JohnC
-
Posts
8,038 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Vegas moved Thompson after he became unreliable. It's the classic example of "one man's trash/treasure." The trick is knowing which goalie will bounce back, or seeing something in the other team's play that contributed to that failure.
I think Linus Ullmark is a great example. He wins a Vezina as soon as he moves on from Buffalo's Swiss cheese defense in front of him.
If you want certitude, you won't get it in the mercurial world of NHL goalies. If the Sabres would have gotten Ullmark caliber of goaltending, this team would be much better. I'm not shooting for the moon. What I want is consistent solid play in net. And as you point out, team defense that includes the blueliners and forward group are critical to the success of the goalie.
-
8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Okay. But you can count consistent goalies on one hand, and teams don't trade them. So what you have to do is play better defense.
Washington got Logan Thompson and Charlie Lingren for miniscule prices. I would be very receptive to trading UPL to get a more experienced goalie added to the roster. As you point out, with goalies there are no guarantees of consistency of play on a year-to-year basis. But with Levi in the system I would be less reluctant to move UPL to get more consistent play from that critical position. I also agree with you that the success of the goalie is inextricably linked to team defense.
-
14 hours ago, Taro T said:
Yes, but if he's replacing Samuelsson, Byram doesn't HAVE to be dealt.
Your view makes sense. However, Byram has more value on the market than Samuelsson does. And getting Byram signed to a long-term contract here is going to be a challenge considering what the player will seek financially and role-wise. I thought that after the non-intervention incident when Samuelsson ended being sent to the suite that he stabilized his game and played soundly. It just seems more likely that dealing Byram with an add on or two can bring us back a top six forward or another thumper for the blueline. We shall see.
-
34 minutes ago, MISabresFan said:
Kinda takes your mind off things...
Being constantly negative is exhausting. For a long time, the Sabres have been an irrelevant NHL team. Just maybe, the tide might be changing into a more positive spot. I really believe that if the front office handles this offseason smartly, it will inch up the ranks from irrelevancy to respectability. One step at a time moving forward instead of backward.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:
UPL was what at one time? .945? Bounce is the magic word here. Goaltending is voodoo.
An inconsistent goalie is an inadequate goalie.
-
13 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
The Sabres have been in desperate need of goaltending help for 4 years.
The Ullmark departure really hurt the team. The GM didn’t have an adequate fallback position for the goalie who was URFA. It ended up being a reverberating mistake.
-
2 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:
Ehlers will get $7m/year in tax free states that have palm trees, 7.5m per for ones without palm trees and will turn down $15m/year in buffalo
The organization through its generation of foolishness created its own unattractive destination reputation. The only thing that is going to change that ugly reality is having some success.
-
1
-
-
Isn’t so much more fun talking about potential and made deals than to talk about the organization!!!
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:
Yes Robertson is a dream, ehlers probably is too. Either work
The trading of JJP makes a Robertson deal to be unlikely. I’m not sure what it would take to get Ehlers?
-
4 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I’m inclined to agree - but I do think if we are going to pry that asset it will have to come from Byram or the 9 overall. Could be down 50% of those assets shortly
I agree with you. You got to give up something to get something. If we can get a Rust type talent for a reasonable price, then we should go for it. Timidity is not the right trait for this time.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:
PSA- I'm just throwing out the reminder that for all the jostling of players, it's all meaningless unless we can improve in net.
You are astute and perspicacious.
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Quinn - Kulich - Thompson
Benson - Norris - Tuch
Zucker - McLeod - Doan
We need another top 6 forward added to the mix.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, ska-T Palmtown said:
I feel like I was mostly in some sort of broad agreement with your post. I was mostly using your post as a way into the convo, tbh. That said, while we may differ on our exact feelings of the JJ trade (and admittedly, I focuses almost entirely of the effects of that one trade in the second half of my ramblings), we both feel you can't judge the trade without the context of what happens around it, ie Terry simply pocketing the $5.5M or GM Howdy Doody actually doing something useful with it. In the end for me, if the Sabres make the playoffs this year, the JJ trade is water under the bridge.
We both agree that there is still a lot to do to reach the minimum of qualifying for the playoffs this season. We should get a better sense of whether the organization is on the right track after tonight.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, MISabresFan said:
so what is the answer?
The answer is to make better personnel decisions. The issue isn’t about a particular good or bad deal. It’s the body of work.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, tom webster said:
I get everything they do is met with skepticism but it’s actually a good deal for Buffalo.
It’s a good deal for the Sabres and for the player. It gives him an opportunity to demonstrate what his value will be in the not too distant future.
-
21 minutes ago, ska-T Palmtown said:
I think there is some value in saying if, If, IFFFFF, the Sabres uses that $5.5M savings to get Robertson or Marner, etc - then we could look back on the series of moves having been an overall success - and that would be more meaningful, at least to me.
By itself, still not happy with this trade. I liked JJ's game. There, I said it. It seems like some people (not necessarily you, JohnnySea) seem to think that strong 2-way forwards grow on trees. I am not even sure that brand of hockey is coached at the younger levels anymore. Even looking at the list of F's that get Selke votes, many of them are "meh" overall, but the crowd is thin.
