, but guys like McKinnon and Makar kept Colorado in the mix even when Landeskog was out for an entire season. I just don't see anyone on the Sabres able to do that. Dahlin would be the closest they have (very talented, can score goals, has ability at both ends, plays with grit and determination), but he's not quite to that level of veteran leadership. Perhaps he'll take the next step with Ruff behind the bench, another year of seasoning, and the C on his chest. I can't speak a lot to the bottom 6 of Toronto, Boston, or even Tampa, but I think that Tampa has done reasonably well with injuries to guys like Stamkos, Kucherov and others in recent seasons because they have other guys who have stepped up. They have a lot of really good players on the roster (Stamkos, Kucherov, Point, Hedman, Vasilevskiy, Hagel, etc.) so that if one or two of them are out, the others can step up. Their top guys are aging and their window may be closing, but the point remains the same (and they made the playoffs last year). I don't think the Sabres have enough of those players on the current roster. I hope a) that we don't have to find out; and b) that if we do have to find out, that I'm proven wrong.

I'm saying that for THIS team, they need to stay healthy to make the playoffs. I don't think the Sabres have the organizational depth to overcome significant injuries. A team like Colorado or Tampa might be able to do that, but not this Sabres team. I don't think there are enough veteran players of the kind to "carry the team on their back" and while there's a lot of talent in the pipeline, but they're kids that are not physically and mentally ready for the NHL. I'm not saying that staying healthy is an option they can elect, it's not, so I agree with you 100% on that. It's mostly luck and to an extent training (training might help prevent frequent soft-tissue injuries, but can't prevent broken broken bones from a slash or crash into the boards). If they have good luck on injuries and buy what Lindy is selling (consistent effort, no days off, attention to detail), I believe they make the playoffs.

I merely believe that Pegula is choosing to save some money on an off-the-ice expense, and to me, it's not a big deal if he does that, as long as it doesn't impact the product on the ice. I can see why someone would disagree with my perspective or opinion, but I'm not sure why it would be perplexing to you or why I would need to "have my head examined" for having that opinion. I understand that comment was a joke and hyperbole, but I don't see it as appropriate, given the tone of the conversation. I can tell from your writing that you are a well-educated guy (I'm making an assumption that you are, in fact, a guy), so I can't see why you'd find it that perplexing that someone would have the perspective that I have on this topic. It's not that complex. While it may be different from your perspective, it's not an extreme or outlandish opinion to have. All this said, I'm not big into message board wars. We can agree to disagree on this one topic and I'd suspect we probably agree on most others. Go Sabres.

Two things have to happen for the Sabres to make the playoffs: 1. Buy into Ruff 2. Stay relatively healthy They've been very close to the playoffs the last 2 seasons, and only missed by 1 point two years ago. And that's with Granato's "no accountability" leadership. With even a middling power play, and good goaltending in October, November, and December, last year's team would have made the playoffs. Both of those things are within reach. They have plenty of talent on the power play and I've got to think Ruff will use it better than Granato did last year. As to the goaltending, no Comrie this year. UPL appears to be for real and Levi has a lot more professional experience under his belt and should be better (and won't be relied on to be the savior).

In my opinion, my way of thinking is ... logical. And some of your responses are ... condescending. But to each his own. Have a great weekend and go Sabres.

I'm honestly not sure what you mean by this. Have you ever run a business? Worked in one? Managed a budget? Pegula has lots of money outside of the Sabres. If he sells the Sabres, he'll make a fortune based on what he paid for it versus his present value. But if you look at the year over year balance sheet of the business, it is losing money on an annual basis. People who run businesses often don't like to pump more money into those businesses that are losing money. It's like throwing good money after bad. Some people look at it this way: if I invest in the business now, it will be better, and it will ultimately be more profitable. (Put the chicken before the egg.) This appears to be what some/most Sabres fans want. It's what I want. I think it's what you want. Other people look at it this way: I'm going to wait and see if the business turns around before I throw more money at it. (Put the egg before the chicken.) This is what Pegula is doing (at least it appears so). Spending money on sending Rayzor and Dunleavy to Europe has absolutely nothing to do with the success of the on-ice product, so why spend the money if your business is losing money year over year. Again, I really don't care how Pegula spends his money (send them or don't send them) on things that don't impact the product on the ice. I honestly can't believe I'm spending so much time on something I really don't care that much about, but as I stated a couple of posts above, I don't shy away from a good debate. I should quit while I'm ahead, as "we must study your brain" is anything but a good debate. Can we talk about the 2nd line center? If we think Dahlin was the right choice to be captain? Whether Gritty could take Sabretooth in a cage match?

