PerreaultForever

Those uniforms change people though. This guy: got turned into this guy:

Well, actively looking for a goalie is something he should have been doing the minute Ullmark's re-signing became questionable so I guess Yay, he's finally looking?? As for Mitts, I'm not surprised. If Mitts wants Cozens/Thompson money, which he probably does given his point totals, he isn't going to get it here. Trading him to avoid the hold out painful negotiation circus that might ensue is a good idea but the return determines everything obviously. Besides, we don't know what he's like in the locker room. Maybe he "doesn't want to be here". . Send him to Minnesota for a package that includes Foligno (and more).

Well, "hate" is a wasted emotion (although some might argue it's a potential motivator) but the internet and websites like this one are platforms for venting frustration. It's just what they are. You can feel a little better if you can vent and see that there are others sharing your frustration. In that equation there is inevitably a target and that can be viewed as "hate". Now the definition of the word isn't full. It's like when you were in grade school and some kid said "I'm going to kill you after school" and they didn't really mean "kill" (although again, in some cases these days they might) but they did want to hurt you all the same. So nobody here actually "hates" the Sabres but the level of anger/frustration gets high enough that it is expressed as "hate". I don't "hate" Granato. I'm sure he's a very nice man. But I think he's not a good head coach and won't take us to where we need to be. I don't "hate" Adams, I just think he's incompetent. I kind of do "Hate" Pegula though. I generally dislike the uber wealthy, just cause they tend to be *****, and I personally think frakking is raping the environment but that's just my personal view. It's not an active "hate" but I do wish he'd sell the team.

Given the topic and the avi, this seems appropriate.

Ya, maybe, we do have a history of f'n things up but I think Marcus would be captain right now and he'd have dragged some of these guys up with him and a lot of them would play bigger than they do. Cozens might not have had his jaw broken by Hathaway for example. Marcus would have jumped in and wiped the floor with Garnet instead. It's a dream of an alternate reality I have. Heck, I'd have tried to bring in Nick on a "play with your brother" discount contract as well and hired Mike as an assistant or scout. Give me a triple dose of Foligno and this locker room would have been fixed. Sadly, that moment is long gone.

Well okay, you want exact wording even if you know what I meant. So change it to GOOD vets or experienced leaders. Only Johnson qualifies but he's on his last legs.

I know what some of you think about fighting, but I am 100% confidant that this team wouldn't be where it is if JBot had not dealt this man away. https://www.hockeyfights.com/fights/n268881

Not surprised by this. He was a lightweight kid and was getting targeted. Like a lot of the kids today he was trying to make fancy plays along the wall and didn't expect the checks to come when they did. I have thought this might happen to Benson too, but so far he's managed to keep his head up and play more straight ahead so he's avoided it (and maybe been targeted less) and might continue to as he grows.

idk, you take Benson out and put a 30+ vet in, you go up a half year plus in age right there. The real point, that I think we would agree on, is there is a lack of solid veteran leadership to go with these younger guys and that hurts the team as a whole.

I think it does. Sabres have had the "talent". We have the "talent" now. We should be better than we are.

That's reasonable, and I totally get it. I probably do use Boston as an example too often but I am familiar with them from watching them and they do provide a complete contrast to what's gone on in Buffalo over the last decade plus. Next year determines if Boston falls or not. 28 million in cap space and big roster changes inevitable. If they get that wrong in any way the long awaited (by most Buffalo fans) fall will finally occur. If they get it right though, your nightmare might continue. I've actually tried to watch a lot of Philly games this year as well to see the contrast and it's really really different. Philly isn't very talented at all but their game is the exact opposite of the Sabres and they have exceeded expectations this year. My biggest issue with the Sabres approach is I think they have Rochester all wrong. It's a mini-me training ground for offensive talent to match the franchise but imo what it should be is a hard working, grinding defensive team that forces these skilled guys out of their element and drills 2 way hockey in to them. Then, after a year or three of that they can come up and let their offensive skills re-emerge but with that 2 way game drilled into their instincts. You could discuss the details in a long thread, but I just think our development program isn't very good for a team that wants to be this reliant on the draft.

