JohnC
-
Posts
5,958 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
5 hours ago, IKnowPhysics said:
***** him.
He publicly stated he wanted to ***** his coworkers. That's a firing. And if he's not fired, Tappen and Sharp could hold NBC liable for allowing sexual harassment and fostering a hostile work environment.
If the comments Weir made were inappropriate, NBC should address them and act accordingly.
If (and it's a big if) Roenick's assertion is truthful that "his supervisor responded that Weir 'is gay and can say whatever,'" then that is also inappropriate and NBC should adress that person and act accordingly.
This lawsuit is a fine example of a Trumpist snowflake crying oppression when they're held accountable for saying horrible *****.
Sometimes when you read what a person said on TV or radio it appears to be outrageous and unacceptable. But what is often left out is the where the comment was made such as on a shock jock radio show where the environment is freewheeling and juvenile. When something is said in a restaurant/bar scenario among friends (including both sexes) the bantering can get real loose to the point of being raunchy with no one being offended and taking the comments as being demeaning. My understanding is that Roenick and his wife were friends with the people he commented on. My point here is that although he said something that he shouldn't have on the airways the magnitude of the indiscretion is raised by the intensity of this swirling social media world.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, IKnowPhysics said:
He hit a sophomore slump and never took the next steps to meet the high production expectations of 4th overall. And that could be due to tons of different factors: expectations were too high, coaching staff didn't give the right on-ice usage/linemates/quality of competition/total ice time, he didn't develop his own mental/physical/maturation game, coaches didn't develop him.
By 2018/19, Bennett did mature and he modified his game from trying to be that 4th overall skilled offense generator to being better in the role he was put in- 3rd liner. He plays angrier with more edge, works harder in tough areas, and has been trying to a better two-way player and a PP/PK specialist. But even this past year hints at more decline for him, as others in Calgary eat up that big ice time (Gaudreau, Monhan, Lindholm, Tkachuk, Backlund) and other younger players start to develop and compete for bottom six roles (like Dube). Nonetheless, he still retains some offensive skill.
I think if Calgary really looks at his performance this year objectively (8G, 4A, 52GP) and looks at who's coming up in the pipeline, they'll realize he's expendable, especially if they want to keep Jankowski, and they may try to use Bennett to secure a defenseman. (Side note: The Flames are an interesting trade partner for Buffalo, actually.) The question is... is Bennett still any good?
He has some interesting rate stats from this past season...
- 0.8 EV G/60 (even strength goals per 60mins) - More than any Sabre except Skinner, Eichel, and Reinhart.
- 0.77 EV ixG/60 (expected even strength goals per 60) - More than any Sabre except Skinner.
- 13.26 EV iCF/60 (even strength Corsi For per 60mins) - More than any Sabres except Eichel and Skinner.
- More EV iHF/60 (hits for per 60mins) than any Sabre.
- But -0.7 EV iPEN+/-/60 (minor penalty taken/drawn differential per 60mins), also more than any Sabre - takes more penalties than he draws
I think he could produce goals given ice time and linemates, but I don't think he's the proven talent who you'd want at 2C.
Thank you for the terrific analysis and write-up. I was secretly eye-balling him as an added/throw in player in a package deal who given a fresh start might revive his still young career. Even if he doesn't develop into a second line player if he can contribute on a third line that would certainly help address a major deficiency of not having enough secondary scoring to augment our over-weighted first line scoring.
-
9 minutes ago, Curt said:
I seriously am surprised that some people feel like Buffalo got screwed out of the playoffs. They were in 25th place in a 31 team league. They sure didn’t earn it.
I'm with you. The Sabres had an extended home stand at the end of the season against a number of below average teams. In that sequence of games in their home arena their record was mediocre. There was also a western four game road trip where they did play well but came away with zero points. They had opportunities to get back into the race but failed miserably. No more lame excuses!
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:
Tangent time: We were real close to drafting Bennett. Unanimous consensus in 2014 was that Florida was going to take Ekblad, leaving us our choice of Sams. Rankings were split between the two; and Bennett was the higher ranked skater according to several sources, including Central Scouting. Several mock drafts had us at Bennett, likely moreso than Reinhart. Draisaitl/Sabres conversations were late to the party, and while he was an interesting pick pre-draft, consensus was that Draisaitl was a top-five pick, not a top-two pick.