I appreciate the response. To me, that's an awful lot of thought devoted to explaining away a cheap owner doing things on the cheap. Terry is not getting any benefit of the doubt from me. He's operating the Sabres as a poverty franchise. I really don't care about taking the broadcast team to Europe one way or another, but I do enjoy a good debate. Terry spends plenty of money on the Bills and he also spent plenty of money on the Sabres in the early days of his ownership, for very little return. I think he's being more cautious about his spending now, and given the economics of the team, it makes sense. If the team starts winning again and filling the building every night, he'll have more cash to play with and may increase spending. I realize that it's a chicken and egg sort of thing - maybe if he spent more, the team would be better, and they'd fill the building. You want the chicken first and they're putting the egg first. I don't see the relevance of this. The relevance of the broadcast team being average is this - spending money on things that are unnecessary but nice things for employees (like a free trip to Europe) contributes to employee retention. If your employees are the best of the best, you spend to keep them happy and retain them. Dunleavy and Ray are average at their jobs, at best, so it's not necessary to spend a lot of money on extras to retain them. They're not in demand and they're not going anywhere. They're not going to leave the Sabres to go to another NHL franchise because they're upset they didn't get a free trip to Europe. I'd fathom a guess that if RJ was still alive and WANTED to go to Europe with the team, that they would have paid for it. He had a gravitas that these guys don't have. He was an all-time great and these guys are nowhere close. Well-run, deeply-supported franchises do, anyway. The Sabres were once a very well-run, deeply-supported franchise. They are certainly not that today. I just watched Monday Night Football where the national announcers gushed over the Buffalo Bills, saying they're a model franchise, from the top down. They're owned by Terry Pegula. They have an excellent coach, a great GM and an MVP-caliber Quarterback. The Sabres have a fairly unproven GM, a new proven solid Head Coach and some talented players, but none at Josh Allen level. Dahlin could be a future Norris Trophy candidate (not likely MVP, as defensemen rarely win it). UPL could be a future Vezina candidate and UPL and Levi could be future Jennings candidates. I suppose Tage Thomson could win a goal scoring title, but they don't have any Hall of Fame candidates at forward. If the Sabres are able to turn it around with Ruff, Adams will be regarded as successful GM (the team he drafted and patiently developed came to fruition), the fans will return, revenue will return, and Pegula will be a great owner once again. Lots of ifs there. This may or may not happen. Sending the broadcast team to Europe will have nothing to do with whether this happens or not. The fact that some teams send the broadcast guys over and some don't doesn't indicate much of anything. I thought I read that Detroit sent their broadcast team over to Europe. They have not made the playoffs in 8 years. Yzerman was a huge success in Tampa, but not so much in Detroit. Detroit was once THE model NHL franchise. Are they now? Again, I really don't care about the underlying issue, but I enjoy a healthy debate. It's also a great way to procrastinate when I have a ton of important things that I have to do and don't feel like doing! Have a great evening.

I see where you're coming from, but there's not necessarily a correlation. I fully agree that I care about spending on hockey operations, such as players and coaching staff. I'd love to see the money saved on Skinner allocated to a top-6 winger. I do think that the team's comment that they're saving that money to pay some of their ascending players is more than lip service, as it would be difficult to get a top player to come on a 1-year deal, so large multi-year contracts truly could impact future signings, but that aside, I still agree that I'd like to see more spending there. Maybe hire some top-flight assistant coaches instead of bringing back the guys who were not successful last season.... I just don't think that spending unnecessary money to send a broadcast crew overseas has anything to do with the product on the ice. I understand the concept of corporate culture and how skimping on "nice things" for employees can have an impact on the overall culture and the "feel" around the building, but I just don't think that this particular situation has that much of an impact. The Sabres broadcast team is average, and that's being generous. They have great jobs that they should be thankful to have....they're not going anywhere and spending thousands as a feel-good gesture to them just isn't necessary. If it was the norm that all teams sent their broadcasters over and the Sabres didn't, making the Sabres an outlier, I'd understand, but that's not the case here. If what I read about the situation is accurate, some teams have sent their broadcasters over, but most don't. If Pegula is losing money on the Sabres, which appears to be the case (talking about cash in and out, not increase in value, which he'd need to sell to realize), it's appropriate to save on certain expenses. This seems like a reasonable place to do that. They ARE taking several extra players, who are not likely to play, but that could be insurance against injuries AND some culture building for the roster, which is important.

