JohnC

I wasn't concerned about being diplomatic.

If at this point you don't understand what I'm saying you never will. Find someone else to screw with.

It's obvious that a player paired with Dahlin is not going to carry the puck as much. In addition the player paired with Dahlin will have to be more defensive minded because Dahlin is going to be more aggressive on offense.

When ROR was traded most of us felt that we didn't get an adequate return. Now that a few years have gone by that deal looks much better with the current play of Tage. And, if Johnson, the draft pick from that trade, ends up playing for us that deal will look even more favorable. The point is that your first assessment of a transaction might dramatically change as time passes. As I have said before the trade of Jack was the right thing for him; and the trade and return for Jack was the right thing for this franchise.

When I categorize a player as a B player in comparison to an A player in the pairings, I'm looking at a player who is more of a support player who to a degree defers to the A player. And yes I do believe that Jokiharju is good enough to be in the top 4 group. Another example is Samuelsson on the first pairing with Dahlin is going to be a B player because Dahlin is going to be the more active player in the couple. I'll carry it out even further: Any defenseman paired with Dahlin is going to be a B player. Hope this clarifies the point I was attempting to make.

If the front office can get a better option for Power, I certainly wouldn't be against it. That same reasoning applies to all positions. If the Sabres could add another power forward winger like Tuch, I would be ecstatic. I'm not reluctant to bump down any player if a better option is available. My view on Joki is that I don't see him being an A defenseman in the top two pairings. But I do see him being a good B pairing, especially on the second pair.

Thanks for the research. However, the sample size for pairing with Power is too small to make any hard judgments. When assessing Joki I still see more upside. He's a young player who while not dramatically getting better is steadily getting better. I still seem more growth potential. As I said in prior posts his best role is as a B player on a pairing that includes the second pair. We all can agree that Power has come in and played marvelously. The player he has been most paired with is Joki.

Who has been paired with Power other than Joki?

I'm aware that Samuelsson/Dahlin is the #1 pair. But whether paired with Power or Dahlin as a B player in the pairing he has worked well in supporting the primary player in each of the pairings he has been assigned to. The salary attached to a second pairing player is not going to be cheap. I know we have a lot of cap space but I would rather use the money for a goalie or two. None of us know for sure how this plays out but I wouldn't be surprised it Joki ends up paired with Power. TBD.

I don't understand why Joki is being dismissed as a second pairing defenseman. My view of Joki is that he is a B player on either the first or second pairing. He's a player whose style of play and psychological makeup allows him to subordinate his game to the A player in one of the top two pairings. Both Dahlin and Power (small sample size) have played with him, and each of them thrived. Joki is not the type of player whose efficient and smooth style of play is not going to attract much attention. He will not dominate the play but what he does well is blend and work well with whomever he is paired with.

That's part of it. It also means that he will periodically, if not regularly, be designated to watch the games from the team box. He's a depth roster player who will most likely be in and out of the lineup. As you and others have noted this team is steadily adding credible depth so that when injuries do happen the impact won't be so catastrophic.

He's a utility player who will play intermittently. He's also useful as a PK.

There were reports that Anderson would have been amenable to going back home and play for Florida. Florida had no interest. There is a good chance that Hinostroza will be brought back next year. By all accounts Granato has an affinity for players who are fast. Hinostroza falls in that category. I realize that on this site Bjork often gets skewered. I wouldn't be surprised if he returns because Granato favors players with speed. And he definitely has that attribute.

What is a ZFG attitude? If I am afflicted with a ZFG attitude do I have to seek professional help? Or does that make me a functioning misfit?

It didn't take long for Taylor Hall to throw in the towel when the season became a lost cause. Some people/players are good at faking interest. He wasn't one of them.

What asset could he have gotten for what he had that he was willing to ship out? Miller probably had the most value but he was recovering from a surgery. Basically, we got nothing in return because we had noting to offer.

