JohnC
-
Posts
8,565 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JohnC
-
-
3 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
Don’t forget, you also don’t like “must win”.
The boat talk is overdone for sure. But when the world was in the midst of a global pandemic they publicly worried about the boat and the family lifestyle. They furloughed 125 rank and file employees in the Sabres organization and PSE. Not a great look for them. The Sabres are always second fiddle, no Bills employees were furloughed.
Then they went to this EEE garbage, and again the Bills didn’t. And they brought in their most unqualified GM yet who in 6 years has only added to the ruination of the Sabres culture.
So while the boat jokes are stale, the agitation of the fan base is legitimate.
If it is inappropriate to criticize an owner of a sports franchise in a system that is designed for parity, there is a simple solution: sell the team. What do people expect? Adulation and a warm embrace for a generation of incompetency?
-
20 minutes ago, inkman said:
Yes thanks for stating the obvious that I myself have gone on countless rants about.
That’s the real issue. Everyone has stated in various forms that he does’t know what he is doing. The problem is that he hasn’t recognized that obvious fact yet. His big boat unreality has sunk this franchise in deep waters.
-
19 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
He actually showed some attitude against Ottawa, now he needs to keep it up. Your bar is too low.He was a first overall draft pick. Just once in a while can we see a dominant performance from him?
It isn't an issue of setting the bar too low for him. What I recognize is that his style of play doesn't rely so much on physicality as it does positioning and skating. And because of that more finesse style his play will not be as preferred by many as the more muscular style of play would be. He's a tall and lean young player who will get stronger. What I'm watching to see is steady increase in his physicality. As you noted, it was evident in the Ottawa game. But the reality that many people are reluctant to accept is that he is not going to be an imposing physical player on the ice because that is not his game. In my more optimistic eyes I see a player who is going to be an anchor defenseman for us. But for many people his contribution will be dismissed because of how he plays.
-
1 minute ago, Weave said:
I think I saw somewhere that Giroux was chirping at Power something along the lines of “you’re a wet dog in a tall body” or something like that. Even our big guys get chirped.
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.
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, inkman said:
The boat nonsense is right up there with the palm tree schtick. Not funny or interesting. He's a billionaire, he can do whatever he wants with his money.
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.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Goes both ways. The other side of this coin is the claim JJ had “no interest in improving” and that he was “anti-culture” and that’s why we dealt him. Don’t really see the need to call into question the mindset of a player retroactively but we’ve been here many times before so it’s hardly worth relitigating.
As mentioned it’s a both sides dynamic. Probably best to simply judge based on the macro results.
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.
-
46 minutes ago, Brawndo said:
Per Tuch’s Agent
“The communication, as you mentioned, has been good, been consistent throughout the summer,” Bartlett said. “You know, we had some good conversations, got kind of the parameters of whatever everyone was thinking. It’s very clear to us that the Buffalo Sabres would like Alex Tuch to re-sign long term. That’s been communicated very well, very clearly, very effectively by (Sabres GM) Kevyn Adams and the staff there. And I think hopefully we’ve communicated back to them that Alex would be very happy to stay in Buffalo, as well.
“We weren’t able to kind of get to what made a deal before the season. And then at this point, we’ve just put it on the backburner.”
This is as on the DFO Podcast
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.
-
3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
I’m perfectly happy to see how the deal works out, but let’s not kid ourselves why KA made the deal. Daddy OilBucks didn’t want to pay JJP. Adams floated the “didn’t want to be here” BS on Peterka to shift the blame to the kid. Frankly it’s despicable.
This move was primarily financial. Utah is paying JJP 7.7 this season and Pegula is paying Kesselring and Doan 2.3 between them. This allowed KA to piss away 3.375 on Quinn and 1.8 on Danforth and still stay 5+ mill under the cap.
Will the deal work out? Possibly, but we traded a top line forward for potentially only one year of two 3rd line (or pair) players with possible upside as both players are RFAs after the season. If they breakout Pegula probably won’t want to pay them either.
