Archie Lee

This could be part of it. But by December I’m pretty sure every coach in the league was hammering home that the Sabres get off to good starts. I’m pretty down on Adams and what he has done with the roster over the past two seasons. So much so that he gets no credit from me if he sticks to his guns, stays with his young guys and they do become a playoff team next year. It will be year 6. The playoffs should be the minimum expectation. It would be nothing to brag about. That said, I don’t think it is the case that everything positive about the team is just related to other teams taking us lightly.

Have we tried Dahlin and Byram together on PP1? Watching them last night it seemed like that would work. Dahlin could run the PP from the wall like Kucherov.

There are many, many players who have no choice or few other options. How do you think we got McLeod and Zucker and Greenway?

I think we will trade Joker, Greenway, and Zucker. The one barrier may be that Adams overplays his hand, asks for too much and gets left holding them because teams move on to more affordable options (I’m not advocating that he trade all 3, I just think it is what he will try to do). I think it is highly unlikely that we acquire a player who helps us win games now. We won’t be actively tanking post-deadline, but I don’t think Adams will prioritize adding anyone who makes us better now. We may acquire a lesser player or two, to fill out the roster. I don’t think we trade any of our young roster players or prospects at the deadline. I think the plan will be to wait for the off-season and use our Rochester prospects and draft picks to acquire 2-3 veterans ton augment the roster. I think Adams still believes in all his young guys and will keep them and will double-down (or is this now a triple-down?) on internal development. He will add vets to replace those he moves out at the deadline, though. I think he will try to make another McLeod-like trade, another Zucker-like signing, and maybe try to add a partner for Power, though I think the current plan is for that to be Samuelsson.

I agree. Unless a team is overpaying, I don’t see the point. We have a bunch of drafted forwards who have in some ways overachieved their draft position, who we might not sign. I don't see the point of us having 12 picks in the draft if we aren’t going to utilize the assets. While momentum does not carryover from season to season, experience and understanding what it takes to win can carryover (I think). At some point our kids need to learn how to win, and putting them in a position where they lose is not the answer.

Got it. Even when someone agrees with your position your first inclination is to pick a scrap.

I see the two bolded sentences as basically the same thing. To support the kids with veterans, he needed to make the difficult decision to trade 2-3 of the kids. The issue is not with the acquisitions he made (though Lafferty and Aube-Kubel are looking like very poor decisions), but rather that he stuck with too many kids in critical positions. Adams needed to have the courage to move 2-3 of these players for veterans. Had he done so, he would still have had a very young team with a better than average prospect pool to draw from in the coming years. Sadly, nothing has really changed. Quinn is playing a bit better but on balance has still regressed. Benson's game is basically the same as it was a year ago. Likewise, the other younger players you reference (aside from Peterka) have not advanced their games. If they come back next season with all of these young players on the roster, they will not likely be projected to be a playoff team. If they stay with the kids, the safe bet is that the streak will stretch to year 15.

Since we are saying the same thing, I guess you don't know either.

Levi is having a good season. But he is 6th in save % in the AHL. Former Sabre and journeyman goalie Devin Cooley has a better save % (in 7 more games played). I don’t see Amerks games, but my sense is Levi has been a big part of their success and the team is playing a much more structured and effective game. Not many coaches or teams will continue to thrive if you replace their good goalie with a bad one.

I think we have seen enough evidence over the years that confirms momentum does not carry-over from year to year. Momentum doesn’t always carry-over, in-season, from game to game, so of course it won’t move with a team across an off-season. Where I disagree slightly on these being meaningless garbage time wins, is I do think there is a point in a team’s development where they do learn how to win. And, I think it is the case that such learning can happen in the 2nd half of a “lost” season. I think the 03-04 to 05-06 Sabres are some evidence of that. What I don’t trust is that Adams will get us a Grier at the deadline and a Numminen and Lydman in the off-season. Adams’s history is to rely largely on internal development to bridge the cap. His philosophy has rendered two disappointing seasons in a row, this one being disastrous.

I think you are right that UPL has, objectively, not been as good as last year. I think, though, that you are also underplaying the impact that the team's poor play has had on UPL's poorer performance. Unless I'm mistaken, a goalie who faces 10 shots from particular places on the ice, will have a specific xGA related to those shots, regardless of whether those 10 shots came over a game span of 25 minutes or 5 minutes. Too often we have put UPL in a position where he is under duress. 30 shot attempts, 20 shots, and 5 high-danger chances over 60 minutes is simply different than the same occurring over 20 minutes.

More seriously, good for Savoie. I hope the kid has a great career.

You mean they didn’t bring him up and put him on a line with the Oiler equivalent of Tyson Jost and Brandon Biro?

Complaints about Cozens are fine, of course. At some point they are misdirected though. The complaint should really be about the in-over-their-heads GM and HC who continue to put a young player, and the team, in a position to fail.

I now agree on moving Cozens to wing. I would put him with McLeod and Tuch for an extended period. Tampa traded for Brandon Hagel when he was in year D+6. He had 44 points that year. That’s about what Cozens is on pace for. Cozens is in D+6. I’m not saying he would be our Hagel. But if Cozens just becomes a 20-25 goal 45-50 point winger on a big, fast, hard to play against 2nd line, his contract will not be crazy (particularly 3 years from now when it rises to $113 million). And maybe he has a little more in him.

I agree that their value is not the same. I’m not interested in trading either, unless it is part of a larger strategy of improving the construction of the overall roster.

Spending more money and wisely would be best. Unfortunately, we do neither. We leave millions unused and the money we do spend we often waste. We are spending $10-12 million more against the cap than Calgary and Columbus and we are trailing both by 11 points. I think you are right, our GM has done such a poor job spending the money available to him, it may well be foolish to give him authority to spend more.