In one of the other threads, it came up that the Sabres were 3-29 when scoring 2 or fewer goals. Solve the goalie, become an acceptably mediocre team that comfortably eeks into the playoffs. Can some of that come from better D? Sure, I guess. But without JJ, they may play MORE games scoring 2 or fewer goals, thus necessitating a proportionally stronger performance from the D and G. Classic Looney Tunes where Daffy is trying to plug the holes in the dam, but runs out of fingers (? you, the kind disney ducks have)
You didn’t accurately read my posts on the JJP trade. As a singular deal I consider it to be a good/reasonable deal for us. In a wider context with likely upcoming trade/s that deal should look even better from the vantage of ending up with a better and more balanced roster. When all is said and done it is the end product that should be the focal point when judging the transactions.
-
4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
Trade grades
The Athletic - 3 A- for Utah, 2 B and a C+ for Buffalo
ESPN - U A+, Buf B-
CBS - U B+, Buf C+
Daily Faceoff - U A-, Buf C
USA Today - U A-, Buf B
Yardbarker - U A, Buf C+
The grades mean absolutely little without giving the context of the deal/s. Are the Sabres better with this deal and another deal that most likely will be made due to the cost saving from the JJP deal after he signed his contract? For the sake of discussion, if Rust is added to the roster that came to fruition because we didn't have to sign JJP, then the combined deals seem to result in a better and mature roster.
Adding Doan, Kesselring and Rust in my opinion does improve the roster in a variety of ways even if the JJP departure is factored in. It seems that you are just being reflexively negative. If you stand back a little and take a broader view I think you will have a more positive take on the eventual tabulation. Still TBD.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:
Helenius, I would say no. Quinn or Rosen? Yes.
We are running out of positions for Quinn if we acquire Rust.
I look on a Rust acquisition and how it impacts Quinn a little differently. If Rust is added, then Quinn has to compete for a top two-line spot and would probably end up on a third line. Internal competition is exactly what we what want and need. And having depth and thickening the roster is the position you want to be in for a long and grinding season replete with injuries. Sliding any player down because another player earned moving up is a good situation to be in.
-
4 minutes ago, Brawndo said:
What is Montreal trading?
-
2 hours ago, JP51 said:
This to me is a major major question... in my post I said if we did this to save money.. we have pain ahead... but if we did this to free up money for a big swing.. well then something different.
Our views mostly coincide. Where I slightly have a different view is that I’m not necessarily looking for a blockbuster deal. What I want are deals that improve and better shape (balance) the roster. With day to day exhibitions of competence you move forward; with constantly changing of plans you create consternation that gets you nowhere. I’m so freaking tired of this back and forth nonsense which is a roadmap to nowhere.
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, MISabresFan said:
I wonder, if all these players saying, I don't want to be here, has anyone asked them why? What is the reason...
Everyone knows why. It’s not a mystery to anyone inside and outsize of this discredited franchise. When you dig a deep hole you have to climb out of it. There’s no magical and quick solutions. It’s about making smart decisions on a day to day basis.
-
13 hours ago, Archie Lee said:
I don’t like the trade, but I would not say I hate it. I am a Sabre fan and by default I am finding things to like about Kesselring and Doan. Legit things to like.
I don’t like the trade because I fear it portends what the next moves will be. There has been much speculation on an internal cap. A similar return for Byram and we pretty much have our confirmation.
If Adams can move Byram and Quinn and extras for a veteran right shot D and a veteran middle-6 winger, both with playoff bonafides, and find a way to add a veteran goalie who can play 35-40 games as UPL’s partner, I may yet come around on our roster.
I've stated this in a prior post that what I will be watching is what the organization does with the added cap room? ( @Taro T keenly brought up this issue.) If the owner pockets it instead of utilizing it, then we have our answer about the seriousness of the owner to compete. The question comes down to is whether this is a serious Pegula franchise or a third-rate Micky Mouse unserious Pegula franchise???
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Jorcus said:
Marty Biron had commented a few times that if Peterka were to hold out during camp or into the season that it would have been bad for this team who is needs to get off to a good start. The Sabres were in no position to go though that this year so away he goes. We often talk about extending players with contracts that did not work out. I remember Adams talking about extensions last summer but nothing happened. Peterka because of his 2nd round contract was the lowest paid player on the team. We certainly could have signed him for what he left for so it's safe to say he really did not want to be here. It seems as if there were a lot of discussions so this trade was not a knee jerk reaction trade. I think a lot of the other players thrown around were probably Peterka plus something or did not fit into Adams plan for roster construction. He was a fun player to watch but if we win more games this year then we did the right thing.
As you keenly noted, a finesse player/team is more aesthetically pleasing to watch than a grittier player/team. Usually, the grittier team succeeds more than the finesse team in the NHL. It's a tough league where you have to handle the rigors of a hard style of play from the opposition, night in and out.
-
10 hours ago, Taro T said:
Yes. And seemingly either a swap of 1st rounders or an additional 2nd rounder for $5.5MM in cap space.
Been fooled at least twice and counting trade deadline time about 5 times about them planning on using that cap space to improve the team. When that cap space actually gets used, will believe they are going to use that cap space to improve the team and not 1 second before then.
You hit on a key issue to be watched: i.e. what is done with the added cap space following this trade. Will it be utilized or will it be pocketed? If the hockey operation continues to lag spending wise compared to other franchises, then you know exactly how serious the owner is in running a competitive franchise.
Summer 2025: NHL Offseason
in The Aud Club
Posted
My scorn for our ragged owner is well documented. As you have stated before, unless he alters how he financially manages the operation from a penurious manner to a normally financially operated NHL franchise, little will have changed. This is mostly an owner issue that we have little influence over. I just hope that he opens the purse to pay the freight like every other owner does. I'm not looking for extravagance; I'm hoping for a normalcy compared to other owners and franchises. We shall see.