JohnC
-
Posts
5,990 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
On 5/17/2024 at 9:18 AM, bob_sauve28 said:
Find the best faceoff guy and throw money at him!!!
If the choice comes between the better faceoff player and a better player, I'm going with the better player. Of course, I would like to add a good faceoff player, but I'm not going to prioritize that skill over the better player.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, nfreeman said:
I think the most likely outcome is that Lindy will try to get the most out of Skinner -- which probably means putting him back with TT and Tuch.
Certainly it's quite possible that it doesn't work to Lindy's satisfaction and that Skinner moves down the lineup -- maybe to an offensively-oriented 3rd line that benefits from plenty of O-zone starts like Vanek-Roy-Max back in the day.
If that happens, I wouldn't be surprised if Greenway moved up to the top 6.
So maybe:
JJP-TT-Tuch
Greenway-Cozens-Quinn
Skinner-XXX-Benson
XXX-Krebs-XXX
The lines you are theoretically putting together makes sense. However, if you switched Benson to the line with Cozens and Quinn, and then replaced Benson on the lower line with Greenway, it would make more sense to me. There are so many options for the new HC to consider. Any way you look at your combinations it becomes apparent that a 2/3 C needs to be added to this roster this offseason.
-
8 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
I agree. I’d trade Power. This may seem extreme but what does he bring that Dahlin and Bryam don’t? He also isn’t worth 8 mill a season imho, but given his age and draft status, I think we can get some important pieces to improve this team short and long-term.
Trading Power makes absolutely no sense! What you would be doing is jettisoning a player who as a rookie did play well, added to the fact that he has so much untapped immense upside to his game. All of that upside is not going to be actualized in one year. Acting out of frustration and impatience is self-sabotaging. It won't take long to come to the realization that the player you let go is now starring on another team.
Not too long ago, you wanted Mitts thrown out the door. He became one of our better players. You also wanted to get rid of UPL because he wasn't an instant franchise goalie. Last year, he demonstrated that he could be our long-term franchise goalie. (I'm aware making conclusive judgments on goalies are fraught with inaccuracies.)
My point here is simple, it is better to be patient and act with calculation than it is to act out of frustration. It's so aggravating to see many of our former players thriving on cup contending teams while we continue to be stuck in the mud. What you are essentially arguing for is to provide the league with more of our talented players so that we can continue to take futile actions that gets us nowhere.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:
I wholly agree with your 1st sentence and the last two. The middle part I’m not sure about. Granato never got an opportunity to coach a playoff style or calibre team. I’m not convinced he can’t adapt if given a team to coach that is built to win. That said, a change to the head coach position was needed to reset culture and expectations.
It's inarguable that the Sabres were not a complete team last year. But adjusting to your limitations and making alterations to compensate for them, is part of the job. Our PP faltered last year yet there were inadequate changes to the unit and strategy as the team struggled in that aspect of the game. Was there enough structure and accountability last year? I don't believe so.
I'm not a harsh critic of Granato. He deserves a lot of credit for being adept at handling young player and advancing their game. However, in my view, the coaching change was the right thing to do.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:
I’m fine with Granato’s departure. I just think it is a bit unfair to point out, correctly, that other coaches were sunk by bad goaltending while not acknowledging that the Sabres were sunk by other deficiencies. Coaching was one of the deficiencies to be sure (poor starts, bad PP), but we had a very young roster that was constructed the opposite of what you see with almost every team in the playoffs (little experience, no grit or toughness). The Sabres of last season did not have a playoff calibre roster. That sunk Granato as much as his coaching. I think the outlier in Granato’s 3 full years as coach was not last year’s disappointing results, but that he somehow managed to get them to within a point the year before.
Granato was the right coach to take over for the system rigid Krueger. Under Granato the younger players were allowed to play a looser style that allowed them to express their talent and personally flourish. It seems to me that Granato couldn't make the next transition/adjustment from player development to team development. Individual player and team development are related but also are distinct. Granato is a good and honorable man. He is a credit to his profession. Changing the HC was the right thing to do.
-
2
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
Baby steps, grasshopper. Playoffs this coming year. Cup next. 😄
A friend here in Fort Worth posted a video of the Bandits win on FB. The crowd was loud and enthusiastic. I pointed out that you don't see crowds like in Fort Worth at an NLL game. Buffalo drew six times more fans than Fort Worth this season (Fort Worth population is just about a million people without suburbs and without the rest of the DFW area).