I have to be honest. The Sabres are not sending their broadcasting team and I really don't care. Apparently, some teams send them and others don't. Even if the reason is simply to save on budget, who cares?

This is very accurate. For those of us on this board who are also Bills fans, it's not that hard to remember the Bills having to overpay for free agents during their long playoff drought. And while more desirable for hockey players (most of whom come from colder climates and many come from Southern Ontario, near Buffalo) than for football players (many of whom come from warm climates in the South, not near Buffalo), Buffalo is still a bit of a sell. There's a lot more to for a young, single millionaire athlete to do in a major market than there is in Buffalo, so not only do the Sabres have to pay a premium for being a bad, dysfunctional hockey club, they also have to lure guys to a smaller, cold-weather market. If and when the team is a contender, it's a lot more attractive of a place to come and play. Some free agents have taken less money to play for the Bills in recent years, given the success of the team and the reputation of the coach and front office for being fair and honest with the players and treating them with respect. So in short, the Sabres overpay for guys because they have no choice. Hopefully, they can get the franchise turned around and won't have to overpay as much in the future.

Krebs has shown flashes of offensive talent, but has never put it all together in the NHL. He's a feisty player and isn't afraid to mix it up and get under the other teams' skin, so he may be the type of player that Ruff likes. A lot of us gave up on guys like Tage Thompson and Casey Mittlestadt and they eventually developed and broke through. Will Krebs? I don't know, but this contract is low enough that he'll be a bargain if he does and not too much of a liability if he doesn't.

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I still find it a bit odd that a guy with 41 games of NHL experience is on a roster where the other 21 players have 8 games of NHL experience COMBINED. Something can be odd, but still have a reasonable justification behind it. An article in the Buffalo News implied that having Rosen and Kulich play in the tournament was an anamoly, given their previous participation and NHL experience, but circumstances this season led the Sabres to make this decision: "Kulich and Rosen may have been given the weekend off in a normal year because they’ve previously appeared in the showcase and both are important depth pieces for the Sabres, but the unusual training camp – headlined by the club’s trip to Europe – caused general manager Kevyn Adams to add Kulich and Rosen to the roster.’" All this said, I don't want to waste anyone's time further arguing an insignificant point that is really just a matter of opinion. What I see as odd, you might not. No big deal. Let's just hope the Sabres improve and make the damn playoffs.

odd /äd/ adjective 1. different from what is usual or expected; strange. As I mentioned in the initial post is that it's odd (to me) that a guy who played 41 NHL games last year (half of an NHL season) is playing in a game that is usually a roster of guys who have not played in the NHL at all or have played only a couple of games. If I'm not mistaken, some of the guys in this tournament may not have even played in the AHL or played professional hockey at all. I took a quick look at the roster and only 12 of the 22 played in Rochester last year and other than Ryan Johnson who played 41 NHL games, the only other players on the roster who played in an NHL game were Rosen (7 games) and Kulich (1 game). So Johnson alone, has played more than 5 times the number of NHL games than the other 21 players combined. I'd call that an outlier, or in other words, "odd." Someone else pointed out, however, that Ruff might want to get a look at him and that makes sense to me. He's a new coach and Johnson is a young player who is borderline to make the roster and may well end up in the AHL, so, although odd, there is some logic behind it. Also, Leone, the new Rochester coach, is coaching the team, so a good opportunity for him to also get a look at Johnson.

It seems odd to me for Ryan Johnson to be on this roster. He played 41 NHL games last season, and at that, played pretty well. What do they need to evaluate of him in this tournament? Rosen and Kulich should excel too, as they've now had a couple seasons of professional hockey in Rochester. The rest all make sense to me and I'm most interested to see how the young goalies play.

