JohnC

The added value that Mitts gave to the Sabres was that when needed he could be moved to the top line without it being diminished. Also, he had the versatility to play both the center and wing positions. Don't discount his versatility value. Don't misinterpret what I'm saying here because from the little I have seen of Byram, I am impressed. This was a good hockey trade for each team.

The trading of Casey had a number of facets to it that went beyond the talents of a particular player. It dealt with the cap configuration and the length of his prospective contract. Casey was having a good year that increased his market value. It's a business. His cost for us was going to be high. Another facet to the Mitts deal had to do with altering the mix/balance of the roster. We got a legitimate first or second pair defenseman who had offensive skills. This was simply a good hockey trade for each of the trading teams. I've heard Granato talk about Krebs on a number of occasions. It appears to me that he has a higher opinion of him and his potential than many here have. Is he going to be better than Mitts? I'm more inclined to say no. That's not to say that he won't become a credible third center with better wingers. That's an open question for me. With respect to your postulation that the Krebs issue falls within the GM's philosophy of promoting within: Absolutely so. There's no question about it. The GM's often stated view is that it is better to build from within when you can without giving up assets. There's no hidden agenda here. For the most part, what he says he is going to do is exactly what he is doing. Coming from a Mitts afficionado (me), from the little I have seen of Byram, I like this deal. You give up value to get value.

Yes.

The blueline unit is getting full. Dahlin, Power, Joki, Byram, Ryan Johnson, Samuelsson, Bryson, Clifton are in the mix. Will there be a trade in the offseason to add to forward group? It shouldn't be forgotten that Quinn who has played center should be back to health next season. This is going to be an interesting offseason. The GM has prospect, draft, and player chips to parlay. He needs to judiciously utilize them to improve the roster. With respect to Krebs replacing Casey, I think that Granato has a higher regard for Krebs than you have. We haven't seen Krebs play with wingers who can score. Don't write him off just yet as the possible third line center.

I have the opposite take on what these games mean than you do. In general, for most teams at this stage of the season these are meaningful games. It seems that half the teams are either vying to get in the playoffs, or even if assured of a playoff spot, are playing to improve their position for a variety of reasons, such as home game advantages. The problem with the Sabres this season, as it was last season, is that it didn't play with the same desperation/intensity in the first half of the season. When reviewing this season, it will become apparent that for the most part this team was often lackluster against teams that they were superior to, the two Anaheim games standout to demonstrate that point. This team let too many points that were there for the taking to get away. When all is said and done, your record is what your record is. And you have to live with that. It just seems that every time the Sabres win you diminish the win and make the assumption that the other team didn't care. And every time they lose you spotlight the loss. You may not recognize it but you are applying an inconsistent standard when the Sabres either win or lose. There isn't anyone here who doesn't recognize that this has been a disappointing season, especially when the expectations were high entering it. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't acknowledge the positive when it does happen.

I'm not sure if Tage was ill or injured but he was playing hurt. There were a couple clips on the bench showing that he was in pain. It was a valiant effort on his part. He cares.

https://www.google.com/search?q=godfather+fabrizio+killed+by+michael's+men&oq=godfather+fabrizio+killed+by+michael's+men&aqs=chrome..69i57.14608j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:eb13717f,vid:FTYCOV-ir5c,st:0

For those who couldn't watch the game this is a 5 minute highlight. Within the link is a segment of the coach's postgame comments and player interviews. .https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/recap-oilers-at-sabres-3-9-24-6348587710112

For whatever reason, Skinner is fading. Recently, he's become an invisible player on the ice with little impact. I don't know what the problem is but we need him to get going.

Peterka was benched as was Skinner. In Granato's post game comments when asked about limiting minutes for certain player, he said he went with those players who gave us the best chance to win.

In the two games that you missed, Toronto and Edmonton, the Sabres played a hard two-way game throughout. Against two high-octane offenses we didn't give them much room to display their offensive talent. Both games were entertaining games. The shame of it is that we didn't play at this level in the first half of the season. You know very well that I was a Mitts fan. Getting Byram appears to be a good hockey trade, This guy is good. Our blue line has become good and deep. Our goaltending with UPL has been stellar. In saying that in these two games our team defense and goaltending have led this team is quite a turnaround in how most of us viewed this roster.

Some quick thoughts in an entertaining game: My first star for the Sabrees is UPL. It's really stunning of the metamorphic change in UPL's play. It seems that after every game as the season winds down, he solidifies himself as our #1 goalie. I thought that Cozens and Tuch played really well. Cozens is becoming a threat on the PK. I'm a Mitts fan. But the trade to acquire Byram was a good hockey trade for us. Byram is a genuine first pairing caliber defenseman. He has good offensive skills, and he can shoot. Bryson is one of the big surprise players for me. He is a lower pairing player who is playing solidly. His goal was our big play of the game. It's unlikely that the Sabres are going to make the playoffs. But from an overall roster building standpoint this front office has built a deep blueline. Compare that to where this unit was a couple years ago. And it appears that UPL has become a #1 goalie who is usually the main factor for our wins. What a change in how this team has performed i.e. our defense and goaltending are leading the play. If you combine the Toronto and Edmonton game, the overview takeaway for me is that the Sabres' defense limited two high-powered offensive teams. In both games, the team played a responsible two-way game with effort throughout. We ended getting three out of four potential points. I'm not complaining about that. This was an entertaining game in which I thought he had a slight edge.

