JohnC

Lehner used to get frustrated after losses. At first in post game interviews he would discretely criticize the play in front of him and then more explicitly. He was right! The players in front of him were not playing with discipline/intelligence or fulfilling their responsibilities. To be blunt Risto was a dumb player who would constantly be sucked into chasing the puck behind the net and leaving the front of the net uncovered. The reality is that the team wasn't talented enough and the blue line unit was inadequate. I was a persistent and harsh critic of Murray giving up a first round pick for him because I thought that it was a too high a cost for a player whose team wanted to move him because it had plenty of depth at that position. With hindsight I have a tad softened my position recognizing that his current level of play would have made a difference in making the playoffs this season. (My opinion.) Unless there is an addition at the goaltending position (And I don't think there will be.) the player who will make the biggest difference between success and continued mediocrity will be Ullmark. (Again, my opinion.)

The Robin Lehner scenario in Buffalo was a sad and complicated human situation. The Sabre organization was very supportive and did the right thing in getting him help to address his mental health problems. Even after he was not associated with the team the former GM kept in touch. Not trying to be dramatic but it isn't an exaggeration to believe that the organization may have saved his life by helping him get the medical attention that he needed. From a hockey standpoint the Lehner saga demonstrates how much this organization is snake bitten. If we would have gotten the level of goaltending that Lehner played at with the Islanders, Blackhawks and Golden Knights this season the Sabres probably would be participating in the playoffs this year.

Near the end of the abbreviated regular season the Sabres were on the fringe fighting for a playoff spot. During that crucial period of time they had a critical four game western trip. They earned zero points. Please, no more excuses or "what if" imaginary scenarios. They earned exactly what they got i.e. left out.

How would you compare Cozens's style of play and talent level with Chicago's Jonathan Toews? Both have size and a driving type of game. I have said it before much to Thorny's chagrin but I do believe that Cozens had the maturity and physical makeup to play 2C in his rookie year. That doesn't mean that should do it on a full time basis but if done on a periodic basis I believe he wouldn't be overwhelmed.

Most people agree that Mitts was rushed to the big club when he wasn't ready. However, he was belatedly sent to Rochester where he struggled in the beginning and then seemed to become more comfortable as a player and understand his role. Where I disagree with you is that although he was clearly rushed and not handled smartly from a development standpoint I don't accept that he is so damaged that he will never attain what his talents should/could have taken him as a player. The Casey story is not over with. He still has time to demonstrate or not demonstrate that he can be a functioning NHL player. Right now the onus is on him and no one else to prepare as best he can to be ready to handle the rigors of this demanding league.

After reading your explanation I would definitely give up a first round pick to Tampa for him. But most likely Tampa would want more as a prior link suggests.

I'm confused on the RFA contract issue. If Cirelli gets traded to a team that he is not enamored with does he have to sign a contract or just go year to year until he qualifies as an UFA if that is his desire? Whatever the contract ramifications are I still believe that Tampa will work out a deal to retain him. (My opinion.) And if he is dealt the asking price for him is probably going to be more than a pick. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2901013-nhl-rumors-latest-buzz-on-taylor-hall-contract-anthony-cirelli-more

Before a trade I would want to talk to him and his agent about his wanting to come to Buffalo and what would be the parameters of a potential deal. If it is apparent that he isn't enamored with signing with Buffalo I would not agree to a deal. If I knew that he was amenable to a deal I would certainly trade our first pick for him.

I'm not giving up valuable assets for a player that I'm not sure I will have for the long-term. I don't want to deplete precious resources on anyone that I hope will stay longer. It's as simple as that. Next option please.

Unless I can get a long term deal secured with Cirelli I wouldn't deal for him. If I could I would be ecstatic.

Yes. If I can get that winger who will be a component in building a genuine second line I would do so. Not only do you reconstruct the second line with that addition but you push down players to play on an upgraded third line. One of the major deficiencies on this team is a lack of secondary scoring to balance out the first line. I have always been a person who valued high draft picks to build a franchise in all the major sports. However, because of the recent history of systemic failure this franchise needs an immediate jolt to alter this negative dynamic. Also, the exasperated and fading fanbase deserve it now, not later. And make no mistake about it the Jack exasperation meter is real. The get me out of here declaration is a looming threat. And I don't blame him! If this new regime doesn't have a sense of urgency after all that has gone on before their installation then they are out of touch before they even started.

