Marvin

Like I said before, it was going to be a sad day in Buffalo when he retired. It is particularly unhappy that is has been during this drek.

Until I see the line-up, coach, etc., I will not vote.

I am open to trading players and picks for upgrades; indeed, IMHO, we must use some assets the strengthen the top 9 a bit. I appear to want to spend more on the bottom of the forward roster than you are. BIAS ALERT: the memories from the early Sabres teams biased me towards depth and more overall balance in ice time because that was how the Flyers, Islanders, and Bruins would beat us: from the 3rd pairs, 4th lines, and in goal. Also, the 1996-2001 Sabres teams were successful in spite of not having a real top line because they had Hasek, depth, and balance. The 2005-11 Sabres had key contributions from the bottom of the roster and organisational depth. Thus, if we could recreate the LOG line or something like it, I would do it -- even though it would leave only about $2-3M to upgrade the top 6 -- because they would suck up tough defencive minutes against the other team's top lines and allow us to put the top 3 lines out against lesser competition in favourable situations.

I would like to, but the price and priority worry me. I am working from Gabrielor's $8M max before I do anything. I assume Miller ($3.9M) and Ristolainen ($5.4M) are traded and Girgensons ($2M) is in Seattle. That leaves me about $19M to work with. My top priority is a 1A-1B goaltending tandem above UPL. I call that $7M. That leaves $12M. My next priority is two middle-pair defencive defencemen later in their careers as partners for Jokiharu and Dahlin. Based on salaries for the guys I would want, these are $6M. That leaves $6M for the forwards. I need to assume $2M for the bottom of the roster, but I push Eakin to the minors to give me $5M more for the top 9. My top 9 base is Skinner-Eichel-Ruotsalainen, Cozens-Reinhart-Olofsson, and Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson. I assume Skinner is quasi-productive or else the team is dead in the water for the next 5 years. I don't see why I can't make hockey trades which add at most $5M and still make that top 9 overall a bit above average. Please tell me what I am missing.

I think we are on the same page. Some clarification: 1. Larsson apparently signed in Arizona for less than Buffalo offered. I would like to try bringing him back because there were games where I really missed the LOG line. 2. I want a veteran goalie as 1A to Ullmark. 3. Ideally, we would get 3 mid-level defencemen, 1 for each pairing, but I think the price would be too high if I want to fix the forwards.

I can agree with this. I think Eichel makes the team 1 line better. That's not trivial, but IMHO that still puts us about middle of the pack for the top 9 forwards -- assuming normal growth of the youth and normal declines for the veterans. The defence clearly needs 2 solid veterans. There will be a lot of growth there -- and a lot of mistakes. But with development and chemistry, the should become solid before long. We probably need to rely more than other teams on goaltending. That is why Ullmark's and UPL's play has been heartening for me. Add a solid veteran and we should be OK. Our 4th line has got to be better. We need to be at least solid there. Ideally, that line is like the LOG line and drive the opponents' top lines crazy. This need not cost much, but chemistry is so very important. The easiest thing would be to make an analogue to our 1998-9 bottom line.

I will use Gabrielor's high end salary estimates with a trade of Ristolainen as my base. (IMHO, Dahlin and Reinhart will be $7M rather than 8, but let us plan for the harder scenario.) I make additions and changes from here. I expect Girgensons to be taken by Seattle. 1. Forwards Skinner-Eichel-Cozens Ruotsalainen-Reinhart-Olofsson Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson Bjork-Sheahan-Okposo Reider-Eakin-Caggiula 2. Defence Dahlin-Bryson Borgen-Jokiharu Samuelsson-Miller Laaksonnen-Fitzgerald 3. Goal Ullmark Pekka-Lukkonen Tokarski Houser Lekkas When I include injuries, I expect to need 5 forward lines, 4 defencive pairs, and 5 goaltenders for this team just to be safe. With that as my base, I have $8M from @Gabrielor, $5M from Ristolainen, and $2M from Girgensons, which leaves us $15M to spend. Knocking off, say, $7M for goaltenders leaves $8M overall. We must acquire at least 1 veteran defenceman for the youth. Ideally, Miller ($3M) is replaced and we have at least 1 veteran D on each side. I would prefer boring, stay-at-home types to cover for jaunts by Dahlin and Jokiharu because the are needed and are cheaper. By my estimate of higher-end middle-pairing defencive defenceman (2×3.5M), that leaves $4M for the forwards. Here, I need a creative hockey trade. I want to be locked in with Eichel and Reinhart. Skinner and Okposo are not going anywhere -- no matter how much people wish it. I would prefer to force Eakin and Caggiula into Rochester, whence they come up only in an emergency. I need hockey trades to replace some wingers to get a better mix of players in the top 9. In this salary structure, ideally the 4th line has interchangeable parts and plays like the LOG line. I think this can be done with the room left. I wonder how Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson would fare against other 3rd lines.

FYI: I remember hearing $7M getting kicked around in the rumour mill. I do not recall anything from any major media or otherwise quotable source.

Is this a testimony to the quality of Mike Bales?