I also commented that in all fairness, most of those Buffalo fans would rather be at a Sabres playoff game.
A couple of weeks ago the Bandits played Toronto at home in an elimination game. The arena was fill with a frenzied crowd. The game was exciting. Just by watching the game on TV my juices were in a state of agitation. (And I'm not even knowledgeable about the sport.) You make a great observation that there was a time when hockey was the primary sport at this time of year for the hometown fan base. That level of interest is in the distant past. As a hockey fan I feel cheated. There is no excuse for this fan base to have been steadily eroded because of a generation of incompetent management.
I haven't given up on this franchise. However, it is way past due for the organization to demonstrate a commitment to seriously compete. The GM and owner need to show some urgency this offseason to get better. I really don't think that this team is far off. But what I do know is that a status quo and casual approach is not going to get things turned around. The eroded fan base deserves better.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Taro T said:
If the 3rd line consisted of Benson & Danault, even if Skinner were the other winger it would still be tough to play against and it would generate a lot of chances itself. That '06 team had a 3rd line that was very tough to play against - the RAV line. It wasn't tough to play against because it was bashing guys skulls in. It was tough to play against because it had a ton of fire power for a 3rd line.
The critical issue that you bring up is the importance of adding a 2/3 C that will allow you more options within the lines. What will be Skinner's role? There will be more line options and flexibility if the Mitts subtraction can be credibly filled. I'm open to all options. What I want to see once camp begins is that players earn their roster spots and roles. If Skinner can be a factor on a lower line, that isn't something to scoff at. And if he can be a positive factor on a higher line, then that isn't something that I'm automatically resistant to. Next season, there will be a new coach who will be open to all options. In camp, there certainly be a lot of line experimentation. The players will ultimately get what they should or shouldn't get.
-
1 minute ago, Taro T said:
If Skinner isn't making $9MM / year does anyone see him as a #1 LW at this point in time? They can't trade him. Really doubt they buy him out (this year). So, he's going to play somewhere on this roster. He generates a higher percentage of his own chances than most other wingers do. Let him get 3rd line usage and the decrease in output due to having lesser linemates should be more than offset by his facing lesser opponents. His screwing up his linemates chances will also be less harmful to the Sabres than him messing up the top line's scoring chances.
Skinner to the 3rd line seems like a win-win-win.
I'm not strongly advocating for him to be on the first line, but I'm open to it. Will the change in coaching have an effect on how he plays? Maybe so. What Skinner can do is score goals. And over the past few years his set up skills has improved. It just seems to me that the third and fourth lines should have the characteristic of being tough to play against. I don't see him in that mold as a player.
-
3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
If KA can make a deal that pushes Greenway to the 4th line, that’s a step in the right direction. I like Greenway and am glad he is here. I do think if we made a 4th line staring Greenway, a decent center and another smart effort player, we could have a very effective and disruptive “4th” line.
When I look at the returning forwards I see 4 top 6 players (Quinn, TNT, Tuch and JJP), 3 players who could be in the top 6 but shouldn’t be yet (or anymore) in Skinner, Benson and Cozens and a 3/4 liner in Greenway.
In Adam’s world the forwards probably look something like this
JJP TNT Tuch
Benson Cozens Quinn
Skinner ???? Greenway
????? Krebs ?????
What he should be looking at
JJP TNT Tuch
Benson ???? Quinn
Skinner Cozens ????
???? ???? Greenway
We need a top6/9 center, a top 9 RW, a 4th LW and Center.
I'm reluctant to go along where you placed Cozens. The Benson/Cozens/Quinn is an appealing line to me. I'm aware that Skinner is scorned in this room. But I wouldn't be resistant to moving Skinner back up to the top line with Tage and Tuch, and then moving JJP to the wing playing with Cozens and Quinn on the second line. What that would do is move Benson to the third line with the expectation that the GM brings in a credible 2/3 C to be on the third line. I agree with you that ideally, Greenway is more suited as a fourth line player with the hope that the GM brings in a player or two to fortify that lower line. With respect to what role will Krebs have? My response would be for him to earn whatever role he can get.
