JohnC

I'm not directing my comments to how you respond in your office because I am not in position to fully know what the work environment is. What I can say in a general sense is that sometimes the reason why people at work aren't fully heard is due to the presentation. If one comes off as too dismissive of the other individual's opinions because of the other person's age or time at the company then it shouldn't be surprising that the counter response would be defensive and negative. Sometimes even body language can be a block to communicating one's view before a word is even spoken. As you noted it goes both ways. What's become a lost art is the ability to listen. And that is an art that is an essential ingredient in making good company decisions.

Whether you are retired or not accumulated wisdom should not go wasted. Some people are wise beyond their years; while others are wise because of their years. ?

You make excellent points but I have a different perspective on a Dudley hire and usage. Without a doubt he has had a long and distinguished career in the hockey business. Just as there are different stages in life there are also different stages in the work world. One way of looking at it as a vocational lifespan. It is appropriate and smart to assess and then adjust what your role is in a business that you have been involved in one way or the other for nearly three quarters of a century. You are right that Dudley has an immensely greater amount of experience than Adams for the GM position. But that doesn't necessarily mean that at this stage of his hockey life he should be the GM of the Sabres and would be better than Adams at this particular time. Sometimes new blood, energy and perspective can invigorate a stale operation. The role that I envision Dudley doing that best serves the organization is utilizing his expertise in scouting both in the pro and amateur ranks. I think it would be a mistake to place Dudley as a sidekick subordinate GM whose influence might benefit the inexperienced new GM. That is a recipe for an office disaster because it is too tempting for the oldster to dominate the youngster and create an atmosphere of conflict and resentment. This is a critical offseason for this meandering franchise. My optimistic view is if the organization makes a few judicious personnel decisions it can uplift not only the team but also the exasperated fan base. If it doesn't make the right decisions this franchise will continue to be irrelevant and increase the level of indifference by its fading fan base.

What the posters think is immaterial. What counts is what the HC thinks. He is slotted where the coaches for two different staffs put him. That speaks for itself on this issue.

With respect to the highlighted area we are in accord. The more salient point isn't whether he can play center or not. It's what position is he best at. The coaches believe that it is at the wing position. The player in question also seems to agree to that slotting.

They both came to the same conclusion even when there was a major void at the 2C position. I'm a Sam fan. He is one of the smartest players on the team if not in the league. It is telling that there is so much talk about filling the void at 2C from the outside when he is on the roster. He's doing fine where he is at on the wing.

How many coaches has Sam played for? They have all come to the same conclusion. I would love to have Sam be capable of playing the 2C spot. I'm sure you will agree that since the departure of ROR there is a desperate need to fill that vacancy. Yet it has not materialized. Why do you think that is the case? As it stands Sam is a first line winger playing with Jack and making it a very productive first line. That's fine with me.

Sam is a natural center in the lower ranks of hockey because of his exceptional hockey IQ. But in the NHL his skating limitations associated with speed do not allow him to succeed as a top two line center. As a center he just couldn't make that qualitative leap into this league. He still has great instincts/intelligence that can be utilized as a winger. And that is where he is at. I simply do not blame the organization for him not overcoming his limitations. In this case he is what he is. And he is being used where he should be used.

My sense is that Adams is more receptive to the "consensus" decision-making approach than Dudley. It seems to me that Dudley is more head-strong and authoritarian in how he functions in an organizational setting. The key to maximizing Dudley's talents and minimizing his liabilities within the Sabre organization is putting him in the right role assuming he is interested in being hired or the organization has a desire to hire him. The major benefit that the organization will have with him as an employee is utilizing his talents in evaluating players both in the pro ranks and amateur ranks. I want to make it clear that I don't want to wrongly stereotype Dudley as a person and his management style. This is just my sense and opinion.

When forming a consensus what you want in the room are people who have independent views and are willing to argue on behalf of their positions even if it goes against conventional wisdom. You don't have to accept them but if the person has credibility and a strong rational behind his views you should seriously consider them. What it comes down to is that you are not challenging people so much as you are challenging ideas. If you only have people in the room who are too willing to conform rather than independently think then you are going to have less creativity and more mediocrity. A good leader is a good listener and is willing to hear many views before making a decision.