How much does his wife weigh? My guess is that the bride of a multi-million dollar professional athlete isn't running two bills or anywhere close to it. Lifting a petite woman once as part of a wedding celebration does not equate to the rigors of playing in the National Hockey League. Just my two cents. I know very little about the player of the situation other than seeing this post.

Glass half empty says that they've lost more scoring than they've acquired and defensively are about the same, and as such are likely to finish about where they did last season and out of the playoffs. Glass half full says that if Lindy can have the team ready to play every night (not falling behind by 2+ goals early in the 1st period on a regular basis sort of thing), improve the power play, and they can get a full season of the goaltending that they got after January 1 last year, they're a playoff team. I have no idea how it's going to turn out. I'm not nearly as excited as I was going into last season when I thought the team was going to continue its upward trajectory and take the next step. I'm not full of doom and gloom either. I guess I'm just in "wait and see" mode.

Even if Levi outplays Reimer, he might still get sent to Rochester. Assuming UPL is the starter and primary goalie, the team may prefer to have Levi in Rochester playing games and gaining professional experience on a regular basis (and developing) versus sitting on the bench in Buffalo. He may also yo-yo up and down - play games in Rochester, then get called up for a start, then go back to Rochester after the start. I believe the team handled it a bit like this in the latter part of last season.

I've only been to Rome and Florence and it was quite a while ago. That said, I (and my traveling companion) hated Rome, but loved Florence. It seemed like we were constantly hassled in Rome by people trying to take advantage of tourists. We were treated rudely at restaurants and got into a shouting match with a cab driver who tried to overcharge us. We also had people following us/hounding us at the Coliseum and other tourist areas. Beware! Another negative or Rome is that the subway line is sort of a giant X, so if you're not going somewhere along the lines, it can be quite a walk from the subway. After our bad taxi experience, we simply decided to walk rather than use that as an option. We got a ton of exercise, but also lost a lot of time. Uber and Lyft were not available in those days, so perhaps that's the answer today (as someone mentions above). I would recommend no more than 2 days Rome - see the major attractions, as these are all-time must see places, then get out of dodge. In contrast, we had no such problems in Florence. We were treated well everywhere we went and did not encounter much in the way of people targeting us as tourists and hassling us. We had a great time there and would highly recommend. As someone else stated above, everyone forms their own impressions and has their own experiences when traveling. My wife was on a business trip in Europe last year, which routed through Rome, so she went a day early to see the city. She loved it and can't wait to go back. Perhaps she was well-equipped based on my advice before she went. I have seen the major tourist attractions there, can check it off my list, and have no desire to go back.

The only three things I can think of that would explain these results: 1. People often prefer to root for the underdog, or the team that has not won anything in a while. So if you asked a casual NHL fan which team they'd prefer to win in a matchup, they might pick the Sabres. 2. Despite low attendance due to a poor team for the last several years, the Sabres (like the Bills) have a large and dispersed fanbase. Maybe the survey happened to catch a lot of Sabres fans. 3. While more so 2 seasons ago than last, the Sabres were playing a high-flying, fast-paced, offensive game with lots of scoring. Many fans like that style of hockey, as it can be very entertaining versus a dump and chase/grind it out style.

The guy scored better than .5 points per game while being an enforcer in juniors, so not terrible. He might have a successful minor league career and could be called up for certain games where there are "issues" with an opponent.

I find no issue with this ranking or the write-up, but the Sabres do have a fair amount of talent and new, proven coach, so they could surprise. I was genuinely excited for last season and thought the team would take the next step, and was obviously disappointed. For this upcoming season, I'm neither excited nor disappointed with what they've done in the offseason. Most of their moves were logical and along the lines of what was expected, plus they may not be done. I'm taking a wait and see approach.

Olofsson will do well in Vegas and outplay the contract. He's a better hockey player than he gets credit for on this board. He'll be properly utilized and will score lots of power play goals and even score some at even strength. He has one of the best shots in the league. His defensive play will also improve, because that's what the coach and his teammates will demand, just like it did for Eichel. Regardless of his strengths and weaknesses as a player, it was time for a fresh start for both sides. Note that I wrote an almost identical post in the Girgensons thread.

I would not be at all surprised to see him do very well in Tampa. It was probably time to move on for both sides. He's a good hockey player and better than he gets credit for on this board, but the guy needs a fresh start. I think he will outplay that contract and be a bargain for Tampa.