The Sams' first seasons after the draft were pretty similar. Reinhart put up 0.53P/GP, Bennett 0.48P/GP. But the next three seasons would tell the tale, as Bennett put up 26P, 26P, and 27P, while Reinhart put up 47P, 50P, and 65P (more than double!) . Bennett was surpassed by his CGY peers, and it shows in his TOI, whereas Reinhart is playing top line minutes with EIchel: Bennett played 12:38 per game this past season; Reinhart played 20:32 per game.
I, and most others, didn't expect Buffalo to take the risky chance on Draisaitl. I think the majority of people who second guess that decision use hindsight. Our decision at the time was between the two Sams, and we chose correctly. Anyone who thinks things couldn't be any worse for our franchise right now, isn't taking the time to imagine if we had tanked that entire miserable 2013-14 season, and then came away with Bennett instead of Reinhart.
What went wrong with Bennett? Was he simply a tool guy who couldn't convert his assets into production or was he the type of player who could dominate at the lower level but simply wasn't good enough to make the leap into the manly NHL league.? Would a change of scenery possibly resuscitate his up to now disappointing career?
-
1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:
1) Outside of the top 10, I am looking at Seth Jarvis because Seth Jarvis. Mercer, Gunler, and Mysak would be players outside the top 15 you could trade down and get but I think that is a risky gamble.
2) I think you would need to define "quality" for me. There are NHL players in this draft that will be 2nd round guys but unlike last year, I think once you get further back in this draft, the drop off happens sharp and quick. This would partially depend on who slides into the 2nd round which is something that the Sabres aren't good at capitalizing on.
Thanks for the response.
When I use the word "quality" I'm defining it as someone who after a few years can develop into a contributing lower line and pairing caliber of player.
-
1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:
Are you asking what pick I would trade down to or what prospects could be drafted outside the top 10 if we did trade down?
(for the record, trading out of the top 10 in a trade down scenario is extremely rare)
What prospects could be drafted outside of the top 10 if we traded down? Also, is this draft full enough with good prospects where we could get a quality prospect in the second round?
-
On 7/12/2020 at 1:30 PM, dudacek said:
I will be very surprised if Drysdale is available at eight and not the best player available.
I would certainly take him over Lundell or Holtz, and probably Raymond as well.
If the Sabres traded down in order to make a package deal what lower first round picks would appeal to you as interesting prospects?
-
39 minutes ago, Curt said:
I’m thinking that Sabres should be looking to add a “boring”, and cheap LD, regardless of size. Someone who can be solid on D, help the PK, and make smart, but unspectacular contributions to offense, thus not racking up many points. Basically a Scandella type, hopefully a little better though.
I always felt that Scandella was unfairly criticized. As a third pairing defenseman with average amount of minutes he was a solid/useful player. When his role was expanded or he played on a pairing beyond his talents he struggled. I thought that when he played with Joki he was a very positive influence on his game.
If the Sabres can add a player or two to bolster the second line it will upgrade the lower lines by pushing players down to play where they are more appropriately suited. As the post above by @LGR4GM points out if you can make the right additions it will positively reverberate throughout the lineup.
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
Agree - and I said as much. No desire to trade him, as I stated.
Confusing. I didn't take issue with anything in your post. I said he was good, not great - I obviously understand that young players improve.
I wasn't trying to diminish his play, I was alluding to how interesting it is that Joki gets a rep for being this incredibly sound decision maker, and Dahlin a turnover mistake prone fiend, when in reality Joki had the worse turnover to take away ratio.
---
You are arguing as if my position is anti-jokiharju and then, after proclaiming him to be good, stating that's why he's untouchable.
My argument that you bypassed was about how I view the "untouchable" designation as a whole. Which went unadressed.
I'm not suggesting that you are anti-Joki. That is not to say that I don't value him more highly than you might. I also believe that this 20 yr. old youngster has more potential to develop. My stance is that I wouldn't trade him for players such as Monahan, Johansson or Strome to assume the 2C slot. If one believes as I do that in the not too distant future Cozens has the ability to fill the 2C spot then it would make even less sense to trade Joki for the above listed players.
With respect to Cirelli I definitely would be willing to trade Joki and a first round pick for the Tampa center with the condition that he will sign a deal with us. If not, then I would say no to a Cirelli deal.
