JohnC

Was Giroux still chirping at the end of the game when he looked up at the score board? I thought Power played well in this game. It wasn't a dominant performance but simply did his job. I'll take that level of play.

Do you know what isn't funny? Screwing up a franchise to the point that he has made it an irrelevant and laughingstock franchise. And there is nothing funny about how he has crushed a once vibrant hockey market into an apathetic market where many games are played in front of empty seats. As far as I'm concerned, this fool owner can get on his tax write off big boat and sale away. This owner is a joke! Is that funny enough for you.

Every team faces issues with players who for a number of reasons prefer moving on. And every organization faces issues regarding makeup of roster and players fitting into their team concept. The reality is that when a franchise has been flailing for as long as they Sabres have, it is going to happen with greater frequency. JJP was in a contract situation that could give him additional leverage. So he used it. Good for him. On the other side of the equation, I believe that the Sabres got a fair return on the trade. It's all part of the business.

The best thing that Tuch can do to move the negotiation needle closer to his side is to have a good year, and better yet a good start of the season.

You are making a claim that he wasn't signed due to the owner's reluctance to pay him in his next contract is based on what? Your assumption based on your disdain for the owner? There is no one in this forum who has more antipathy toward this fool owner than I do. I would conjecture that you and I are in the same contempt strata directed toward this stubborn and incompetent owner. So let's be fair here. That doesn't mean that money was the reason why he was dealt. The evidence based on many reports is that he didn't want to remain for a number of reasons. One of them had to do with his relationship with the coach and I'm sure that he didn't want to be stuck in this third-rate organization that has little chance under the current organizational scheme to be a serious franchise. (As you and many others have frequently noted.) The GM wanted to sign him to a new deal. And he publicly stated so on a number of occasions. JJP had no interest to sign a deal. So he was dealt for what I consider to be a fair-trade deal where the return was Kesserling and Doan. With respect to Doan, he's giving us what we hoped he would do so. Kesserling has been injured so that is a TBD issue.

Is that an extender to stiffen the limp pole? 😀

As you well know, except for the few elite goalies, predicting how a goalie is going to perform is a bad bet unless you have money to lose. What makes it even more challenging is that past performance isn’t always a good guide. The best way to help your goalie is to provide him with strong support in front of him.

Lyon starting the season as the opening goalie is a marvelous opportunity for him. If he plays well for a team that desperately needs to have a good start, it wouldn't be a surprise (at least for me) that he becomes the #1 goalie. UPL has been plagued with injuries and inconsistencies. The opportunities have been there for him to seize. He just has not been able to be dependable for a variety of reasons. Just maybe, being seriously being pushed by UPL might be the best thing for him. The Sabres are far from being a well-rounded team. But if he can get consistent solid goalie, we should be able to be in the playoff mix for the whole season. I'm predicting a Sabre win tonight. Why? Hometown bias.

How the player plays will determine how he will be handled.

Your perspective is different from mine. Go ahead and believe what you want to believe. So be it.

You may not be aware of it but you were with your response. That's okay. I'm not bothered by it.

I disagree that with a more astute GM it would take 3 to 4 years to break through the perpetual funk. If a new GM added a credible goaltender, that in itself would put this team in such a better position to succeed. There are enough solid players and young players with upside on this team to make it a playoff qualifying team if it had the right backstop/s. Why is it that a GM for Washington Capitals can bring in goalies for a miniscule price while our GM has never adequately been able to satisfactorily address the position? The GM placed his bet on UPL to be the anchor goalie. I have no problem with that. However, he never had an adequate backup play just in case it didn't work out. That's an example of his poor judgment. He's a checkers player in a game of chess.

Your observation about me is correct. I have lost patience with this owner. A generation of his foolishness has become intolerable for me. He has eroded what should be a vibrant hockey market to being an apathetic market that is irrelevant to the hockey world. I wish this stubborn and non- talking owner would sail away in his tax write off big boat. You are being silly.