For sure. Eichel and Reinhart are really sucking since they left Buffalo. and to think, we had ROR as well.

I actually differ and think the old worst goes first with no lottery was fine. I don't really care if some teams want to "tank". Have at it. As Torts said "tanking is asinine". But if some teams want to do it and ruin their fan bases that's their own problem. Free to do what you want why not? Teams trying to out tank each other for a Bedard would be kind of funny. Really the bottom third of the league has never been very relevant and the existence of perennial bottom feeders is why Europeans created relegation for their "football" . North America prefers wild cards and leagues where almost everyone makes the playoffs but crap franchises are still crap franchises and so let them "tank" all they want imo. It's asinine.

Ottawa has been a failure for sure and I guess that can make us point and feel good but we aren't any better. Columbus has also failed. Philly (and maybe even Montreal) bugs me though as there is no way that roster should be better than us but it shows you what coaching and proper hockey can do for a team.

I definitely don't think Adams is doing nearly enough for sure. For example, given the Samuelsson injury I really don't get why we didn't snap this guy up when Vegas waived him? https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/flames-claim-defenceman-brayden-pachal-off-waivers-from-golden-knights-1.6755989 Imperfect player for sure, but also definitely would fill a need on this roster with the injury. Definitely better for what we need on the roster than Bryson. They really don't seem to have any interest in winning now. They are fine with some long long term vision of letting their own picks develop and it's a really dumb plan.

This "young" excuse has carrried on for far too long. Skinner isn't young. Okposo is old. Thompson's been in the league for several years, that's your "top" line right now. Cozens has been in the league several years. It holds for Benson and maybe Peterka but Mitts, Greenway and Tuch have all been in the league for many years now. Girgs is old. Writing all this off as "they're young" is just BS. It's on the coaching and the way they are teaching the team to play. Proper hockey should have been driven into them in training camp and it should be a standard they are held to. Age has nothing to do with it. Dallas has young guys too, but they make them play the right way. But yes, easy shots from low danger areas has been an issue for years and still is.

Your counter logic makes no sense. You do realize that most marriages end in divorce right? Why would you expect greater loyalty to a sports team?

They all kind of blur over this last era but the Taylor Hall year was probably the worst. Big names and supposed stars and all the wheels pretty much fell off the bus at the same time on that one.

I've told this story here twice but quickly, I grew up in Hamilton Ontario. My first sports team were the CFL Hamilton Tiger Cats (black and gold). That made me choose the Steelers as my NFL team (at the time they were also both defensive tough teams, steel cities, very similar). First hockey game I ever watched was the Bobby Orr flying cup winner. So I said that's my team (as a kid, and also black and gold). Buffalo local tv games I saw the Sabres and fell for the French Connection and Gare and Dudley and that whole era won me over and Boston became a distant second. The Sabres/Bruins playoff years I favoured the Sabres but would cheer for the winner in the next round. Buffalo was #1 always but I have a soft spot for the Bruins as my first team and for #4. The Chicago argument is double sided as you are agreeing with me that it's a balanced team and that's what the Sabres aren't and need to be. Pretty much every cup winner had to become tougher to get there. Look at Tampa. They got blown out when they were all skill. Toronto loses every year. It's simply not how you construct a roster.

"dandy" lol, that made me laugh. Some decent hockey in that game but not enough. Clifton penalty was pretty weak imo but that probably didn't change the outcome. The thing I really want to know though is what was with Dahlin's stick over the shoulders after the shot in the middle of the game? That just boggled my mind. I do not think I've ever seen that in a game, ever. Before a game or in practice sure, but wtf was he thinking there? Just really weird. But "dandy" lmfao @SwampD made me think of this:

