Archie Lee

I agree so much with the bolded. My view is that if something like this happened in a Panthers game, as an example, and the Panthers did not immediately respond and then after the game the narrative was "It was a one goal game and we didn't want to risk a penalty", they would have credibility because everyone knows there are no shortage of players on the Panthers who are willing to respond, plus they win a lot. When you are a team like the Sabres and you lose a lot and you have a reputation for being soft, then "it was a one goal game...", doesn't really hold water as an excuse. I found, by my observation, that most of the "improved responses" that we saw after the Noesen hit, were half-hearted and performative.

Here are some wingers, who are currently playing "top-six" roles for Eastern Conference playoff teams: Carolina: Jackson Blake, age 20. He had 34 points in 80 games this season. Florida: Mackie Samoskevich, age 21. He had 31 points in 72 games this season. Tampa: Gage Goncalves. 20 points in 60 games. Washington: Anthony Beauvillier. 25 points in 81 games. Toronto: Pointus Holmberg: 19 points in 68 games. NJ: Erik Haula. 21 points in 69 games. I think Benson is more than capable of playing a top 6 role on a playoff team. Thinking you can make the playoffs with Benson and Kulich both in your top 6, and on the same line no less, is likely very flawed and is repeating this year's mistakes.

Peters and Rivet aren't my "cup of tea" when it comes to hockey podcasting. But, they do have good insights into the mindsets of NHL players, particularly players who played similar roles to theirs. I listened to this particular episode of After the Whistle last night. I find Harrington and Hamilton very hard to listen to, and I typically disagree with most of their opinions. I think though, they are probably correct that Ruff will have increasing influence. What is a bit disappointing is how there is no interest in looking at Ruff's record since he left Buffalo, with a critical eye. They both clearly hold Ruff in very high esteem. I've seen a lot of head coaches over the years who did not need half a season to diagnose and repair what was wrong with a team. Ruff's status in the community, is just going to get him the benefit of the doubt in some circles. The cynic in me thinks that was part of the reason for bringing him back; his presence buys time. To bring it back to my 1st paragraph. I thought the one insightful portion of this episode came from Rivet. At one point Hamilton and Harrington, and to a lesser extent Peters, were going on about the Noesen hit on Thompson. They were in an uproar about the incident and about how in the following days Lindy Ruff had to teach these "NHL players" how to be good teammates*. Rivet, was having none of it and, I think correctly, spoke up for the players on the ice and said that they are likely good teammates and that they are players who just don't have it in their make-up or skill-set to respond to such incidents. He then pointed out that years ago if something like that happened when Pominville, Roy, and Vanek, were on the ice, none of them would have done anything. Rivet's view was that this falls on bad roster construction and that you need multiple players dotted through your line-up who are willing and able to respond either in the moment or in the aftermath. * Perhaps interesting that the two big "the players don't stick up for their teammates" incidents (Lucic/Miller, Thompson/Noesen), came with Ruff as head coach.

I agree that this is how it is shaping up. I will certainly be happy if Ruff is successful and won’t begrudge him any success. It would be a pretty cool story if he is the one who gets us back in the playoffs. I just don’t think there is much reason to think he is the future of the franchise.

Yeah, it’s almost like the Oilers did the opposite of what we have done. We have been relying on internal growth, without having the veterans around to provide balance to the roster. The Oilers had 3-4 younger guys poised to take the next step in their careers and likely could have improved by relying on internal growth. Their roster mistakes might cost them a lot more than one playoff series. As an aside, three players who are in the playoffs with their new teams who we easily could have outbid their new teams for in trade or UFA cost, are Logan Thompson, Cody Ceci, and Warren Foegele. They are collectively what we needed instead of Reimer/Levi, Jokiharju, and Aubé-Kubel.

The series is far from over, but going with Skinner, Arvidsson, Henrique over Holloway, Foegele, McLeod, is looking like an epic level failure. Not that we are where the Oilers were or are, but it is perhaps a cautionary tale about moving on from younger players for veterans. It has to be the right veterans.

The reason it works with Cassidy, in my view, is that aside from being difficult/demanding he is also just an elite-level NHL coach. I don’t think the “hard on players” approach works if you don’t have the coaching chops to render results. I guess that’s pretty obvious. I think the evidence is pretty overwhelming, particularly when it comes to the parts of the game that we are lacking (defensive structure, discipline), that Ruff has not been a good NHL HC for a long time now. I think that good coaches, regardless of whether they are difficult/demanding or a “player’s coach”, instil discipline, structure, and urgency. I frankly don’t care which style of coach we have. I just want a really good one.

I'm not sure if this is the right thread, but I wanted to make a comment about the 13 game losing streak. A lot has been written about Adams's failure to do anything to try and course correct during the streak., and I certainly understand the sentiment. Adams has now said that if he could do it over again he would do something, like call up a player from Rochester or maybe a trade (qualified, as always, by: "But I don't want to do anything reactionary that hurts us down the line".). I think this narrative that Adams should have done something and his begrudging acknowledgement of this, is letting Adams off the hook a bit. It suggests that Adams can learn from the mistake of letting things go south for too long before acting. It's really missing the point. THE POINT, is that in his 5th year as GM Adams iced a hockey team that was capable of losing 13 games in a row. The fix for this catastrophic error was required in June and July of 2024, not at the 4 game point of the losing streak. Calling up Brett Murray or Ryan Johnson or Isaac Rosen, was not going to fix that mess. The tie in to the thread, is that it has always been the case that the players are aware of management's shortcomings. As much as we want to think that the players should just be professionals and suck it up and play to their highest levels, it's naive to think that the players' preparation, commitment, focus, and effort, won't be negatively impacted by having one of their hands tied figuratively behind their backs by bad management.

I think the spot was left open for whoever seized it (Savoie, Benson, Kulich, or Rosen; and if one of them didn’t step-up, it would have just gone to Murray or Biro or a waiver claim). Benson definitely did earn the spot, but there should not have been a spot left so open.

Well, then I think the answer is that he is not that level of a player. Panarin and Kaprizov were/are game changing players without having a top-centre.

I agree in this sense: if everyone plays well with Dahlin and less so without him, then why not just pick Dahlin's partner once an for all and at least let that guy grow into the role of the 1st pairing partner of a Norris-trophy-level d-man. Then decide who you are keeping amongst the other d-men and go out and get the best partners you can for them. Why diminish everyone's value by showing the world they are only good with Dahlin?

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.