As you point out, the McDavid deal is a contract that specifically deals to his situation. It made a lot of sense for him to get a bridge deal that will get him to the next NHL elevated financial agreement. The player and his representatives made a deal that they believed was in his best interest. How does this contract affect Tuch? I don't think it does. Tuch is in a much different situation. He's now in his prime and in a few years he will probably be on a downslide. So maybe he would rather lock in a longer-term deal now. What's also interesting is how does the Sabre organization view the Tuch contract scenario. Would they rather give him a bulked up short-term deal or give him a longer deal that will carry them over into the new NHL higher cost landscape? What makes the situation more complicated for all parties is that next year the financial landscape will change and everyone will have to adjust to that richer reality. The players who will be the most affected are players such as Dahlin and Tage who already have signed long-term contracts and will soon have undervalued contracts.

Selling out the arena for the opening game is not an achievement, especially when a quarter or more of the fans are rooting for the visiting team. Regardless what the announced attendance was for games last year, when I watched the games I saw a lot of empty seats that belied the announced tickets sold. When a person has a purchased ticket and can’t go to the game and can’t give it away, that is telling and an indictment. I want the Sabres to succeed and am rooting for them. But what I see is what I see.

I know that I can’t drive the owner out. That doesn’t mean that it can’t be pointed out that as an owner he is a dismal failure. Are the complaints repetitious? Absolutely so. And the reason is that his foolishness has been going on for a generation. His extended record is his record. And that in itself is an absurdity.

The NHL establishment didn't lead him astray. As you point out, I'm sure he solicited opinions on who would be good candidates to staff his franchise. And I'm sure that a number of candidate suggestions were offered. But he was the one who made the selection/s. The problem is the manner in which he has structured the organization so that he would have a decisive say (maybe less so now) is what has weighed this franchise down. What has crippled this franchise is covered by your first two points: 1.) He thinks he knows the game and 2.) He gets infatuated with people he knows and likes. KA is an example of that last point.

Jack wanted out. Reinhart wanted out. Ullmark wanted out. Montour wanted out. JJP wanted out. If I say something that is inaccurate, then disputing my comments is warranted. However, when someone says something that is factual, then resorting to the tired argument that you won’t be happy until you drive the owner to moving the franchise is a lame position to take.

The problem isn’t attracting high end free agents as it is keeping your best players who no longer want to be associated with an inept franchise that they don’t believe is and will be a serious franchise. We had Eichel, Reinhart, Montour and Ullmark on the team. They all wanted out and got out. A dysfunctional organization is never an appealing work place to be at or go to.

The players on the AHL team are older and more experienced than the younger players in the juniors. Even our young prospects, such as Helenius and Östlund, can help in guiding Mrtka through the rigors of the higher league. The coaching and the facilities are definitely better in Rochester. If the young defenesman ends up struggling too much, then send him down. Again, let his play determine how he should be handled. What's wrong with that? There is no one way to handle all young players/prospects. Why be so adamant about following the standard approach when sometimes it isn't the most suitable approach for a particular player. If there is an exception to the rule, then have enough flexibility to adjust.

On Rochester, he will be surrounded by players who are more experienced than he is. And as @Andrew Amerk noted, that wouldn’t be the case in the lower league.

If during his stint in Rochester he demonstrates that he can handle the rigors of the AHL, then keep him there. Let his play be the determining factor. From the little that I’ve seen of him it seems to me that he can handle the challenges, including struggles, of the higher league. One benefit he will have in the AHL that he won’t get in the juniors is mentorship by older players.

I didn't say that he should be on the team now. What I did say is that when watching him I didn't get the sense that he was overwhelmed like a lot of young players would be with their first exposure to the highest level of play.

This issue is a judgment call. However, I see it differently. What happens if he plays well in the AHL? From the little that I have seen playing with a higher level of talent, it doesn't appear to have hurt him. In fact, I would argue otherwise, that it has and will accelerate his development. Is he an exception to the rule regarding the handling young prospects? I think so yet understand why others don't in this particular case.

Sometimes explanations are simpler than one might expect. The problem isn't so much about the amount of money he spent as it is in the decisions being made. The owner came in gangbusters thinking that throwing money around would give his team instant credibility. What he learned is spending money foolishly, no matter what the amount is, is simply wasting money. The owner has made a number of bad decisions, especially in staffing. And to compound the problem, this self-made billionaire is a stubborn man who was inclined to double down rather than alter course. The reality is that this franchise is structured the way he wanted it and is staffed the way he wanted it. Ineptitude is ineptitude. He has sabotaged himself. Has he learned from his mistakes? Maybe so. I'm not really sure because this fellow with the off big boat doesn't talk much.