JohnC

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.

There is an irony being exhibited by those arguing for the Pegulas to sell. If new owners bought the team what we would want is for them to conduct themselves in the same manner in which the team is currently being run. The franchise seems to have turned the corner and is now run in a smart manner. Why would anyone advocate for an ownership change now and risk a change in operation by a new owner? That makes no sense.

It doesn't matter that what Paul Hamilton reported about the owners' retrospective about granting authority to McBeane is accurate or not. It could be true or not. What matters is that the football staff currently has the authority to make football decisions without the interference of the owners. The results are indisputable: The Bills are acknowledged to be SB contenders by almost everyone involved in the sport. The same learning cycle of how the owners conducted themselves applied to their hockey business, as it originally did with the Bills. The owners were very involved in the hockey operation when they bought the team. The results were predictably bad. Are the owners now intimately involved with the hockey operation? My sense is they are not, or at least significantly less so. And it shouldn't be a surprise that the fortunes of the team have dramatically improved. With respect to the attendance, there is no question that fans expressed their disillusionment with the organization by not attending the games. No one should blame them for not willing to pay for a decade long bad product. This organization lost the trust of the fans. Long term dysfunction and a bad product will do that to any enterprise. The franchise has to now earn its lost credibility back. For a large portion of this season the Sabres were drawing 4000-6000 people at the arena. Recently, it has doubled in size with a sellout for the Rick tribute. Yesterday's game drew close to 13,000 very engaged fans to the game. That's progress. It's going to take time to bring back the fanbase that ownership/organization contributed in losing.

Who is ragging on Josh Allen? He's overwhelmingly recognized as one of the top qbs in the league.

If there was an award for "chirping" Skinner would be a near unanimous choice to win it. It is so great to see a once deflated and demoralized player become one of the most spirited and feisty players on the ice. The difference between a player like Skinner compared to Marchand is that although he can be an irritant he is a clean player.

I agree with your observation that there was an indifferent attitude for an end of season game that has little meaning to the Islanders. There is no question that from an eye test the Sabres are an energized and motivated bunch. As others have previously stated we will have a better sense of where the Sabres actually rank next season when we "hopefully" play meaningful games where mistakes and good play are magnified within the context of meaningful playoff implication games. However one wants to look at this season one takeaway that is apparent is that players are getting better and the team is playing better. The extended good play has been for more than 20 games. That in itself is so encouraging.

The owners are doing well with the Bills because after a number of misfires he hired the right HC and GM, and then allowed them to do their jobs without any consequential interference. The Pegulas hired a recently fired coach in Rex Ryan because he said he wanted to hire a prominent name and give this nondescript franchise some relevancy. It was a dumb and damaging reason to hire him. Eventually he got it right and then good things followed. My impression (can't say for sure) is that he is belatedly following the right hiring course for the hockey franchise.

Do you know what the attendance was? It looked like a good crowd.

Let me start off with your comment about Golisano. He saved this franchise from not only folding but also being moved. He bought this team when it was in bankruptcy. When he took over he discovered that the financial books were in a state of chaos where franchise funds were intermingled with private accounts. What he did was sort out the entangled financials and put this chaotic franchise on a hard budget. That not only was the right thing to do but the necessary thing to do in order to make the franchise financially viable. Without being obligated to do so he paid all the vendors, some of them he wasn't required to do because of the bankruptcy laws. Without question he brought order and professionalization to the whole operation, that included the hockey and business parts. When he sold the franchise to the Pegulas he claimed that he had higher offers that would have resulted in the franchise being moved. My understanding is that the commissioner, Bettman, was not going to allow that to happen. At the news conference of the sale to Pegula Golisano noted that he had a clause in the contract to sell that if the Pegulas decided to sell the franchise it still couldn't be moved. In my view Golisano should be praised and not criticized for how he ran the franchise and for how he handled the sale of it. With respect to the Pegulas as owners they were most at fault for the demise of this franchise during their stewardship. Hopefully, they have learned from their mistakes. I strongly believe that they have.