Archie Lee

I was just thinking the other day: What exactly is JJ Peterka. He is going into the season where he will turn 24. Perhaps interestingly, that was the age that Panarin and Kaprizov were when they first arrived in the NHL. Peterka is coming off a 68 point NHL season (77 games), which is at least as impressive as the 62 point seasons that Panarin and Kaprizov had in their final KHL years (in 54 and 57 games respectively). In the trade deadline speculation re: Peterka to the Rangers, it was stated that Peca, who coached Peterka in Rochester, thought he could be a 100 point NHL player. Does Peterka have that level of game-changing, impact ability?

I'm not endorsing any of the Kraken moves, but what does it say about the Sabres, if an expansion team that has only been in the league 4 years and already has a playoff appearance and a 1st rd win under their belts, is on to their 2nd GM and 3rd HC, because the results just aren't good enough?

This has been my point on Benson all along. It wasn't that he was unable to play in the NHL (he clearly has been able to play an effective role), but by leaving a spot open for a player on an ELC when he had $10 million in unused cap, Adams set the tone of complacency. If your GM lacks urgency to win, how can you expect the players to approach their jobs with urgency? It starts at the top. Adams looked at the improved results in 21-22 (from 54 to 75 points) and 22-23 (from 75 to 91 points) and concluded he was smart and that if he just stayed the course the next step would be 100 points and the playoffs. He completely neglected to consider that the single biggest factor in those improvements was Tage Thompson unexpectedly transforming from a borderline NHLer to a legit-star. Adams's off-season prior to 23-24 set this team back 3-4 years.

Actually, no. Hiring Ruff to be POHO is precisely the sort of thing a hapless organization that hasn’t seen the playoffs in 14 years and thought it would be a good idea to have Adams as the GM, would do.

They were calculated gambles though. There was an article earlier re: Dubois and about how they saw in scouting that he was most engaged in a shutdown 2-way role, so that is how they use him. Thompson was a career .911ish goalie before this season (never below .908); it’s a mystery that he was not more highly valued. They definitely had a plan. You won’t hear their GM say that they didn’t know how someone would fit.

I agree that the player mix needs to be better. But also, and I don’t think it should need to be said, some coaches are better than others.

First, while I still think that Benson should have gone back to junior, he is an NHL player now and belongs in the NHL. Second, as incredible as it may seem, the Sabres are now in a spot where they are going to need a couple of entry level contracts on the roster. Assuming they are keeping Peterka, McLeod, and Byram, and/or trading them or others for players with similar contracts, the Sabres will be right at the cap. I don’t see a scenario where Benson and Kulich aren’t in some configuration of the top 9.

That’s what I have for our top two lines, but I have Benson and Peterka flipped. I like the idea of acquiring Rust from Pittsburgh and having Zucker - Kulich - Rust as line 3.

Let's hope this is infectious.

I have listened to multiple podcasts in the last few days, hosted by Buffalo media, and the deference paid to Ruff is really surprising to me. I get that he is a local legend and means a lot to the community, but nobody in the media seems to have noticed that Ruff has really not been a good head coach for a while now. Yes, he has had a couple of amazing seasons (one in Dallas and one in NJ), but in both cases his teams regressed quickly and he was fired within a year. The biggest frustration I have with the Ruff hiring/situation, is in how he continues to be presented and sold as the anti-Granato. Neither coaches a sound defensive structure, in my view. The players are taking a lot of heat for the team's defensive shortcomings, when I really don't think our coaches have positioned them to be successful.

Sold!

- I think there are very few teams in the NHL, including playoff teams, that have a collection of players perfectly slotted into 1st line, 2nd line, 1st pair D, 2nd pair D, etc. roles. - I think Benson and Kulich could well thrive playing top-6-roles as soon as next year - I think putting Benson and Kulich together on top-6 line next-year would be clear evidence that our GM/HC combo are unable to learn and adapt

Baker/Fairburn didn't think anything would happen before the draft. They also made a good point. Pegula is going to spend several days with Beane/McDermott watching how an elite level NFL executive/coach manage the draft. Then he is going to meet with Adams to hear about how it all went wrong and how Adams is going to fix it in year 6. The contrast should be stark and obvious.