If you could get a genuine second line talent who is in his mid-twenties with that pick you got to deal it. The future is now. The audience is suffocating and becoming moribund. It desperately needs oxygen right away. Another year out of the playoffs and we are going to have a Jack problem. And I wouldn't blame him.

Who the heck is Rakish? Is he an Indian guru that you follow when you are in a deep state of meditation? ?

You and few others here are exceptional in the analysis of draft prospects. It's a treat reading your views on this draft class. I salute you and the others in your knowledge of the prospects. ? It seems that right now Lafreniere and Byfield are ranked in the top two with Stutzle and Perfetti also considered in the upper echelon by some. If you were asked what couple of players in the second half of the top ten (5-10) could turn out to be very good players who would they be?

I have never said that Adams was hired primarily because he was cheap and easy. You have misconstrued my commentary on this subject.

I don't think you are referring to my comments because I have not said he will be a disaster as the head of the hockey operation. But what I have clearly stated is that the heavy financial structure of the operation was a major reason why there was a GM change. And I have also stated that if the former GM would have been agreeable to the changes mandated by the owners he would have been retained. (Many people disagree with that view.)

I said it before and I will say it again I'm holding my judgment until I see what the hockey decisions are in this critical offseason. Other than that I don't know what else to say.

The games are going to have a lot less than 10,000 people, if any people, at the games because the covid issue will still be a significant factor hovering over the sport, country and world. Although I do have qualms I'm not going to work myself into a frenzy about the structure of the organization and who is running the operation. What I will be watching are the decisions being made in this offseason. Then I will make my judgment.

If you have read my numerous responses on this topic I have openly acknowledged that financial considerations were the driving force behind this dramatic organization change. It certainly is a risky proposition, and as you state a recipe for disaster. But it doesn't have to be. As I have stated success will be dependent on the quality of the hockey decisions made by this thinned out staff. In the end that is what is most meaningful.

As you point out regardless of the stunted hiring process and the thinning out of the staffing when all is said and done the ultimate judgment is going to revolve around the hockey decisions that will be made in this critical offseason.

Under this particular crushing financial scenario I understand what they did and why they did it. My comments do not deal with their decisions prior to this situation. Adams was hired to execute the harsh financial measures that the Pegula wanted done. I still believe that even under this austere setup good hockey decisions can still be made.

Usually when there is an opening for the top hockey job in a franchise the obvious issue is who would be the best candidate to assume the job. The standard response to fill that opening is to advertise for replacement candidates and then make a judgment as to who would be the best replacement. That didn't happen with the Sabres. Essentially there was an in-house installation shortly after the firing of the GM followed by an immediate (the next day) chopping of staff. Kim Pegula publicly stated after the declaration that Botterill was going to be retained that the owners had multiple discussions with him. The owners could not get him to agree to go along with their new business plan. He was subsequently fired, and Adams, who was involved on the business side of the encompassing hockey business that included youth hockey, was hired with no outsiders considered. What's obvious is that what transpired was mostly driven by business/financial considerations. As I have stated in prior posts I'm not criticizing the Pegulas for the dramatic change in direction on how the franchise was going to be managed. This franchise with middling success was hemorrhaging money, and unless a major change in operation was made it was going to continue in this oppressive virus economic environment. I have no criticism for how the Pegulas acted. There certainly was an understandable rational behind it. But anyone who doesn't believe that the main consideration in this abrupt scenario wasn't related to financial considerations is being naive. I also believe that under this now more austere organization good hockey decisions still can be made to make this franchise better.

Yes. ? https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=discover+card+commercial+yes&docid=608018200497947523&mid=07D77AFEA8AC8CDE6E4E07D77AFEA8AC8CDE6E4E&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

I don't think we are really disagreeing. There are a lot of factors that have to be considered regarding contracts, roster and what the returns can be for the departed players. As you have pointed out these are complicated multifaced decisions. Being in a position to make these decisions because of an abundance of talent is certainly better than seeking ways to add talent to a deficit riddled team. We both agree that Tampa is a smart and forward thinking franchise. They will come out of this challenging offseason making calculated decisions that puts them in the best situation that they can be in.

Bingo! Your comment about the importance of goaltending is the central issue. There are plenty of discussions on this site regarding what new players will be brought in to improve our status. Assuming that another goaltender isn't brought in the most important player on our roster that will determine success or failure next season is Ullmark.