-
13 minutes ago, dudacek said:
There is no way you’d trade a package a 1st rounder (this year is or next) and Henri Jokiharju for a 2C: Monahan, Johansson, Strome, Nugent-Hopkins? How about Joki a sweetener and #8 for Cirelli or Matt Barzal?
If your trade scenario for Cirelli or Barzal was offered I would quickly make the deal with one qualification. Both of those players would have to be signed for the long term. If not, then I'm not making the deal.
-
4 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Not sure why a 2nd pairing guy is a no-touch.
We do have players on the defensive unit such as Montour and Risto that could be assets to bring back a return. Joki is a 20 year old player with upside that I believe will be at worst a second pairing caliber of player. Can he be a first pairing caliber of player? Maybe in another year or two??? I just don't see him being moved. This is going to be a very long offseason for the Sabres. Let's see how prominently his name gets mentioned in proposed deals. I just don't see it.
-
27 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:
The fan base is reallll angsty right now. All of it stems from losing, but it's pointed in different directions. Many, but not all, fans were calling for Botterill's job, but those folks don't seem to be expressing pleasure regarding what has occurred. I can't remember of a time when fans called for a firing, got it, and then still weren't happy.
I don't know if that's because we hired Kevyn Adams, or because we hired a GM without a publicized search, or people wanted a different/better-known name (who would that have been??), or what. Maybe it's because we have major holes in the roster that aren't yet addressed. Maybe fans will be more excited if we make start making good roster moves. But the post-Cup finals offseason doesn't start until potentially October 4th, the Draft is October 10th, and the next season start is December 1st, so we could be in for three to five more months of mopey dregs.
I wasn't screaming for Botterill's head, but I recognize the newly present opportunity to gain traction and move forward. I still have some singed notion of hope. I'm hoping some of the glaring roster issues get attention so we can ice a remotely competitive team come December.
I'm excited about some elements: Eichel, Dahlin, Cozens, and much more, but they need some help.
Your response captures what must of us feel about this team. Many of us are both skeptical and hopeful. That's an unsettling mix. Will the Sabres make a few smart moves that will better balance out the roster and make it more competitive? Will the younger players make the expected/hopeful progression?
I wasn't as harsh a critic as most of the former GM with the drab personality. I thought he put the team in a good position with its cap situation and number of UFAs on the roster to be in a favorable position this offseason to make some deals to upgrade the roster? Now that he is gone will the younger and inexperienced replacement GM take the mantel and make enough smart moves to make this team a genuine playoff team?
I'm offering up a lot of questions because it would be foolish to make positive assumptions that this organization will be smart about the decisions it will make this offseason. I may be gullible but I am hopeful.
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
It's funny how these narratives develop - Jokiharju's take away to give away ratio was dead last on our team.
Joki was 20 yrs old last year. How many defensemen that young can play as well as he did in this league? You can use stats in his rookie year to diminish his play. After watching him play last season it isn't a stretch to project that he is going to be better than a good player. His performance level is not static. In another couple to few years he is going to be an established second pairing player for us. For me he is a no touch player.
-
5
-
-
3 minutes ago, Weave said:
I feel like I’m the only one that doesn’t see Joki as untouchable. I don’t WANT to move him, but you have to give value to get value, and I don’t see Joki as one of those guys whose value to the team makes him off the move for a legit 2C list.
For that matter, the only D I put on the do not trade list for a 2C is Dahlin.
I respectfully but strenuously disagree with you about Joki. My opinion of him is off the charts. He is one of the most poised and consistent young defensemen that I have seen in a long time. He is smart and knows what his abilities are and doesn't stray beyond them. What impresses me the most is about him beyond his smooth skating is his intelligence on the ice. He rarely makes a wrong decision when he has the puck. (If Risto had his smarts he would be an all star.) Don't get caught up with a player being able to make dazzling plays and muscular hits. That's not who he is. This young guy is already a second pairing caliber of defenseman and quite possibly the most consistent defender on the unit. When Botterill traded Nylander to get him the GM should have been charged with felonious theft. In my unyielding view he is a no touch player!
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, dudacek said:
Looking at their roster and cap situation, I think they are a natural trade partner. I think pieces like Montour, Risto, Mittelstadt, Cozens, Reinhart, UPL, and #8 all should be of interest to the Flames. Joki and Miller as well, even McCabe.
