JohnC

The biggest problem does not revolve around the captaincy as it does the dearth of talent. Whether Tuch or Okposo becomes the captain has little bearing on how each of them can influence the rest of the squad. They can have the same influence as captains or not just by the way they conduct themselves. You don't have to be a designated leader in order to lead. This organization is in the process of incorporating young players onto the roster. They need more of them. It's going to take time.

This was a different and separate appearance on the Instigator Show. I want to make clear that I'm not suggesting that Jack was a bad dude because that was not the case. He did a lot of charity work with children with cancer where he wasn't seeking attention. However, there was a sense of entitlement that the organization to an extent fostered. It was a big mistake in designating him captain when he wasn't ready for it. And the organization responded to his demands/requests for bringing in players when it should have been a strictly organizational matter. However the Jack issue is framed I side with him more than the organization. Overall, the organization failed to construct a competitive team in a reasonable period of time because of its repeated miscues. Jack's major fault (which in mind is not a fault) is that he was an intense competitor who wanted to wim. He felt stuck in a bad situation. So he made it clear that he wanted out. His position was understandable just as much as the organization's position of moving on was understandable. Each side acted in their own respective interest. I wish Jack good health and nothing but the best. He's in a good situation being on a veteran and cup contending team. And the Sabres made the right decision in deciding to reset and rebuild. This type of departing scenario happens everywhere in all sports. It's part of all sports and relationships.

Gionta on the Instigator Show a while back did make comments about an entitled young player not treating everyone in the building with respect. He also talked about how a leader should conduct himself and behave professionally. He didn't specifically mention a name but everyone knew who he was talking about. The GM also made less than oblique references on WGR on how he expected players to represent the shield and the city. He stated that the standard was not being met by all. Everyone knew who he was talking about. I'm not a Jack basher. He got stuck in a dysfunctional system and understandably wanted out. But there were issues associated with the environment/culture that needed to be changed. It was obvious by numerous comments emanating from the inside what was going on. For outsiders who were less than clueless it was not too difficult to discern what the situation was.

I didn't watch the game but saw the clips. As you noted it was evident that Vegas has more talent and physically is stronger. When Vegas scored it seemed that the Sabres were scrambling while the opposition had structure. And as you point out the goalie deficiency can't be hidden. It has to be better addressed in the offseason. The Sabres have some young players (Mitts, Quin) who are injured and some young players in the pipeline (Peterka, Power) who will soon be added to the roster. It's just going to take time to solidify an incomplete roster. It's apparent that when there is no margin for error for a thin team it is a vulnerable position to be in. That's where we are at.

One attribute that is noticeable when watching him play is his speed. I was surprised how fast and how well this big power forward could skate.

That twirling device is also used to stretch the necks of people whose necks are too short.

When I read the column the first thing that came to mind was that the hiring of Don Granato to steward the influx of young players is the key to success. If a standard coaching hire was made from the carousel of NHL coaching retreads, the rebuild primarily based on the development of young players would fail. It just seems to me that from the top of the organization, to the coaching staff, to the young players and mentoring veterans everyone is in sync. There is a coherency to the plan that is being followed.

If a player has a debilitating case of hemorrhoids is it described as a mbi (middle body injury)? ☠️

What is LBI? Is it lower back injury?

You make a good observation. Samuelsson is obviously the more talented and impactful player. Fitzgerald on the other hand is a player who knows his limitations and plays within his talents. He's more of a support player who isn't very noticeable on the ice yet he is effective. We could use another Fitzgerald type of player on the backend.

One player who has really impressed me is Samuelsson. He plays like a composed veteran defenseman. Although this big fellow is not a thumper he does play big. His efficiency and positioning are those of an experienced defenseman. ( @nfreemanalso cited his play.) What's evident is the plan to play him extensively in Rochester before bringing him up has worked out marvelously. Next year, when Power is added to the blue line you can see the formation of a talented unit. Dahlin/Joki/Samuelsson/Power make for a promising core. Adding another player or two to the group as support players will make this unit even better. After Skinner signed his big contract he was the target of much derision. Much of it deserved. And playing for Krueger he was a lost soul on the ice. To the player's credit he is a revitalized player and arguably the biggest offensive threat for this team. Granato deserves credit for putting him in a position to succeed.

As like you, I wasn't particularly keen on the way KA handled the goaltending issue this past offseason. On that we can agree on. But there is a benefit to having a veteran like Anderson on the roster that in a variety of ways positively effects a novice player such as UPL. As a mentor for the young goalie the veteran can serve as an example in how best to prepare for games, not only in practice but also in video sessions. He is also a respected player/person who can serve as a sounding board when the inevitable struggles happen for the inexperienced goalie. On most teams there are a few veteran players whose value goes beyond their statistics. The benefit to their team due to their "presence" in practice and in games can't accurately be quantified. Okposo is a player who falls in that "positive presence" category. In my opinion, Anderson also falls in that category.

I agree with your comment. Giving up assets for the wrong players was a mistake.

We just disagree. Anderson gives the Sabres a better chance to be respectable. Not only does he allow us to be competitive but in no way does his presence hinder the younger players. In fact, I would argue by allowing us to be respectable he is helping the younger players to develop. When UPL gets healthy he will get enough playing time to enhance his development and demonstrate what he is capable of. So at least for this season I don't see his presence as hurting any player or the rebuild plan. In my view you gain nothing by shipping out a player who helps the team for a meaningless return. Next year the situation is different. But this year trading the old goalie makes no sense to me.