I think there are sound arguments for keeping Byram and Power and also for trading one of them. I don’t know why you think we would get very little in return for either player. I think both would be sought after if the Sabres made them available.

If I thought this were true, I would stop watching Sabre hockey. We could have traded for Sam Bennett. At the time he was acquired by FLA, his stock was down. He was a pending RFA. There is zero reason to think we would have been unable to extend him. We didn’t sign Hagel when we could have, but nothing stops us from identifying the next Hagel and trading for him. Tampa had the guts to offer what was thought to be higher than value. They won that one, then lost on Jeannot. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I’m generally a glass half-full guy. Looking at the approximately 100 players in this tourney, I would say about half are no-doubters. Then there are 35 or so who could be interchanged with similar players depending on the preferences of the management and coaches. Then there is the bottom 15 who are there because someone has to be (ie: the entire Finnish D). We have a legit no-doubter in Dahlin. We have a guy in the interchangeable category, IMO, in Thompson. We have a couple of additional forwards in Tuch and Peterka, who are in this tourney if they are Swedish or Finnish (Cozens, on reputation, might be also). Byram and Power are 1st or 2nd pairing Finns. Last year’s UPL belongs. We need a GM who knows what he is doing. To hell with the current “woe is me” guy.

I completely agree. There is a world where a different “new” GM has one meeting with Ralph Krueger and goes to Pegula and says the first thing I’m doing is firing this phoney. Then I’m hiring a real coach. Then I’m extending Reinhart and Ullmark and telling Eichel to go have his surgery. My point is not to defend the decision to tear things down. But, if Adams manages things properly starting in June 2023, I don’t think we are having this discussion. If we break it down to three questions: 1) Did the tear down need to happen? No, it didn’t. 2) Was the tear down managed well? Sure, but that was always going to be the easy part. 3) Have things been managed well since making the playoffs has been a reasonable expectation? Not close. Disastrously bad.

I have a little bit of a different view on the outcome of the tear-down trades that saw Hall, Montour, Staal, Risto, Reinhart, and Eichel moved. Those trades looked at individually, were never going to be wins unless one of two things happened: 1.) The player we traded fell on his face; or 2.) We somehow lucked into a star-level-talent in return. Both of those outcomes were always unlikely. Individually, the probability was always high that they would be losses. The point of the teardown was asset acquisition. You bring in a plethora of top picks and prospects and build an asset-base that eventually feeds your NHL roster through players that develop in your system and through trading those assets for NHL ready players. Adams did fine with the first part of the plan. He has failed miserably after that. I think that the absolute and utter failure of this season has cast a shadow of complete failure on Adams and his plan. I think that in many ways that conclusion is justified. The bottom-line is that in his 5th year at the helm, when the team should be at it's highest level of performance during his tenure, we are playing as badly as we have under him (post-Krueger). He owns that. Completely. He should be fired. The sooner the better. But, it should not be overlooked that in April 2023 we missed the playoffs by one point, with one of the 2-3 youngest rosters in the NHL, and while having a top 5 rated prospect pool. Adams's failing was not in the tear-down and was not with the assets he acquired in that period. His failure came from falling in love with those picks and prospects and not proactively moving the team forward when it was obvious to anyone paying attention that it was time to do so. As a GM, his failing is not in the moves and trades that he made, but in those he failed and refused to make.

Nice job!!

Yep. Incredibly, Dahlin will be in year 8 of his NHL career next season. Wasted.

This is largely how I felt, though my peak off-season optimism was when they fired Granato, which was quickly deflated when they almost immediately hired Ruff. Up until the Ruff hiring, I had convinced (tricked) myself into believing that when the time came to win that Pegula/Adams would pivot to ensuring the organization behaved like a normal NHL team. We would do an actual search for the right head coach. That coach would bring in a new assistant or two. We would make one or two prominent off-season personnel moves (not just 4th line changes). We would spend like a team that plans to win. We would be proactive if things were not going well. We would no longer worry about kids being blocked. Then we hired Ruff in what was an obvious charade intended to bring back a public-relations-nostalgia-hire who the owner and GM were comfortable working with and who would accept their preferred terms (2 year deal, no new coaches). This cemented for me that the Sabres are simply not a normal NHL team; the goal of winning has been displaced by a hundred sub-goals related to cost and personality and fear and apprehension. It’s too late now though. I’m in until the end.

Well, I already did when I replied to your earlier posting of the Lysowski quote. I pointed out the following: "...you look at the Florida Panthers and see Mikkola and Kulikov as the 2nd pair. Or Dallas and a right side of Lyubushkin, Dumba, and Ceci. Or Tampa and Raddysh on pair 1. Or Winnipeg with Samberg on pair two with Logan Stanley and Colin Miller as pair 3." I'm not saying we should go and get any of those players specifically. What I am saying is that every year teams make the playoffs, and in some cases have deep playoff runs, with players of this quality playing in their top-4. Often such players don't have trade protection. In some cases it isn't about being more talented, it is about being more experienced, or about having better support from forwards, or being better coached, or having better goaltending. Rasmus Dahlin is a legit top 10-15 D-man in the NHL. Three 3 years ago Bowen Byram played 2nd pair minutes on the Stanley Cup Champion. If Owen Power decided tomorrow to retire from hockey, the Sabres would still have ½ of a top-4 defense core, that is legitimately Stanley Cup capable. And, I'm just talking playoffs here. Any person worthy of being a legit NHL GM, could start an off-season with Dahlin, Byram, Connor Clifton, and Ryan Johnson, and piece together 3-4 additional d-men that an NHL team could make the playoffs with.