There wasn't much of a flow to the game because neither team allowed much space when the other team had the puck. Both teams played a hard and tight game. If you think about it, the style of play of tight checking and more focus on defense is more associated with playoff hockey than regular season hockey. For me, maybe not for you and many others, that alteration in style of play in itself was a positive takeaway. Where I disagree with your original comment is that you took a portion of the game (the beginning) and made it seem that it represented how the Sabres, in general, played that game. It didn't, at least as I see it. Our goalie continued his quality play, our blue line unit played well, and the lines played a tight and hard game all the way through. I consider that to be encouraging. You and the majority of others don't. Different eyes and different views.

You pointed out that the Sabres got no shots in the first 15 minutes. So what! Toronto controlled the play when the game began, then the tide turned the other way. It's the standard ebb and flow of a hockey game. You point out that some Toronto players were sick. So what! Our most productive offensive player (Mitts) was dealt before the game. This game was relatively even that was tied after three periods. In general, the team played hard and well. They lost in OT and gained a point. If you want to characterize this game in a negative light, then that is your prerogative. If you didn't see any positive play in this game, then so be it. I saw this game differently. If you have problems with the divergence in opinion, big freaking deal.

Did you fall asleep after the first fifteen minutes? Toronto got the first nine shots to start the game. After that, the Sabres got the next 12 shots. The Sabres ended up with 25 shots on net for the game (10-9-3-3) while the Leafs got 27 shots for the game (6-9-10-2). May I kindly offer you a recommendation: When watching the game keep your eyes open for the whole game. 🤡

It's remarkable to me that the majority of people can watch this game with a takeaway that this game was a disaster. I saw this game the same way you did. This was one of the Sabres strongest games from a defensive and effort standpoint. Toronto is one of the most prolific scoring teams in the league. They got one goal in regulation. In overtime, there is a lot of open ice, so there is going to be a lot of back and forth. We had our chances and couldn't convert. And it should be noted that Mitts, one of our most productive offensive players did not play because he was traded. The Sabres ended up getting a point in an OT loss. If this team would have gotten a few more OT loss points this season, this team would now be in a better position. On how this team needs to play to be successful, I came away being encouraged. I recognize that this is a minority view. And the more I watch UPL play, the more he solidifies his position as the #1 goalie. That in itself is a positive step and is encouraging.

Okposo is a class act as a player and person. He's the type of person you admire simply because of the dignified way he carries himself. The most impressive thing about Okposo is that it is easy being the upfront person on your team when things are going well. What he did well is maintain his professionalism and class while playing in an era where failure and discontent pervaded the environment. A related question about player status surrounds Girgs. What's going to happen to him? Does he want to stay another year or would he prefer to have a chance to play in the playoffs with another team?

UPL is a fascinating story. When making assessments about goalies you have to be humble about predicting how they will play from one year to another. One year the player is a king, and the next year the player becomes a peasant. It's a difficult and peculiar position to assess. How many people on this site wanted to dispatch UPL for another veteran retread. The same premature assessment was made by many on Mitts. Even a player such as Bryson who was scorned by many can turn out to be a useful player. When rebuilding a roster with young players sometimes judicious patience is a good strategy.

I'm not defending Adams at all. What I am doing is pointing out that the course of action that he did take was supportable. His strategy of staying the course within his mostly rebuilding from within appeared to be working based on the previous season where the team made a leap from 75 points in the 2021-2022 season to 91 points in the 2022-2023 season. I'm sure that he didn't count on our all of top gun goal scorers to have lesser years this season. And I'm sure that he didn't assume that our PP that was in high gear at the end of last season would falter at the level he did. As you point, he miscalculated by not bringing in a few more experienced players to augment/support the youth movement as Yzerman did. The Greenway, Clifton and Eric Johnson pickups were good pickups to bolster the roster. In hindsight, he should have brought in 2 or 3 more mature players to round out the roster.

Two to three weeks went by before UPL got back to his current level. Even if it was two weeks, it took additional time for him to solidify his position as the primary goalie. I don't disagree with you that this regime was leaning toward Levi in the competition. That shouldn't be surprising considering how Levi played at the end of the year. He struggled more than expected. There was no question that there was a sorting out process. Was it avoidable or strung out too long? Not necessarily. In the end, there was a 3-way competition with UPL rising to the top. This is what happens when you have a young roster with spots and roles not completely decided on when going into camp. Assuming that UPL continues with his current standard of play, I'm confident that there will be less vying for roles next season. My expectation (hope) is that UPL grabs the mantel, and Levi becomes the backup. And it won't be a shock to me if Levi challenges UPL for the primary goalie position. In retrospect, this season has been good for UPL from a developmental standpoint, and it also has benefited Levi's development by getting a lot of playing time in Rochester. It's a tough up and down process that has a lot of inevitable frustration built in.

UPL got sick and was out for some time. Then when he returned it took more time to for him to get in a groove. That was a reason why that 3-way competition lasted as long as it did. If UPL didn't get sick and played at the level he is playing now (stunningly well), that competition would have been determined sooner. The illness factor extended the goalie selection process.

I'll spell it out to you so you better understand what I want. I prefer talent and tough players. You don't have to be a dirty player to be an effective player. Different strokes for different folks.

I agree that there needs to be more than the attributes listed. This team needs more tougher and grittier players; players who are not afraid to park in front of the net when in their offensive zone. As of late, the Sabres have done a better job of hovering near the opposition's goalie. They still need more of it. Adding another Greenway type of player or two would better round out this roster.

I have little regard for cheap shot players. You seem to admire them. I don't.

There were some draft analysts who considered him to be generational. You cited Bowman as an example. What I have been saying is that he is not, although he is an all-star. Based on his play he is probably our best player who is an upper echelon defenseman. He is not a generational player and shouldn't be judged by those standards. Crosby and McDavid are generational players. Dahlin is good but not at that historical level.