I strongly recommend that you keep your pants on if asked for proof of your condition. This is a TMI situation. In this case public ignorance is very appropriate.

I'm not sure how it applies in this mask scenario? As an example if you have children and the school system requires you to have proof that they have the required vaccinations you have to provide the school with the medical documentation.

It's obvious that this trade was a disaster and has had a lingering damaging effect on the team. For the sake of argument if it were Terry P who forced the trade to be made prior to the bonus being paid it put the GM in a difficult position because he couldn't publicly state that it was the owner who created this boondoggle. I suspect now that Botterill is no longer associated with the team that it will come out who was responsible for this ridiculously unbalanced deal.

I will now take the opportunity to ask the esteemed hirsute reporter if you believe Botterill would have been retained if he was more receptive to the restructuring (thinning out) of the hockey operation? Or another way of saying it is when you are not receptive to the boss's suggestion/request you are looked at less favorably by your superiors and put in a very precarious position.

I have heard multiple NHL analysts say that if you are drafting in the top ten to maybe 12 you will have an opportunity to select a very good prospect. Almost all of them are unanimous about the top three with the next grouping of 7 or so players jockeying for position with each other.

The mask rule is actually simple to enforce if the rules are clear and unambiguous with few exceptions. And it needs to originate from the state government with the force of the law/regulations behind it. If you allow exceptions then you are sabotaging the efficacy of the law. If in the very rare case that there is a legitimate medical reason not to wear a mask then a doctor's note should be required. That would stop most of the fakers from trying to skirt the mask rule.

I didn't take it as you suggesting that we shouldn't bring in Dudley. It would be interesting to know what Dudley's plans are now that he is no longer associated with Carolina? I'm wondering if he wants to get back into the grind or be more of of a consultant who works at a more leisurely schedule. He certainly would be a good resource for a young GM and a less than fully staffed scouting department to rely on.

Having his experienced voice in the room when considering trades and draft prospects would be an asset . Even if he isn't the decision maker his point of view would be invaluable in an offseason most of us expect/hope trades will be made to strengthen the roster.

The Home Depot in Maryland that I go to requires masks to enter and they limit the number of people in the establishment at one time. Maryland and the county I live in require masks for indoor activities. What I noticed at this particular Home Depot is that it had to post a security person at the entrance in order to enforce the mask rule. This individual ignorance and selfishness is getting tough to tolerate.

If we keep the pick regardless what teams do who draft ahead of us we will get a good player. What we should be hoping for is a team or two ahead of us select a defenseman so one of the high quality forwards will still be on the board to select from. Most of the analysts indicate that the top three picks will be upper tier prospects and predictable selections. Right now I prefer to keep the pick unless that pick can be used in a trade for a high quality young second line forward.

I consider Risto's contract a reasonable and fair value contract for him. It is probable that Tampa will have to move out players to retain Cirelli. This is a smart and well run franchise. They will get it done. If it were a future #1 I would make the deal. If it was this year's #1 I wouldn't.

The ROR deal was a boondoggle for us. It's remarkable how one bad deal could have such a negative lingering effect. The lesson to be learned in that deal is not to be forced to move a player until you can get fair value for that player. Miller is a good player. However, I wouldn't be willing to give up this year's first round draft pick for him.

In general our views in this topic are in alignment.

When you talk about trading for a top tier 2C there is an assumption that the price is going to be high. That's the only way that type of deal is going to be secured. It will require multiple assets moved out to get that valued type of second line center. As I posted in a prior post if theoretically Cirelli or a similar type talent could be dealt for you have to consider giving up a player such as Risto, Cozens and a first round pick, either this year or next. I wouldn't do it.

The deal you propose is certainly a terrific deal for us. But it is not a reasonable and fair value deal for Tampa. For the sake of discussion if a deal could be made would you deal Risto, Cozens and a 1st next year? I wouldn't. And let's not forget there is an assumption that Cirelli would be willing to sign a long term deal with us. I just don't see the player agreeing to a pre-trade deal in order to make the trade happen.