JohnC

Greenway was added last year and Clifton was added in the offseason. Neither transaction can be categorized as major additions. However, they were both solid deals that added an element ruggedness for a team that lacked it, and it improved the roster. It has taken some time for each player to adjust to his new role and team, but they now appear to have reached a comfort level.

One goal went off the stick of Johnson. How was he to blame? He's an AHL player who served as a fill-in for an injured player. He played to his level. He was adequate with limited minutes. Bryson is a fringe player. What else do you expect from him?

Just because a player is on the ice when another team scores it doesn't mean that he is responsible for the score. On one of the scores there was a deflection off of another defenseman's stick. I'm not arguing that Bryson was an asset, but in this game he wasn't a liability. His role was limited; he was a fill-in player brought up from the AHL. He sufficed as a player for us.

I don't know. I don't watch enough games to give a fair assessment. Usually, the calculation to which player to bring up doesn't revolve around which player is better so much as it is which player better fits the role as a replacement.

I'm going to take a different perspective on the play of Bryson. Everything you said about him in this game is accurate. His minutes were a little more than modest. He is essentially a substitute player from the AHL who was temporarily brought up to replace an injured defenseman, Eric Johnson. He was far from being an impactful player in this game but he wasn't a liability. He's essentially an AHL player who fills in when needed and then goes back to being a decent AHL player. That's a sign that the regular roster is being filled with NHL caliber players.

Some quick thoughts on this game: The Sabres were simply the better team. So there isn't a meaningful takeaway from it. JJ is the first star. I really liked the line he played on. I hope Quinn isn't seriously hurt. After watching the replay, I'm worried about the severity of the injury. UPL was solid. I thought this was Greenway's best game. He's a big fellow who plays big and strong. The best sequence of play was the Greenway goal. Mitts battled on the wall, got the puck to Tuch, who was also battling, and then he made a nice pace to Greenway who converted down low. Clifton has stabilized his game. The Greenway and Clifton additions were solid additions that added an element of ruggedness to this roster. I like Tuch playing with Mitts. The conundrum is that without Tuch on the first line it isn't as effective. What I liked about this game and the LA game is that although the opposition led in the beginning, this team continued to play its game and get back to take the lead. As others have commented, the hope is that Quinn isn't seriously hurt. Although I continue to get bricks thrown, I encourage the discouraged members here to not give up on this year's playoff aspirations. There is still a glimmer of hope.

The HC tried to create a different offense/defense balance this year that leaned a little more toward the defense. This team has not comfortably adapted to it. What's the main sticking point? My belief is that the roster makeup is more conducive toward speed and flow while the intended adjustment leans toward more cautious play. When this team plays fast and increases the pace it forces the other team to adjust to them. It seems that this year we are the one's adjusting to the opposition. This team is thinking too much about how to play instead of playing with more spontaneity. In hockey, as in most sports, hesitancy is a liability.

I don't take money.puck seriously. The Bills had a 5% chance of making the playoffs this year after struggling for more than half of a season. They then went on a run and qualified for the playoffs. The Sabres need to go on a run soon. I'm aware, as everyone else is, that if they don't, they won't make the playoffs. This team dug a deep hole for itself by their lackluster play. Can they dig themselves out? I think there is a chance that they can while acknowledging that the odds are against them.

Don't throw the towel just yet as long as the body is still quivering. https://www.facebook.com/bigKOBoxing/videos/throw-the-towelthrow-the-damn-towel-apollo-drago-rocky-rocky4/630090794165114/

No! I have not given up on the season just yet. I'm aware that the odds are against us and that the sand in the hour-glass is nearly finished. However, if this team can string some wins together right after the break, we can get back into the playoff race. I'm not cluelessly naive. I'm aware that the odds are against us. Why throw in the towel now? I'm willing to wait a little longer than the rest of the brethren here on.

Dionne Warwick is great. I'm a big Motown fan. This team can be a heartbreaker for Sabre fans.

There isn't much to figure out. Play hard and play a simpler and more basic game. Instead of trying to dazzle on offense by hanging on to the puck and dangling, just shoot the freaking puck. The Sabres have to be one of the worst team in the leagues in positioning players in front of the net to obstruct the goalie when we shoot. Our two best players in that tough area are Benson and Greenway. It's not about outsmarting anyone. Just play tougher and harder throughout.

