JohnC
-
Posts
6,062 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
5 hours ago, Zamboni said:
Posters have their minds already made up about Sam. This is an exercise in futility.
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.
-
6 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Krueger has never tried Sam at centre that I'm aware of. Housley tried him with two replacement level players, it didn't work, he never tried it again.
Both coaches preferred him at wing given the players they had. I also think Sam prefers wing. He is a good winger and we don't have many. I think he should stay on the wing.
None of these things mean Sam cannot play centre, or that he was given a good shot at the position and failed.
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.
-
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
Only 2 since ROR left. Housley and Krueger.
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.
-
2 hours ago, dudacek said:
Right. Because all good centres are burners.
Joe Thornton, Henrik Sedin, those guys definitely needed to be moved to wing after sucking as young centres.
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.
-
59 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Sam Reinhart has played centre for an extended period twice: nine games as an 18-year-old on one of the worst teams in hockey history, and a similar stretch between Benoit Pouliot and Seth Griffith at 21 on a team that was nearly as bad.
He is a natural centre and the fact the Sabres never developed him into one is one of the more unsung failures of this era of ineptitude, but the window has closed. He is a winger now.
He probably still would be the 2nd best centre on this roster, but that’s more a commentary on the roster than his chances of being a solution.
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.
-
3
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, dudacek said:
I agree with this philosophy, and Adams very clearly preaches it. Does he practice it? Does Dudley?
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.
-
3 hours ago, dudacek said:
I’m certainly in favour of Dudley, who checks The missing boxes in the current braintrust and seems to be philosophical fit to the type of player evaluation system Adams is preaching.
The open question is whether this admitted maverick personality is a fit in the team/consensus model Adams and the Pegulas want to operate under.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, PASabreFan said:
Dunno. I just know I'm not telling the assistant assistant manager at Tops I have herpes.
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.
-
3 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:
They have HIPAA on their side.
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.
-
5 minutes ago, john wawrow said:
it's been difficult to pin this one down, and a reason why i've had difficulty laying all the blame on Botterill for the trade.
though i don't know for certain whether pressure came from above, i do know JB was under a lot of pressure to complete the trade before O'Reilly's bonus kicked in first thing next morning.
at this point, it's going to be difficult to prove one way or another, because people will now have agendas to say one thing or another.
that said, i'd say it's a 50-50 one way or the other.
jw
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.
-
3 minutes ago, john wawrow said:
neat theory.
it's wrong. but it's a neat one, nonetheless.
jw
note: you could've asked me politely, as i'm right here. but since you didn't, i see no need to reveal why you're wrong, just that you are.
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.
-
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
I don't remember which thread I put it in but someone suggested this draft was deeper than normal and I said no. The more I look at it, I think it is slightly deeper than normal. It is above say 2017 but below a 2015.
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.
-
1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:
I'm envious. In PA, what I've heard is that the mask mandate is impossible to enforce. People can claim they have medical conditions that prevent them from wearing a mask, right down to mental illness, which could be something as common as anxiety about covering your mouth. And no documentation is needed. I'll say this. The mask wearing has picked up a lot as cases have spiked in the south and west. It's weird how we tie ourselves to what's happening in distant places, rather than maintaining a position of, "We don't have a lot of cases here, let's keep it that way."
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.
-
2 hours ago, Curt said:
Oh yes. I wasn’t saying it made no sense to bring Dudley in, I was just referring to the title.
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.
-
17 hours ago, Curt said:
Well, if they are not willing to pay him what he thinks he deserves, then he probably isn’t going to Buffalo. Regardless of the title, he would most likely be in an advisory role to Adams. Perhaps similar to what he was doing in Car, as Brawndo just described. The title could be Assistant GM, Director of Player Personel, Assistant Director of Scouting, etc. I doubt it’s the title that matters. It will probably be the duties and compensation that matter.
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.
-
1
-
-
On 7/4/2020 at 6:01 PM, Weave said:
Finished up a pretty good sized project today. Had to make a Home Depot run. Today was the first time I became genuinely angry at the people around me. About 25% of the people in the store were maskless. Ridiculous. I gor fed up enough that I finally made a comment in the checkout line. Mr. Maskless in front of me didn’t respond.
Arrogant SOBs that find their convenience more important than public safety. Just go out and about wearing a T shirt with a big middle finger on it, because you’re basically doing the same thing when you go into enclosed public places without a mask. FU too.
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.
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I just want them to take the player that's the best at hockey, ties be damned.