IMHO, actions speak louder than words. (Not that "I have dreams about McDavid" did not announce it any more loudly.) XGMTM gets my contempt because he undermined the team at every turn by trading anyone playing well -- so obviously that players joked on the bench that if you were playing well, you were trying to get traded. I personally think that the team played out of their heads in part because they used the negative motivation from management. Ted Nolan was the perfect guy to turn that into something to drive them. And Arturs Irbe worked magic with whomever XGMTM brought in. The players, coaches, and normal fans were treated like crap and deserved better than learning how to habitually lose.

You can blame XGMTM for it too.

They have got to get 2 or 3 sage defencemen to mentor the youngsters. I like the young defencemen a lot, but they are way too young for my blood. I would like at least 1 experienced goaltender even if Ullmark is re-signed. If Sheahan and Reider are here, I want them to be reserves. And I want forwards 15-21 on the depth chart to be a mix of NHL-ready prospects with high-end AHLers and tweeners. If they are here next season, this is where I want Eakin and Caggiula. I think that we need a greater variety of forwards in that top 9. Having said that, the top-9 as-is isn't bad IF the 4th line can be like the LOG line the last few years because all the roughest minutes are accounted for and you could just have the other three lines take the offencive minutes. But unless you are raiding the 3rd lines of contenders for that 4th line, it would be crass stupidity to count on that.

Good on you. 🙂 2 games, 5 goals, 88 shots.

I just put that up there so that we can see what we are staring at going into the summer. My bias is to have 4 lines whom I could throw over the boards with alacrity; otherwise Eichel has someone other than Bjork on his wing. In real life, though: I expect Girgensons to be taken by Seattle. I expect Eakin and Caggiula to be in Rochester. I would like 2 forwards in the top 9 swapped out for different styles. Many would put Cozens in the top 6. That makes the line-up something like: Skinner-Eichel-Cozens Ruotsalainen-Reinhart-Olofsson Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson Bjork-Sheahan-Okposo I would want to swap out a couple of forwards for a greater variety of styles among linemates -- more Girgensons's style.

I was just thinking that. Wowee. This is what happens when you rile a team which outclasses you.

We are on the same page -- although I personally think that Seattle will take Girgensons regardless of who else we expose. Protecting Cozens a bit to help him develop his game appeals to me. Depending on how the wingers shake out for Eichel, Reinhart, and Mittlestadt, a 4th line of Girgensons-Cozens-Okposo could be very effective. That is is no ordinary 4th line. Assuming I am correct and Girgensons is chosen by Seattle, then we could satisfy Skinner haters and Skinner supporters by putting Skinner-Cozens-Okposo as a nominal 4th line. As we head into the off-season, we have, including FAs: Skinner-Eichel-Bjork Ruotsalainen-Reinhart-Olofsson Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson Girgensons-Cozens-Okposo Eakin-Sheahan-Caggiula You can object that Cozens has no business on the 4th line, etc., etc. Ask yourself now: what changes do you want to make? I would like a greater variety of styles in these 12 plus the 3 behind them.

Alle Alle Auch Sind Frei! Calling all goaltenders! Your chance to play in the NHL has come. Contact the Buffalo Sabres via sabres.com.

The unfortunate reason that the Eichel and Reinhart talk is relevant is that whom you draft depends on who is on your team. IMHO, if you have a shadow of a doubt about Eichel and Reinhart being here after next season, you draft the best centre you can.

One of the few things I have hope about is that Lazar remarked that the team has a positive belief in itself when he was traded. Moreover, there is a good vibe from the team overall; in particular, Sam Reinhart and Rasmus Ristolainen look less grim when they are out there. We have seen a bit more team chemistry when players get hit; I can barely recall the last time I saw the team respond to attempted intimidation this well. The team overall does not quit; they can be overwhelmed like they were in the second game against Boston, but they responded against the Islanders last night. It is the first time in a long time that the team has playing decently in the last month of a season (Bylsma's first season). Maybe that helps

One difference is his mindset: he is in a supporting role in Boston whereas he had a primary role here. He clearly seems to be more comfortable in that kind of role. In fact, I think he said so a few years ago, but I would not want to be quoted on that.

For the record: I have a preference for an experienced coach over Granato, all other things being equal. Based on what I know now? Gallant. The one problem I have with Gallant is a big one, however: he has only lasted 2.5 or so years at all 3 jobs. What I would like is someone who is as good with young players as Granato has been to be the next coach -- experienced enough to have the respect of veterans but knows how to develop youth. That is a tough needle to thread. (And as someone who sews his own repairs of non-work clothes, I know how hard that is.) Alain Vigenault? Gerard Gallant? Bruce Boudreau? John Tortorella? Bueller?

Who is our back-up again?

I notice you said, not the game, but practise. Not the game, not the game that he loves, but practise. 😉

I think everyone has a good point, but I wanted to single out these specific responses. @PerreaultForever Just because we prefer Granato to what we had does not mean that if we score an interview with Gallant and he seems to be better, then you hire Gallant. I like that we have moved forward AND I want stability, but it is far more important to have the right guy for the job. @pi2000 Has exactly the attitude we should have. @PASabreFan is correct -- we should be open to anything if it appears to improve the franchise. That includes management as well. (Terry, Kim -- please let the hockey people be hockey people.) As it is now, I would be OK with Granato as a coach, but I don't want the team to chintz on the search.

Congratulations, Michael Houser! You earnt this one. 🍻