Where I am aligned with you is that the GM needs to add talent from the outside. If it is mostly for bulking up the lower lines, I would be fine with that assuming he brings in a 2/3 C to replace Mitts.
-
20 hours ago, K-9 said:
The youngsters in this raucous room don't know who Ed McMahon is. However, the old hipsters here do:
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, sabremike said:
Do you know who Adams cannot acquire through a trade no matter what he offers? Anyone in the entire league with a no trade/no move clause. But I will note this doesn't let him off the hook for appearing to have no clue about constructing a roster.
I don't get your point. If a player the GM is interested doesn't want to waive his no-trade/move clause to come here, then you go to your next player option in the pursuit of players. In the sports business and in life if option A is not attainable, then you go to option B-Z. And it should be pointed out that every franchise in the league has to contend with no trade clauses in the hockey business.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Pimlach said:
Yes. This is what we are as a franchise. Hope to make the playoffs as a mediocre wildcard team. It is a realistic next step.
I am in North Carolina on vacation. All I hear is how great the Canes fan base is. Sell out every game. Buffalo is a joke here. Not a threat at all. They laughed at the Brind'Amour to Buffalo comments.
Buffalo has become an inconsequential and irrelevant franchise. That's what happens when your franchise falters for nearly a generation. The pro lacrosse team is more of a sports factor in the community than its pro hockey team. That's sad and pathetic.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, SwampD said:
Just, ugh.
Is this really what we’ve been reduced to?
The discussion is excellent, but this thread is pain.
Really high quality pain.
If you expect a radical makeover of this team, you are going to be deeply disappointed. The GM has been fairly candid about what he intends to do this offseason. Dramatic action is not on his agenda. If there is, I will be surprised. It's very likely that the GM is going to take some actions to alter the roster. I'm sure you will be disappointed at what he ends up doing. We shall see.
-
1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
KA is not a proactive GM when it comes finding veteran talent for his roster. Every major deal has been reactive. He's told to sign Hall, he signs Hall. He is told to redo the rebuild and he trade Risto, Eichel and Reinhart. He fails to sign Ullmark and has no plan B, thus signs Dell and Anderson. The team is up against the internal cap because of the long-term extensions, so he can't re-sign Mitts and therefore trades him for whatever he can get even if that player doesn't really fit any need on the roster.
I guess the only thing he is proactive about is signing players to long-term deals after one good year. Makes you wonder how he is going to be able to retain JJP and Quinn when they have another big year this coming season?
Trading for Necas is arguably again reactive since he doesn't have any centers after TNT and Cozens. At least it would be a move to add depth and talent where it's needed and Necas is at least a legit player.
One of the biggest weaknesses that this GM has, and you seem to allude to, is his ability to assess pro talent. The Sabre organization has been solid in evaluating prospects but not too adept in assessing talent in the market. Apparently, it is more by design not to get involved in the market, and instead emphasize what one has in the system. That's a mistake simply because you are limiting your options to improve when some avenues are deliberately taken off the table.
As far as I'm concerned, at this point, I simply don't care if a transaction is strategically made or are done reactively. The issue comes down to adding talent to the roster, one way or the other. I have not been as harsh a critic of this GM as many here are. But if he doesn't show a greater level of urgency this offseason through deeds, then my patience with him and his approach will be exhausted. There is no excuse for him not to make moves to improve and better balance this roster.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
As I said in my post, I'm not against the move, but it would be contrary to KA stated objective. There is no question that we need to upgrade the center position. He's a reasonable replacement for Mitts with potentially better goal scoring upside. I also don't think KA has the b.... to make such a big trade.
If the trade were made Krebs, 11 and a mid level prospect for Necas and 28 maybe?
The Mitts trade that brought us Byram would look even better if a comparable replacement is brought in for Mitts. I haven't given up on Krebs, but I don't see him having much value in the market right now. A Necas trade that cost us our first pick and a mid-level prospect appeals to me a lot.
With respect to you questioning the size of KA's cajónes, I wouldn't consider the proposed Necas trade a major/daring deal. In my view, it would be a fair-value deal for each team for a player who probably won't be on either of our top two lines.
