JohnC

Why do you think he is a cancer in the locker room? It's the opposite. He is one of the more popular and engaging personalities on the team. If you want to criticize his play, that's fair game. However, speculating that he is a bad dude behind closed doors when there is not a scintilla of evidence of any disruptive behavior is patently unfair. For what it is worth, I have a minority view on Skinner. There is no question that his more freewheeling style of play can be problematic. But his biggest asset as a goal scorer can still be utilized. At least for this upcoming season, I would keep him.

How long have your neighbors been teaching?

You sucked him dry. Is that why they droop so much? 😁

Hustling and hitting are not gone in the games I watch. In the playoffs, that rough and tough aspect of the game are even more pronounced. One of the reasons why the Sabres have been an inconsequential team is because they lack the physicality that good teams have. Playing tough hockey is not about fighting; it's about playing harder and tougher. Fighting is irrelevant to that aspect of the game. In reality, most fights are contrived where the combatants agree in advance to drop their glovers. It's so stupid and idiotic.

I listened to Douglas Jemal when he decided to take on the Statler project after the death of Croce, who bought the building but ended up dying in a plane accident. As with the Seneca One project it was fascinating and impressive to listen to him talk about his vision for each project. The Seneca One project was a multi-phased project that encompassed not only the big building but also the surrounding area. A number of people got a lot of attention when they tried to resurrect the Statler. That all failed for a variety of reasons, one foreign investor was a fraud. The developing business is a very complicated and challenging endeavor. Douglas Jemal knows what he is doing. And he does it. A lot of developers talk big but end up being overwhelmed by the finances and complexity of these projects. Not Jemal. He's a doer and a finisher. This outsider is one of the biggest assets in the local community.

I agree with you that the coaching search was a charade. There was even talk that he wanted to replace Granato with Ruff at the Iend of the season, prior to it being concluded. I have no problem with the hire. His selection made a lot of sense for a variety of reasons. However, spouting BS doesn't appeal to me. What this team is needs is evident to everyone. There's no mystery there. Whether he gets it done is another matter. I do believe that he is going to be more aggressive this offseason than usual. (My opinion.)

Olympic and college hockey don't allow fighting. Both games are entertaining hockey to watch. Anyone who has watched top tier college hockey recognizes that it doesn't lack for physicality. Last year, Cozens instigated a fight to stir up his own players. He got his face smashed in, and he wasn't the same player for quite a while. It seems that most hockey fans enjoy it. I do not. It should be banned. My recommendation for hockey fans who like fighting is that they should go to boxing and MMA matches. Hockey hooliganism is outdated. I will say it again that tough and hard play have nothing to do with fighting!

The biggest challenge for the GM to accomplish his offseason to do list is adding a 2/3 C to the roster. The issue is what is he willing to give up and who is available. If he gets a good 2/3 C, it will create a lot of line flexibility. Interesting offseason for this GM. Action should be happening soon as the draft approaches.

I'm not into fighting. In fact, I believe it should be banned because of the player safety issue. (I usually get booed when I say that.) 😀 As you smartly point out, there is a big distinction between playing grittier/tougher and fighting. It's indisputable that this team needs to get grittier. You accomplish that by bringing in some players who add that element to the roster.

A lot of Canadians drive to Buffalo and fly out of our airport because the flights are significantly cheaper. As you point out, if you want to experience the benefits (entertainment etc.) of a Big City it is a positive to have a city such as Toronto within a reasonable distance. In essence, each location feeding off one another. The best of both worlds.

He's also in the process of developing the Statler. And as you indicate a number of other projects. He does his homework (due diligence) before taking on a project. When he starts a project, they get done. The development world is going through tough challenges with the cost of financing relatively high. This outside developer is a local gem.

One of the biggest boosters of Buffalo architecture is Douglas Jemal, an out-of-town developer. He has done a lot of restoration projects in DC, Jersey and NYC. Over the past ten years or so he has gotten involved in a number of projects in Buffalo and western NY. There isn't anyone in the country who praises the rich history of its architecture more than he does. And there isn't anyone in the country or local area who has successfully taken on as many projects as he has. The Statler is now one of his current major projects.

I have been out of town for a long time. Is Allen St. still a little off-beat part of town? I mean that as a good thing. Or has it gone through gentrification and lost its character?

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/authors/schopp-and-bulldog Within this WGR link is a 23 min segment with Tony Ferrari on the Schoop and the Bulldog Show talking about the draft. He talks about who he thinks Buffalo might draft and about the draft class. At the end of the interview Benson's name was brought up. He gave a glowingly assessment of him.

As you observantly point out, KA has restocked the system. When he took over, he said it was a priority to accomplish that mission. Most observers will acknowledge that he has done that well. The Sabres are now at the next stage where winning now trumps not only the development of players but also the accumulation of players/prospects. As you have frequently noted (rightly so), this franchise has the cap space, prospects in the system and draft picks to parlay to upgrade this current roster. This is going to be a critical offseason. The hiring of Lindy was a good decision. He needs to follow up this critical hire by bringing in enough players to improve and better balance this roster. At this point, excuses can no longer be tolerated. Your record is your record.