No it doesn't? What do you expect to get for Anderson in a trade? His value to the Sabres is that he gives them a chance to win more games.

I don't understand your reasoning in expecting/hoping that Anderson gets traded? When he plays the record is respectable; when he doesn't play the team plunges. What would be the point in trading a veteran goalie who would return you little? What the young players on this team desperately need is some current success that will provide some realistic optimism for the future. Trading Anderson would be a damaging move with little benefit. I'm simply perplexed by your stance.

The "what if" game is a game of futility played by losers. But "what if" the Sabres had Anderson caliber netminding all season? How many more points would this team have earned? My conservative guess is in the range of 6-8 more points. It wouldn't be a great difference but it would provide a better outlook on this team and season.

I watched the first two periods. Anderson was terrific. He got right into it with no apparent rust from the long layoff. What is evident is that in a short period of time the GM is reshaping the roster with his acquisitions that included drafting Quinn, Peterka and acquiring Krebs and Tuch in the Jack trade. From the two periods that I watched not only was I impressed with the play of Krebs but also the potential in the near future. He has exceptional vision and his passing is top shelf.

The oldsters are chuckling while the youngsters don't know what you are talking about.😁

The lesson to be learned by the TM tenure is to be judicious with your assets and wisely utilize them. That wasn't a trademark of his tenure that looked for a quick fix. There are a number of avenues to upgrade a roster. Foreclosing or limiting any one of them due to fear of previous failings is the wrong lesson to be learned. What is evident with this regime under KA is that this franchise is not going to act out of desperation or expediency. That was evident by the way KA handled the Jack Eichel situation. He bided his time and waited until a reasonable deal materialized, and then he made the transaction. Taking steps to move forward is better than standing in place when the destination is still some distance away.

Potently stated! The Murray mistakes of the past that are reflexively brought up whenever someone brings up options to improve this team. That hesitancy due to fear of past failure in the long run is more franchise crippling than taking some actions that don't work. Few people here are advocating for a dramatic change in the draft and develop rebuild process. Without question that is the core of the rebuild strategy. However, when one has an excess in draft capital that includes a number of second and third round picks on top of a low cap figure, then those are assets that can be parlayed into contributing players. Anyone who believes that this team has enough contributing players isn't watching the same games that I am watching.

I don't see what Sabre player has value in the market. As you point out Miller is hurt diminishing what value he ever had. I still believe that Olofsson is dealing with the effect of his injury. He simply isn't close to what he was since he came back from his injury. Because of his diminished play he has little value and because he may be impaired because of an injury I would be reluctant to part with him. I'm more intrigued with what the organization does in the offseason than what happens at the trade deadline. That's where there will be opportunities to add some useful pieces to this rebuilding roster.

Walking away from Ullmark was not the problem. The problem was that the GM didn't have an adequate fallback position if he couldn't sign the UFA goalie at the price he deemed acceptable. That's the indictable offense. However, I absolutely agree that paying Ullmark a million dollars more on a four year term (your example) would be worth it. That extra million would have had a negligible impact for a franchise that is at the bottom of cap spending. The combination of Ullmark and UPL (now injured) would have made more sense than bringing in Anderson and pairing him up with anyone else. The Sabres have had bad luck with injuries at the goalie position this year. But when the season started the position was thin to begin with. I'm not getting carried away and proclaiming Ullmark to be an upper tier player. But as a Sabre he played well for us, and his record was starkly better than other goalies in the net. The past is the past. The lesson to be learned is to be better prepared to respond to contingencies such as having options for a player who is an UFA. That was the failure with in this situation.

The Ullmark issue has a number of aspects to it. One is that the GM declined to sign Ullmark to the contract that he was willing to sign in order to stay. And the other side of it is that Boston signed him for a reasonable contract. What it came down to is that Ullmark wanted the Sabres to pay a premium price for him to stay with a struggling and rebuilding team as opposed to signing a lesser contract with a more complete and playoff contending team. As an UFA Ullmark was looking out for his best interest. There was nothing unreasonable about Ullmark's stance. The GM who had plenty of cap space and an acknowledged major void at the position could have easily kept the player at the price the player was demanding and still continue on with his rebuild without hindering it at all in the short or long term. The point I'm making here irrespective to this particular example is that there are ways to accelerate the upgrade of this team if there is a little more creativity and desire to do so. I'm not talking about fanciful blockbuster deals as I'm talking about being a little more aggressive in improving this incomplete team. When you are walking and increase your pace just a little you will get to your destination quicker than if you continue at an ambling pace.

There are opportunities for players who are underperforming where they are at and who need a change of scenery. Sam Bennett has been a tremendous pickup for Florida. Although the deal was not costly it turned out to be impactful. I don't expect such a deal to turn out as auspiciously as this one but there are deals that could be made that would improve the roster. The Sabres have cap space and they have draft assets. An enterprising GM would be able to judiciously use them. Again, I want to make it clear that I am not advocating for a major depletion of our resources/assets to upgrade the team simply for a short-term benefit at the expense of the longer term. https://www.nhl.com/news/florida-acquires-sam-bennett-from-calgary/c-323572260