I'm going to reply to a few things here that are way off and a spin on what I said. First, I didn't say trade Dahlin, I didn't say he was garbage. What I said was he's very gifted offensively and he's valuable. Makar has Toews. Dahlin has ? Jokiharju? (Samuelsson's made of glass). As for Dahlin growing, he's at prime age now. He is what he is. Now, to my "biggest problem", lol, it's hardly a problem at all. Having them as TEAM B or second team or whatever you want to label them as is the only thing that keeps me sane with the Sabres being as bad as they have been. They have given me joy in watching hockey, unlike the Sabres. It's not a "problem". So, I've never said we have to be Boston, or reach their "levels" but they are an example of a thriving hockey culture that I am familiar with. They do a lot of things the right way and emulating that wouldn't be a terrible idea. No on to Chicago, I think you need to take a closer look at the actual make up of those cup winning teams. Those are not offensive juggernauts, they are well balanced teams. Remember when Chicago pissed off the super skilled Vancouver referring to the Sedins as "the sisters"? The sisters never won a cup. Chicago had more than enough grit and was a well balanced team that could play good defense to go along with Kane and other's offensive skills. Their Toews was one of the best 2 way centers in the league. If we were modelled on those Chicago teams I'd have no problem with that. There's no issue with being fast. I often think the Bruins are too slow and that's part of their playoff woes over the years. Fast is good. But playing defense and having a solid team structure with defensive layers is also good. Our fast exit system is total b***s**t. We also need to use our speed and size and forecheck heavy, finish our checks rush their D and knock people off pucks. All too often we just float and play fair weather hockey. You can defend it all you like, and I've seen you often saying this Sabre is really good or that one just needs more time and so on but LOOK AT THE RESULTS. It's garbage. It doesn't work and it won't work. It's just not how you play winning hockey. We need a new coach, and we need a GM who knows how to construct a proper roster that can play 2 way hockey. Until we get that, you will be stuck with your "problem" in the Sabres bubble of maybe next year. Adams/Pegula is like Lucy holding the ball for Charlie Brown. Next time, it won't get pulled away. Sorry Charlie. Fooled again.

This is possible, but hard to say and it depends on how you measure "better". What makes a D man "better" varies by definition. I will give you an example, on this site most fans would say Dahlin is better than McAvoy and they would never trade Dahlin for McAvoy. On a Bruins site they'd laugh at that and would want 3 firsts along with Dahlin to even consider it. Just one example but if you think about it I think it makes the point. I really liked Jiricek at that draft moment and unless he is a head case (as some suggest) I think he will be a stud D man in time. But we wouldn't know what to do with him and would ruin him too. I'm pretty certain of that. What needs to change on this team imo is the make up and identity of the team itself. Pegula hockey is NOT winning hockey. Fast skating shooty passy possession hockey with no defense and no grit is just never going to win enough games to get us anywhere. We need a Tochet type coach and a GM to change gears on the team structure and composition. Until we get that, it'll just keep floating along the same feeble way no matter which pieces we change.

I'm curious but to the 3 bolded sentences, why? What's so special about Ryan Johnson that makes him untradeable? Or Levi? Peterka's been very good this year and is progressing forward so his price would be high, but he's not indispensable either. I don't give up on D men at Power's age, but there's no question we do not know how to develop D men properly so for the right price........ and what's so special about the "top line"? Who is the "top line" anyway? Mitts Tuch and Greenway now? Tage is inconsistent, Skinner's a liability, and.....it's Okposo right now so idk who you were thinking as the other wing. It's hardly a "top line" Dahlin can be a valuable player, no question, but he's not defensively good enough to build a team around. If that's your number one guy you'll have the same problem Ottawa and then San Jose and now Pittsburgh has with Karlsson. Lots of points, but gets you nowhere. Really I just dont' see how ANYBODY on this team is "untradeable".

One of the reasons for that is that we keep a guy like VO on the roster all season but he can't crack the line up ever so why is he here??? It's as ridiculous as the 3 goalie situation was. Where's the half dozen fringe NHL vets that can be called up when needed and/or waived and sent back down when not needed? Other teams have them. If the kids aren't ready for call ups the organization HAS to have those guys. We don't have any more injuries than any other team (at times) so for the roster to look this bad with a few guys out is just ridiculous and the GM didn't do his job.

Showcasing Kyle and EJ for the trade deadline? Seriously idk, it's not a very impressive looking line up. I'd expect Benson is reaching rookie burn out at this point too. It's a swiss cheese line up unlikely to win more than about 40% of the remaining schedule.