The question of are we better with the trades than not in of itself reflects the distorted way in which this franchise has been run. For the most part, we gave up developed players only to bring on developing players. It's like running a race, and then when you get to the halfway point, you go back to the starting line. With the new collection of players, you may or not be better. But the reality is that because you went back to the drawing board, you are closer to the starting line. It's like panning for fools' gold. As @Thorny keenly pointed out, instead of focusing on the return, put your efforts into surrounding your own top tier players with the right support players, so that they would in a position to succeed. We lost sight of the goal and got captured by the never-ending process. This franchise has churned through players, coaches and front offices. There has been too much motion and not enough wisdom. Taking two steps forward to then go two steps back doesn't move you forward. Foolishness followed by more foolishness. The reality is that players such as Eichel, Reinhart, Montour, Ullmark have had outstanding success with other teams. They are not better players now than when they were with the Sabres. They are simply on better teams. Our front office never understood something that should have been quite obvious.

The "diss" the fans issue was blown out of proportion. The raising or not raising of the sticks became a meaningless gesture. The stark reality is that the team was not only not talented enough but also wasn't well constructed. Too many people got caught up on a meaningless gesture and used that issue to express their frustration with this exasperating franchise. The attention should be on adding talent, playing better and better coaching. Distractions don't lead to solutions.

Stamkos is not coming here under any circumstances. He has no desire to come to Buffalo. Kane is another matter. If offered a better contract than others bidding for his services, I'm sure he would be interested to come back home. I think adding Kane to this roster would be a terrific move that not only could jolt this lineup but also the fanbase.

I don't understand your fixation on this particular player. Your point that he was part of a failed 3rd rebuild doesn't resonate with me. So were a lot of players who will be on this season's roster! Are you arguing that Dahlin should be sent packing because he has been part of this failed reconstruction? Of course you are not. Girgs is a fourth line player, nothing more. He's an earnest player who consistently plays hard. And he is a good PK player. If he remains with the Sabres it will be as a fourth line player who plays that role well. So why are you so zealous about dispatching him for a player who most likely plays a similar game and isn't better? I'm not arguing to keep him or not. I don't believe that it is a consequential decision. But what I'm not going to do is point the finger at an honest player (as you are doing) who has nothing to do with the underperformance of this team. It's indisputable that this roster needs some reshaping. However you want to look at it, he's not the problem, and never has been.

It's obvious this roster needs players who play a tougher brand of game. But that will be insufficient if the rest of the lineup collectively doesn't also add a more disciplined element to their game. Obviously, not every player is built to play a rugged style of game. But that doesn't mean that there can't be a greater emphasis on responsible two-way and consistent energetic play. How many games did you watch where it seemed that this team played like it was fatigued while the opposition played with energy. Especially on back to back games, the teams simply won't have it. That's the reality of a long and grinding season. It just seems that it happened to us more than it did to other teams. We now have a coach that will hold the players accountable. That in itself should make a big difference.

I have somewhat of a different take on Greenway. I agree with you and @dudacek's assessments that Greenway's play lacks a grit component to it. That dog on bone style doesn't describe how he plays. (As both of you accurately describe.) On the other hand, I will say that he plays to his size and plays a strong game. He isn't easily moved in either of the zones and he rarely gets knocked off the puck. In my view, he and Benson are the two players who give us net presence, something that this team is dismal at. There is no question that Greenway lacks the speed and quickness to be able to excel in the tight man on man style of play. Yet, although he lacks the required quickness, he's a moose on the ice that is difficult for the opposition to move. In my view, he was a solid cost/benefit pickup.

If either player demonstrably outplays the players in camp assembled by the GM, then they should make the roster. If Adams doesn't bring in enough talent, then that is another issue. It's not inconceivable, but less likely, that one of these rookies makes the team even with an infusion of outside talent.

Considering the roster assembled entering camp, Benson earned a spot. Whether the GM failed to start off with a more robust roster in camp is another issue. Not only did Benson legitimately earned a spot but he also acquitted himself quite well throughout the season.

We are in accord on the issue of rookies earning a spot/s and the necessity of bringing in talent from the outside. The 3C issue is a big question. Is the GM going to be bold or timid in his approach this offseason? As has been discussed before, if the GM adds a 2/3 C player to the roster, there will be a lot of flexibility in how the lines get assembled.

What happens if Kulich and/or Savoie shine in camp and demonstratively outperform other players competing for a roster spot? Do you send them down because you are wedded to an approach that is usually the right way to go. Or do you make a judgment on an individual case that goes against the norm. I was surprised when Benson made the roster last year. As it turned out, he was an asset and not a liability. In general, the patient approach you are advocating for is the right approach to take. But sometimes, a player playing beyond expectations should be judged on performance. It's a delicate balance that calls for a lot of judgment. In general, I so agree with you that when in doubt take the longer development route. But there are exceptions to every rule.