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.
-
2
-
2
-
-
57 minutes ago, inkman said:
Much like Amiinyet male enhancement program
Is that an extender to stiffen the limp pole? 😀
-
2 hours ago, Taro T said:
Hope springs eternal and Lyon did have that one magical run while Bobrovsky was out, but he's had opportunities to seize the starters job in the past and has never been able to take the reins.
Expect a more realistic hope is that he can be "the guy" for the month of October and then either UPL finally gets out of his own head or one of the little AHLers get an opportunity and seize the day.
Either way, go Sabres.
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.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, DarthEbriate said:
We've seen with this organization that that can change to week-to-week very quickly.
How the player plays will determine how he will be handled.
-
11 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
It's just when I read screeds like yours, followed by "I hope I'm wrong," I wonder if that's true. it's like the guy who calls WGR and says he's not demanding anyone be fired, but then reads a laundry list of grievances with Sean McDermott and/or Brandon Beane.
Your perspective is different from mine. Go ahead and believe what you want to believe. So be it.
-
4 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Am I though?
You may not be aware of it but you were with your response. That's okay. I'm not bothered by it.
-
On 10/4/2025 at 5:19 PM, Gatorman0519 said:
We are in semi permanent limbo. Even if we got Zito to take over, it could be 3-4 years. Looks like this season is shaping up to be like the last 14.
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.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, tom webster said:
I really do respect your opinion and you are one of my go to posters when I visit the board, but man you are like a reformed smoker.😉
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.
1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:Would you rather they win or be right?
You are being silly.
-
2
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Thorny said:
I can’t see the McDavid deal used in any way to artificially lower the value of every new deal now for the foreseeable future. I don’t think people will pretend it’s anything but an anomaly - otherwise he effed over the nhlpa lol
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.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, tom webster said:
Given the tenor of this board, I think it’s a little surprising that less than 1000 seats remain for Thursday’s game.
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.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, 7+6=13 said:
I'm disputing that you can drive the owner to doing anything.
I think Jack wanted out but he did sign a long term extension. Sam and Ullmark, I'm not sure it's a fact they wanted out. Montour, haha, oh no not Montour.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 10/4/2025 at 9:57 AM, Pimlach said:
But yet he is the opposite with the Bills. His problems with the Sabres stem from these things:
1. He thinks he knows the game
2. He gets infatuated with people he knows and likes
3. He does not fit into or trust the NHL establishment and feels they led him astray.
Just curious, are you retired yet?
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.
-
9 hours ago, 7+6=13 said:
But then we don't like it when we do because it's too early, etc.. IMO, we do a good job of keeping our own. Problem is our fans complain about our own, them love them the second they leave. A lot of us will say anything to dog the team.
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.
-
1 hour ago, 7+6=13 said:
It would make sense Pegula would rather win. Buffalo has never attracted high end players in free agency and we're on many no trade clause lists. When re-builds are decided on, it's like turning around a cruise ship. He's tried a lot of different things and nothing has worked. I'm glad the Sabres are worth a lot of money, in part it's a compliment to the fans. I hope we make the playoffs and think the roster is good enough to do it.
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.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
But who are you thinking of?
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.
-
2
-
-
23 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
Who is that mentor for the Sabres (Rochester)? I mean I know who is on the roster, but who is a good mentor?
The issue for me is simply too much too soon and wearing him down. At his age I personally think big minutes in junior might be better.
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.
GDT: Panthers @ Sabres October 18 2025 @ 1PM, MSG-B, ESPN+, Fubo
in The Aud Club
Posted
I don't know who is starting in goal. But if I had a choice, it would be Lyons. If we can get the caliber of goaltending that he has given us so far, I would be happy with that.
I see the Sabres in a good situation to win this home game because of the reasons you cited. They are compared to Florida more rested, are at home and are less banged up. Another factor is that the Sabres should be determined not to fall too far back at this early stage of the season.
So I'm predicting the Sabres will be in the win column by nightfall.