It's a tough juggling act for a young goalie when he doesn't regularly play. I can't fault a coach for mostly sticking with the hot goalie. https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/don-granato-postgame-at-lak-6345542462112

I didn't watch the game but saw the recap this morning so it would be fraudulent of me to act as if I knew what transpired. Based on the recap, it looked like Mitts was on a line with Quinn and Peterka. In one of the goals I saw Mitts make a subtle move and nice pass to Quinn for his score. It seems to me not putting Mitts on a line with scorers is wasting his set-up talents. I really liked the sequence on Tuch's goal. Krebs fought for the puck in the corner, got it to Robinson, who down low made a nice pass to Tuch who quickly got the shot off in tight quarters. Robinson made a nice pass to Tuch for the conversion. One positive takeaway is that although the Sabres were down, they kept at it. They were not deflated. At least they showed some fight. Why didn't they do that the previous night against an inferior opponent? I would appreciate it if those who watched the game could give me an assessment on the play of Levi. If the Sabres beat the Sharks would this be considered a successful road trip? I would say no because in the first game of the trip they lost an opportunity against a lesser opponent. This team is not in a position to squander any opportunities.

The issue I am bringing up doesn't deal with the variety of companies that draw their electricity from the Texas grid. The issue is that the Texas grid is a separate/independent grid that doesn't have the ability to draw from the national grid when part of its system goes down. This is by design. So, when part of its system is damaged/shut down due to weather, tornados etc. it takes longer to get back on-line in comparison to other regions that are tied to the national system and temporally can get electricity from outside sources.

What choice does the customer have regarding the inflated bills due to an outdated system? They signed the agreement because there was no other choice. As @Doohickie pointed out, the problem isn't that Texas has their own grid system so much as they don't have an ability to draw from another system when theirs is down. Another reason why there is a refusal to join a national system is that they don't want to pay for a system that has higher quality standards. Sometimes when you try to save a penny you end up paying a $$$. The people who end up paying the piper are the customers who had no other choice.

I think it was a couple of years ago when the grid was badly damaged that it resulted in people getting utility bills in the $ 1000s. Texas may be the only state or one of the few states that are tied into the national grid. That makes no sense to me.

There are certain categories of behavior that even by insinuating certain things associated with one's reputation you are behaving inappropriately. My point is by insinuating when there is no trace of supporting evidence you are acting irresponsibly.

Could you explain to me why Texas refuses to be part of the national grid so when nature causes breakage in the grid there is no ability to bring in power from the other parts of the grid until the lines are restored? The people who are affected end up paying humongous bills until the lines are repaired because there is a supply/demand cost system.

I'm just stating that's what the announcers stated. On the other hand, even if it was called by our HC who was not aware of the 10 men on the field, it wasn't an unreasonable call under the circumstances. (My opinion) Our coach took a calculated gamble. It didn't work. But in the end it was not a factor in the outcome. It was a calculated gamble that didn't work. So what? In the end, the risk taking didn't affect the outcome. I have no problem with the call.

Accusing a player or even suggesting a player is using PEDs when there is not a scintilla of evidence of it is crossing the ethical line, even on a bulletin board where there is a loose standard in presenting one's opinions. The participants here give good and bad takes. There is nothing unusual about that in this type of setting. But making a scurrilous comment questioning the integrity of a player by even suggesting that he is cheating is not acceptable, especially when there is nothing to indicate the behavior. I don't want to come off as a sanctimonious moralizer but in my opinion you crossed the line here. Just because you don't necessarily like the poster who called you out doesn't mean that the substance of what he said doesn't have merit.

As explained by the announcers, the fake punt was called at the line because KC only had ten men on the field. It was a good (understandable) call that didn't work.

This was a great game. Two very good teams with elite qbs. As others have said, the difference in this game was our drops. The Diggs drop was a pivotal play. It was a well thrown ball and the coverage was good. If would have been a tough catch but the big-play opportunity was not seized. We also caught a potential game-changing break when their back fumbled the ball into the end-zone when they were on the doorstep of closing this game out. It was apparent to me that the accumulation of injuries on defense took a toll. KC was smart to control the clock by running it at the end of the game. You have to give Mahomes his due. He arguably is the best qb in the game. Although Lamar Jackson is the MVP in this season. In the end: It was wide-right all over again. Where did I see that before?

I'm not into excuses about how this season has disappointingly transpired. But the biggest difference between success and failure has been the play of our PP. Teams have adjusted to what we do the PP. We haven't sufficiently adjusted to their adjustments. (As others have pointed out.) As I said in a prior post, the difference between most teams in this league is small. From my view, I thought this was an evenly played game. Some teams are more proficient in their attention to detail. We made a few glaring errors in trying to get the puck out of our zone; they capitalized on them.

TT probably does have a nagging injury but so do a lot of players. In all sports, the opposition makes adjustments to players, especially to the best players. What TT wants to do is being taken away from him. That's why teams scout. What he has to do is make an adjustment to the adjustment. Compared to last year, when he had a breakout year, he has less time and space to work with. He needs to handle the puck less by passing it more quickly and stop trying to go through the defense when it is clogged. What he needs to do is be less cute with the puck (too much dangling) and get back to basics i.e. more quickly shoot and pass. He needs to simplify his game, as do a lot of his teammates.