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.
-
2 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:
Id have to think if TBL was going to consider a trade, a Risto contract isn’t something they’d want to take on. They’d want prospects, picks, cheap players.
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.
1 minute ago, Thorny said:I would, as he's already the player, right now, we'd be HOPING that pick *MIGHT* become ONE DAY. Jack is in his prime, right now.
Besides, luckily, JT Miller didn't cost that. We'd be looking at a future 1st, instead. In other words, a steal.
If it were a future #1 I would make the deal. If it was this year's #1 I wouldn't.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Thorny said:
I'm looking and hoping for more of a JT miller type deal, or ROR, where almost nothing, relatively, was given up.
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.
-
1 minute ago, Thorny said:
It wasn't my proposal it was @LGR4GM, I agree it would cost more.
And no I wouldn't make the deal you suggest.
In general our views in this topic are in alignment.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Thorny said:
We shouldn't plan for a situation where Cozens is the 2C as it's no guarantee - that's no way to run a franchise, relying on hope. Besides, we need another top 6 player REGARDLESS of if Cozens solidifies himself in that spot, down the line. Which, the likelihood goes up for, if he's brought along properly.
Of COURSE it makes sense to trade for a top tier centre, we need one! We of course need to be mindful of the assets it'll cost, and weight that as part of the decision making process, but it's a fault equation from the start if the second bolded, that "until", is included as part of the process. It's not until, it's "if".
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.
-
2 hours ago, Thorny said:
If it's a top 10 protected 1st next year, Mitts, and Johnson, it's such a no-brainer of a "yes" from us that I'm assuming it would cost more.
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.
-
33 minutes ago, Curt said:
Agree that it’s unlikely that Cirelli is both (1) moved, and (2) moved with the division to Buffalo.
Small quibble, Tampa was always in a fine position to resign Stamkos. The only question was if he wanted to go somewhere else or not. Specifically, whether he wanted to be close to home (Toronto).
My understanding is that he could have gotten more gross money signing with Toronto or New York. However, the salary differential was narrowed because Florida has no state income tax. As it stood he was in a good situation playing with a good organization that was a perennial cup contender. Considering all the factors he was in a good situation and decided to stay in a good situation. The same scenario applies to Cirelli as a player and Tampa as an organization.
In a year or two it is hoped that Cozens will develop into a 2C. So it doesn't make sense to trade for a top tier center and end up yielding a lot of assets for an already thin team. If I had to guess I would lean toward the front office making a deal for a player such as Anaheim's Adam Henrique to fill the position for the short term until Cozens is ready.
-
3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
He is an RFA without arbitration rights. He has almost zero leverage. He can holdout, but that isn’t good for anyone. He can sign in Europe, but that is a huge step down in competition and far from his home. His only real leverage is to sign a short-term deal until he can become a UFA, but that may limit his current income. The truth is if TB is foolish enough to trade him in the division, he’d sign and relatively quickly.
That said, TB traded Miller To Vancouver. If they have to trade Cirelli, expect a deal out West somewhere.
Also he only had 44 pts in 68 games. This isn’t exactly HOF production. He is a very good player, but again there are probably cheaper alternatives which are much more likely to get done then us acquiring Cirelli even with an offer sheet.
We need to be more realistic. If by some miracle he is acquired without destroying another part of the team, then great. However, I can almost guarantee Cirelli won’t be a Sabre next season.
Bullet points
1. TB will almost certainly keep Cirelli. They will find takers for two of their NTC players and two players like Gourde and Johnson looking for a fresh start.
2. Even if we make an Offer Sheet for Cirelli, it doesn’t mean he’ll sign.
3. Even if he does sign the offer sheet, TB will match it to keep him, as they can be over the cap in the off-season. This will actually give them the opportunity to still trade two NTCs and keep Cirelli without worrying about the contract negotiations or trade him with the contract done.4. Odds of them trading within the division are nearly zero.
We in general are in accord. My primary point in my post on this Cirelli subject is that I believe it is improbable that Tampa has any interest in trading him to the Sabres. And I don't believe the Sabres are willing to give up the bounty in assets required to acquire him even if he is willing to sign a deal.
As I said in my prior post Tampa is a well run organization that is known for its smart decisions. A lot of people thought that Tampa was not in a good position to sign Stamkos when he was a free agent. They got the deal done just as I believe they will do with Cirelli.
Rick Dudley Unlikely to Join Sabres
in The Aud Club
Posted
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.