-
2 hours ago, Taro T said:
One thing getting neglected in your discussion w/ @Thorny (& btw, absolutely love it when you 2 are in a debate - it's always great stuff) is that the '21 Sabres wouldn't have been nearly as bad had they NOT considered an injured eyed Hutton to not just be a quality NHLer but a quality NHL STARTER. The quality of the skaters was FAR above the quality of the goaltending (especially when Ullmark being out injured is factored into it). Give that team a legit coaching staff (something we have not seen in Buffalo through Adams 1st 5 seasons) and a legit NHLer to go with Ullmark and it wouldn't have been the disaster that went 18 games without a W.
Though their record was similar, they were NOT the '22 Blackhawks. And if that '21 team had been able to be kept together, they weren't that far away. Get a goalie to pair with Ullmark and Danault in FA and a couple more pieces and even though that '21-'22 team probably wouldn't have made the playoffs with losing Eichel for 1/2 a season; they SHOULD'VE been able to get in that next season. Goaltending, Eichel and Reinhart entering their primes, Dahlin and Montour along with most of the rest of the support pieces that team would've had would've been pretty good on paper. (They don't play on paper, obviously, but the talent on that team that got blown up was in reality a lot closer to the 81 point paced squad we saw the prior year than the 0.350 one we saw in '21. MHO. Clearly, ymmv.)
If the Sabres get the same level of netminding from UPL next season with some tweaks to the current roster, do you consider this team a playoff team?
-
On 5/17/2024 at 3:54 PM, nfreeman said:
OK -- how about these:
- Sabres trade Jiri Kulich and Ryan Johnson (or Matt Savoie and #11, or some other combination of those 4 assets) to FLA for Sam Bennett -- contingent on Bennett signing an extension for 6 years @ $7MM per year. It's too much money and too much term for Bennett, who turns 28 in June, but he's not coming to Buffalo without getting that type of contract.
- Sabres trade Jiri Kulich and a 2024 2nd-rounder to Vegas for Nicolas Roy. Vegas is close to capped out. Roy is a 6'4", 202-lb C who is a 35- to 40-pt guy, turned 27 in February and makes $3MM per year.
- Sabres trade a 2024 2nd-rounder to the Islanders for Kyle Palmieri. Palmieri, a 5'11", 198-lb RW who had 54 pts this season, will be 34 in February and has one more year on his contract at $5MM -- and the Isles are capped out.
The proposed Bennett deal is too rich for me. Although I like the grit he would add to the lineup. However, I would be reluctant to give him the length and per annum amount that you also indicate would be problematic.
The Vegas deal for Roy makes sense. The remaining portion of Palmieri's contract seems too high for me.
What your proposals demonstrate is that there are options for the GM to pursue this offseason. They don't have to be blockbuster deals so much as medium range deals that better round out our roster, i.e. the lower half of it.
-
20 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:
I think Dudacek was correct to point out that the precedent is for these rebuilds to take significant time to yield results. That said, we did miss by a point in 22-23 and most of us now agree that there were moves Adams could have made to get this team into the playoffs, or to more aggressively compete for the playoffs, that season and certainly in the season just past. There is a degree of incongruence in the argument that this process takes lots of time when one considers how close we were to getting in just 13 months ago.
I agree that the GM overestimated where the team was at based on the surprisingly good results of the 22-23 season. Instead of building on that success, he made an assumption that this team was on track to move up the ranks. He was wrong in his assessment. He should have built on that prior success (meaning adding players) instead of coasting from that prior success. As a lot of people have already stated: He miscalculated.
Each year is a new year. It's not just about improving your team, it's also about competing with teams that are also taking actions to improve. It's not a static league. Our GM seemed to be too comfortable with where his team was at. He should have been less nonchalant (@Thorny's incisively biting word) and more proactive.
-
3
-
-
14 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
Lots of passion here @Thorny
I am still going to hope Adams plan is the right one for the long term, it’s already failed in the short term, as you mentioned 5 years is long enough. Since he started with a deliberate, slow, long term approach, that is what we have and were we are.
You have a good perspective on where we were and where we are now. @dudacek demonstrates in detail that the GM decided on a major deconstruction, and then reconstruction. Based on how the GM wanted to rebuild this flattened franchise, it was never going to be a quick fix (@dudacek's central point.) There was a tsunami of bad decisions that led to Jack and multiple UFAs on this team (now thriving on cup contending teams) to be determined to get out of this wrecked franchise.