That the guy who said ‘no’ when Burke was interested?
Please take Joki and Cozens off of the list. There are going to be a number of desirable players on the market. So the Sabres will have options as to not only who they might acquire but also who they will have to deal in order to make the acquisitions. I'm very open to trading our #1 pick; I'm not open to trading the two aforementioned players.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Curt said:
I think it would be unwise to move forward under the assumption that Cozens WILL be a good 2C at age 21.
The ES defense was not bad. It was pretty good. The PK though was horrible. I think the total failure of the PK may be coloring your perception of the defense as a whole.The Sabres had the second worst rated PK in the league. Why was it so bad? Was the problem more related to the players or design of PK? I'm not making excuses because you are what you do. But this past season with an average to a little higher than average PK and with more consistent goaltending this team lost in the vicinity of eight to ten points in the standings.
https://www.oddsshark.com/stats/defensivestats/hockey/nhl/penalty_kill_percentage
-
2 hours ago, Tondas said:
I've loved the Sabres since 1970. But, I'm getting concerned that the Pegula's don't understand what it is to be a Sabres fan. It's not that hard. A hard working team that brings it every night. That sticks up for each other. That leaves everything they have on the ice. That will to win. Grit. Determination. Fight. Sacrifice.. If they gave all this, I could tolerate the losses. But I want teams coming it to play in the KBC to say, "*****, this is gonna be a tough night.'
The hockey of today is not the hockey of yesterday. The team that has more talent and skilled players will usually prevail over the lunch bucket team. The well coached team with a balanced roster will prevail over the less talented and earnest team.
-
2 hours ago, Thorny said:
I like the cut of your jib.
I’m good with Krueger being the key mind, if he understands and allows Dahlin to play to his strengths. That’s my biggest concern with Ralph. It’s pretty crucial.
Chad had a nice breakdown, and a great read, for one possible way to construct this team under a cheaper bottom line - posted it in the off-season game plan thread if you are interested.
I have read a few breakdowns from a number of people that when taken from an overview perspective regarding the reconstruction of the roster what is obvious to me is that there are a menu of good options to work with. As others have frequently pointed out a number of teams will be capped stressed and forced to deal good players in order to retain some of their core players. Will this organization be creative enough and bold enough to take advantage of the situation? (Right now I believe that it is more likely than not that we deal our first round pick in order to make a substantial deal.) The most important office in the organization will be the pro scouting office. In my view we don't need a dramatic remake of the roster. If we can bring in two second line caliber of players that will also allow us to reconstruct the third line and make it a more contributing line for a team that desperately needs to spread out its scoring.
I like Krueger a lot but I do have one concern about him which you intentionally or not alluded to in your comment about how he handled Dahlin. Krueger is a coach who believes in discipline and line coherence. Will he loosen up on the reigns for Dahlin and Skinner and allow them to play a little more freelance game? The player that I thought he stifled the most with his tight system was Skinner. He needs to allow him to play his sharpshooting and roaming game without harping on maintaining his positional responsibilities.
Let's not forget that Krueger's coaching history in Europe with the Swiss team was that he was coaching less talented teams against demonstrably superior teams. In order to have a chance he needed his team to play a tight brand of hockey where the focus was more on preventing the other team from scoring rather than focus on your team's offense. I'm hoping that Krueger will adjust his mindset a tad. To his defense he was coaching a team last year that had a limited range of scorers. So I understand his conservative approach.
I have said it before so I apologize for the redundancy. While we all are focusing on bringing in talent for our lines the most important player/s for us will be the goaltenders. If they in tandem can provide consistently solid play then that in itself will be a key ingredient to a successful season.
-
2
-
-
17 hours ago, PASabreFan said:
Don't you think Terry was smart enough to see energy trends coming? Isn't that why he cashed in in 2011?
Were the people who invested in the hotel, airline and restaurant business smart enough to predict that there was gong to be a pernicious pandemic?
The Pegulas were to an extent cashing out of the energy business and diversifying into other businesses. They were not able to see into the future like everyone else wasn't able to.
-
3 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:
Is it wrong to mention that in ROR's last year with us we had 62 points - 68 pts this year in 13 less games - and 76 the previous year?