I say this with respect and with no antagonism intended but I don't think an infrequent poster would care whether some responses technically relate to a topic or not. And I want to add that I appreciate the work you and others do to keep this site running well. Speaking for myself I get a lot of enjoyment participating in this forum and learning a lot about hockey from people who are much more knowledgeable. When all is said and done a little disorder like a little dust isn't worth being bothered by.

If someone has more knowledge about the Taylor firing I would appreciate the added information. I think it was WGR's Paul Hamilton who stated that it was Krueger who got Taylor fired because the AHL coach made it clear to him that what he was espousing would not work in today's NHL. Supposedly, Krueger didn't want anyone in the ranks who didn't adhere to what he was promoting. The irony is that when he was fired and DG replaced him the new coach immediately took an approach that undid a lot of what the antiquated coach tried to install.

It may be unfair to Krueger to make this generalization but I can't think of one player who hasn't played better under Granato.

When discussing the restoration of this particular player who metaphorically was strangled and buried alive by the previous coach, Don G spoke about Skinner and his work ethic. The coach with the cool blue framed glassed noted that even when he was marginalized as a player last year, there wasn't a player who worked as hard in practice as he did. DG added that he sat down with Skinner after the season and told him what he needed to do to get back on track. The coach said that he as much as anyone took the message to heart and put in the work in the offseason to prepare for the upcoming season. There is a lot of talk about analytics in hockey. The previous coach took a $9 M player and turned him into a minimum salaried scrub. The current coach took this same player and brought him up to being a $7 M player. How is that for increasing production relative to salary! Another impressive attribute about Skinner is how he handles interviews. He is one of the most thoughtful and analytical responders at the podium. He listens to the questions, mulls it over and then gives a thoughtful response that isn't riddled with meaningless cliches.

Are you suggesting that there is a lot of winking, nodding and third party communication going on between agents and organizations? I'm just shocked!

Due to Okposo's offensive production I'm coming around to moving KO up to a higher line and then filling out the line with another grinder. I'm not worried about whether Girgs or Asplund is more suited to the center or wing position because of the nature of their roles. I would have no problem with them periodically exchanging positions. As you point out you can see the talent base growing to the point where there are options and flexibility within and among the lines because of the depth. As an example Mitts has played center and wing, as has Krebs. And with the increase in talent injuries won't be as depleting to the roster as it was this season. There are players on this roster who are unsung players because their offensive stats are not very impressive. I put Asplund and Girgs in that category. What they contribute can't be measured so it accurately reflects their contribution.

The owner is the boss. If he wanted to intrude more, he could. However, he's not a billionaire because he is foolish and works against his own interest. TP recognizes that the GM he hired has put together a quality staff. He isn't oblivious to the fact that they have done a good job for him. On top of that upbeat picture it is evident it was done with a minimum amount of expenditure $$$, at least for now. From an owner's perspective: What is there to dislike? I agree with you that the GM knows how to sagaciously deal with the owner. He listens, and then does what needs to be done. This GM has good interpersonal skills and uses it to his benefit.

You go to many Sabre games and have a good feel for those in attendance. What would be the affect on ST sales and attendance in general if the front office acted boldly this offseason (still staying within the rebuild parameters) and added a Tuch caliber player and a high quality goalie?

You very well laid out where this team is and the potential for the near term is. It basically revolves around the goalie issue. I don't want to reprise the Ullmark issue but if he would have signed him even at the hometown premium price he was asking for compared to the discounted price that he signed with Boston or have a better fallback position last offseason if he couldn't sign the goalie, this team would be in a better place moving forward. I strongly believe as @Thornybelieves that with a little more aggressiveness this offseason, the GM could accelerate the rebuilding process and make this team's prospect for a serious playoff run next year more likely. The Sabres have the assets in cap space and extra picks to make a couple strategic moves that would advance the franchise's timetable toward meaningful respectability. If smartly used this team can still maintain its organic rebuild strategy and put itself in a better situation. I have a slightly difference of opinion regarding Johnson and his decision to remain in the college ranks or not. As with Portillo and Levi what the GM does has little influence with their respective individual decisions. In each case one can make a good case to stay in school and not. It's simply a personal decision that includes hockey and other considerations.