It has gotten fatiguing reprising the past and pointing out what went wrong. That's not a major challenge to do. It's like shooting at fish in a well-stocked barrel and then act as if you accomplished something challenging.
By the time the upcoming season arrives, the GM will have had enough time to show that his long-term strategy to rebuild is a success or failure. (Your point.) This has to be a constructive offseason where he adds the necessary pieces so at the minimum get this team into the playoffs. If our GM succumbs to his conservative instincts and sticks with the status-quo, then his tenure will clearly and fairly be labeled a failure.
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Was that a full-capacity crowd last night?
-
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
I'd put Benson around 45-50pts this season. Benson got 30 last year as an 18yr old with barely any pp time on a terrible pp. He's only getting better.
Jack Quinn, 70+ if he's healthy. Quinn already broke out, we just can't say it cuz it was a short time frame. He's gonna be great if he's healthy.
These are probably the best 200ft players we have currently. I think if you can build a line around Benson, he could drive it. If you put him with Quinn Cozens, he'll hit 50pts.
I think it's realistic for him to hit the numbers that you project, especially if he is put on a more talented line. However, even if he doesn't reach the projected numbers, hie still adds value by the way he plays. As @K-9 pointed it, as a rookie, he was one of the most structured and persistent checkers in the lineup. And, as you noted, right now, he is one of the best full-length players on the team. This resilient youngster was a terrific draft selection. I'm looking forward to seeing how he does in his sophomore season.
-
2 minutes ago, Taro T said:
Yep. Year 2 is when these guys start to get expected to go outside their comfort zones (though honestly not sure just what that would be in Benson's case) and with that expectations rise.
Really looking forward to seeing how both Benson and Quinn handle their 2nd full seasons in the NHL. Those are 2 that should both bring more than they did last year; and with Quinn presumably getting a full 82 (or thereabouts) in; he himself could go a long way to replacing the lost Mittelstadt production.
If I had to bet on one player who was going to make a quantum leap forward, my money would be on Quinn. Last year, JJP took a step forward. Although I wouldn't categorize it as a quantum leap because there were too many down interludes. In my opinion, Quinn is a better player because he has a greater dimension (skating in tight spaces and hockey intelligence) to his game, whereas Peterka is more of a straight-line power forward.
Understandably so, a lot of attention is given to who the GM is going to bring in from the outside to upgrade the roster. However, it's just as likely, if not more likely, that the improvement of players such as Benson, JJP, Quinn, UPL, Power, Byram etc.) is going to be the biggest factor in whether next season will be a success or not.
-
2
-
-
26 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
I think Benson's "jump" will be in year 3 or 4. Likely when he's around 21.
I will not be surprised if he takes a backwards step next year and it won't worry me as I see a bright future. He might not. We shall see how he adjusts to what Ruff brings, but I am expecting a more structured style of play and young guys usually have some issues with that initially.
Neither of us know whether Benson is going to take a quantum leap forward next season. But for a player who was so young, I didn't witness him last season fading as the season grinded on. In fact, it was the opposite. I thought he played better at the end of the season than the beginning of the season because he seemed to comfortably adapt to the tougher NHL game. I'm not predicting a quantum leap forward in his play, but he should be better with a season experience and an offseason to prepare for this upcoming season.
As far as his ability to adjust to a tougher style of play that Lindy will require compared to what Granato tolerated, I would say that he was one of our more responsible players from a checking standpoint in both zones and from a willingness to have a net presence in our offensive zone. My point is that maybe some other players will have trouble adjusting to a Lindy coached team, but he shouldn't have any problem adapting to the new coach.
-
3 hours ago, ska-T Chitown said:
This sorta baffles me ... he was nearly as productive (11-19-30 in 71 games) as Quinn (14-23-37 in 75) Peterka (12-20-32 in 77) when he was 18 while they were 20/21 and people (not everyone, I know) had trouble hiding their boners after the Quinn/Peterka rookie years ...
You missed my point regarding Benson's play in his rookie season. As a full-time player his offensive stats were not impressive. That's a fact. I wasn't factoring in his age because that wasn't the issue. My central point was that despite his production I still felt that he played well and never was a liability.
Hopefully, you are now unbaffled.
UFAs Sabres may want to sign
in The Aud Club
Posted
We need a "just kidding" emoji!