You're doing a good job of selling me on Martin.

Not making changes at GM and HC this off-season is just delaying the inevitable. Adams is now in quite dubious company when it comes to post-expansion GM's who went 5 straight seasons out of the playoffs, from the start of their tenure with a team. If he goes on to have a long successful career as the Sabres's GM, he will be the first GM in league history to have such a poor start with a team, only to then have long-term success with the same team. Ruff is the oldest coach in the league. He has had two winning seasons (better than DeLuca .500) in his last 11 as a head coach. He made the playoffs 3x in that stretch. You have to go back to 2011 to find a season where Ruff coached a team to the playoffs in consecutive years. His teams are consistently near the bottom of the league in goals against. He once missed the playoffs in Dallas with the league's 2nd highest scoring team. Rolling these two men back in their respective roles and expecting success is the opposite of what any major league franchise that has any degree of self-respect, let alone expectation of winning, would do. Could Adams and Ruff find a mix of players that gets into the playoffs in 2026? Sure, it's not an impossible to imagine scenario. But there is zero reason to think these men are going to get it done. It's not personal. Adams seems like a good man and I think he has done as well as a person with his limited experience could probably be expected to do. Ruff is a coaching legend and there is no question there was a time in his career when he was among the league's best. But they are not the future of the franchise. At the very least, replacing Adams with a new GM (even an internal promotion, like Karmanos), positions the team to be flexible when it comes to a coaching change. What if DeBoer or Bednar or Knoblach don't survive first round playoff losses? What if Pittsburgh moves on from Sullivan. Should we be considering Laviolette (who has made the playoffs in 8 of his last 11 seasons). What about Todd Nelson in Hershey, who just wins, and wins, and wins, and seems to coach a repeatable structured system. What about the league's best young assistants who will be looking to move into head coaching roles? With Adams as a lame-duck GM, none of these are even options. If you have had the same GM for 5 years and you are headed into the final year of their contract and you are not prepared to give them an extension, then it is time to move on. I am hoping that Pegula is capable of recognizing the obvious.

I don’t think it’s that mind boggling. Eichel and Reinhart were kids. Kane is a good player and brings a certain element, but he brought as many issues as solutions. Dahlin didn’t arrive until Botterill’s 2nd draft. All three of our post-Regier GMs had issues with roster building.

Adams continues to present as a man without a plan. His answer on the partner for Owen Power was jaw-dropping. He acknowledges that he has not supported Power well enough, but then states that he recently spoke to Power and Power says he’s good with anyone but prefers playing with a puck mover, and then Adams finishes by saying it’s hard to get a right handed all-star D. Adams comes across like he is making decisions based on the last person he talks to. Power says he’s good, so I guess he’s good. Ruff was a bit better, but in my jaded perspective seemed like a veteran coach who can diagnose the problem, but no longer has the solutions. My view is that our roster could make the playoffs with a better coach and Ruff could make the playoffs with a better roster. If we are being serious here though, both need to be improved.

Unless Adams is removed from the GM role, I really think any changes are just scapegoating. If Adams had successfully positioned us as a playoff team over the last two seasons, I could look at changes to assistant coaches or assistant GMs and conclude that Adams isn’t complacent; he’s not satisfied and he wants to be better. With 5 non-playoff years and after regressing this season, despite it following Adams’s most aggressive off-season, any such changes just ring hollow to me. I’m not defending Marty Wilford or Matt Ellis, but my view is they have done at least as well at their jobs as Adams has at his.

I heard a Brind'Amour interview last off-season. He was discussing Necas and spoke about how talented Necas is offensively. He then added that the challenge he had as a coach with Necas, was in getting him to understand that not every shift and not every puck possession is a goal scoring opportunity. I think this is a general issue with the Sabres. Part of it is that so many of our players are offense oriented, part of it is inexperience, part of it is coaching and development. All of it, at this point, is on Adams.