ROR went to an excellent team and he thrived, so what? We stunk with him.
I fully understand our biggest need is likely 2C and it's easy to correlate ROR to that. I'm still glad ROR isn't our 2C.
When I think about how ROR expressed his frustration and how Eichel express his - I see two entirely different things. Not that I'm happy our franchise player is frustrated.
The issue isn't that ROR got traded. The issue is that he got traded in an imbalanced deal. It's obvious to me that this deal was forced before a reasonable deal could be made because the organization wasn't willing to wait for a better deal because it didn't want to pay him a bonus.
ROR was tired of the losing and publicly expressed his frustration. Big freaking deal! So the response by the organization was to jettison a key player on the team and get less than value back. That makes no sense. That's like getting into a duel and before the count down is finished you shoot yourself in the foot. How smart is that?
You can minimize how damaging this trade fiasco was but the reality is that this foolish transaction still haunts this troubled franchise because it is still trying to fill the void left by the departed player. So what is the lesson to be learned? Acting in a dumb manner is not a smart way to do business!
-
1 hour ago, dudacek said:
You're not wrong, but you're missing the big picture. Everybody has to fill out their roster
The Sabres have nearly $3 million to spend per roster spot. The league average is under $2 million.
Some teams (Leafs Barrie, Bolts Cirelli, Blues Pietrangelo, Canucks Markstrom, Coyotes Hall to name a few) literally do not have the space to re-sign a key piece without sacrificing another key piece or pieces, or pay a premium to dump bad contracts.
Few teams have the space to sign free agents or take on bad contracts. Those that do will be looking at the best buyer's market for player acquisition in recent memory.
You are astute and perspicacious.
What is made evident with your wise commentary is if this bedraggled franchise acts smartly and seizes the opportunities available in the market this team can be meaningfully improved. It's not about spending unwisely as it is about being judicious with your resources.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Taro T said:
Whether the original idea to move O'Reilly came from ownership or executive, the idea that he had to be moved prior to paying the bonus was definitely on ownership.
I agree with you. That was my point. I certainly understand why the organization, and most notably the owner, would be upset with a highly paid player who was soon to collect a sizeable bonus publicly expressing his unhappiness with the team he was on. However, by reacting too quickly to dispatch him before a fair-value deal could be worked out it ended up being an act of self-sabotage.
It's not unfair to say that because of the two deals that I mentioned (the first round pick for Lenher and the ROR deal) this franchise was demonstrably set back. Instead of building on what it had it had to fill the holes that it dug.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Sabre fan said:
don't forget we gave away Kane as well for a bag of hockey pucks...and a side note I find it hard to believe that Pegulas worried about ROR's bonus when they throw money around like it's nothing (which it is to them)...hell Jack ***** every year that he hates losing so what's the difference from when ROR stated he hated losing and tanking on purpose? I totally agree losing quality in ROR and Kane for nothing, just like losing Briere and Peca years ago for nothing, sets the team back again and again. Just poor management year after year...
AP's John Wawrow has not conclusively stated but has indicated that there were strong suggestions that the owner was not willing to pay the bonus and wanted the player moved out before the bonus payment.
-
7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Also see Johnson, Ryan 2019
I don't understand your response. Could you elaborate? This selection was a reasonable pick. That is not to say that the trade package made much sense.
I have always felt that the ROR trade deal was influenced by the owner who wasn't willing to pay the bonus to the disgruntled player than it was by the GM. If the organization would have paid the bonus and then scanned the market the return for him would have been significantly greater.
-
1
-
Jeremy Roenick Sues NBC Sports for Anti-Straight Discrimination in Firing
in The Aud Club
Posted
People who are in front of the mike a lot are inevitably going to say stupid stuff. Even people who are not "predisposed" (as you state) are at times going to say something foolish and offensive. If he has a history of saying inappropriate things and has been warned about it by his bosses and ignores the warnings then there are consequences. If he is such a liability in front of the mike then don't hire him or renew his contract. What intensifies the "offensive " comments are that they are then constantly being re-looped by other outlets.
What I find troubling is this quick resorting to boycott in a variety of forms with someone who affiliates with someone you don't like or says something that you disagree with. If you don't like what is being said then turn the dial and find another outlet. The quick draw resorting to "cancelling" out is becoming too prevalent to the extent that it is stifling communication.