My dream scenario (that assumes Adams, Ruff, and Appert aren't outright fired) also has Ruff going to a Senior Advisor role and Appert becoming GM of the Amerks. This opens up the coaching staff to a complete makeover. Too much to ask for though. As I don't think Adams, Ruff, or Appert, are getting fired, I like your predictions.

I'm not saying it would be justified, just that if Adams and Ruff are still GM and HC and they fire assistants, then in my view the firings are just scape goats. I would include Marty Wilford, Matt Ellis, and Jerry Forton in that. I'm not saying any particular assistant should be kept. But if your GM has missed the playoffs for 5 straight years and your HC has had two winning seasons in his last 11, then they are your biggest issues and any changes to assistant roles just amount to a couple of men who don't know what they are doing, finding someone to blame for their failings. An example being: the players need to be in better shape.

I disagree that it would be a nothing burger. I mean, it could prove to be a nothing burger, but I don't think it has to be. I'm trying real hard to put lipstick on a theoretical pig here, but some positive things that could prove to be true: - Adams might be better suited for a POHO role where he is the measured voice of reason that exists between the owner and GM. He does now have 5 years experience as a GM and if he is at all self-aware, he will recognize some mistakes he has made. - Karmanos is far, far more qualified for the GM role than Adams was when Adams got the job. Karmanos has actually worked under experienced GM's for cup-winning franchises. I know that some people see Karmanos as being nothing more than a former nepo-hire, who was brought in to Buffalo to be a yes-man and support the Adams philosophies of "want to be here" and "no blockers". But a couple of things to that: 1.) Smart people learn from their own mistakes and from the mistakes of the people who are around them or who they work for. 2.) An assistant's job is always to help the person in charge realize their vision. Don Granato was an assistant under Ralph Krueger and they could not have had more different philosophies on how to play the game of hockey. Obviously I have no idea Karmanos would be in the role (if he gets it), but I'm no more worried about him and his background than I would be about anyone else who would agree to work under Adams/Pegula. We aren't getting Jim Nill or Doug Armstrong. - In our 14 year streak, we have never had a mid-season change to HC that was intended to salvage a season. Adams to POHO and Karmanos to GM opens up at least a possibility of a mid-season coaching change. If Adams is still GM in the last year of his deal, I think it is unlikely that Pegula authorizes him to fire Ruff in December and bring in his 3rd head coach; if so it would just be something like a move to Appert on an interim basis. If Adams is POHO and Karmanos is GM, with 3 year contracts, such a change is at least feasible. Last season, the Islanders, Oilers, and Kings, rebounded after mid-season head coaching changes to make the playoffs. This year, St. Louis did it.

On UPL, my opinion is that he will thrive on a team that plays with actual structure. Something that Lindy Ruff was brought in to provide. It speaks to the abilities of whomever made the decision to hire Ruff, that they were unaware he has not coached effective structure as a HC, in well over a decade. Indeed, going from Granato to Ruff was like throwing gas on the fire.

I agree, for sure. Last year's scapegoat was accountability, but Granato also took the fall. I could see this year that it will be an assistant coach and maybe pro-scouting or analytics who get fired.

Friedman said that he thinks "...at the very least some of the staff around [Adams] will be out and [Adams] will change it". He then asks something a bit strange. He asks "...does that mean Adams changes his title at all, I don't know, we'll hear from him [today]?". That was odd phrasing. Why or how would Adams change his own title? Did Friedman misspeak and mean that he wonders if "Pegula will change Adams's title"? I'm not sure it's worth trying to sort out what Friedman might have some inside information on vs. what he is speculating on. I think a lot of the national coverage and speculation around the Sabres assumes that on some level the Sabres function like a normal major league franchise, when those of us who follow the team more closely know that is largely not the case. I mean, from the national media perspective, someone has to be fired, right? It could just be that Friedman is making that assumption, because what organization in this situation wouldn't make some changes to the front office? To me, anything less than there being a change in GM (regardless of what Adams's title ends up being), is just Pegula and Adams finding this year's scapegoat.