EM88

The point of my entire post isn't that a great QB isn't enough, it is that without a great QB most teams will drop off considerably. I never debated nor disagreed with a great QB not being enough. There is also a difference between a QB playing 'great' vs 'elite'. Most elite level QB's, like Josh Allen, Patrick Mahomes, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, those elite level guys are enough to make a team a consistent contender with just about any roster.

100% agree. Going into this season I put a lot of the Sabres woes on the Defensemen. Some of the posts like the above helped me to see things differently when I watch replays. Often times it looks like our D-men are woefully out of position or do not make plays they should. However as pointed out by many of you, they get very little help from the forwards. Worse yet, the D-men are out of position because our Forwards like Cozens and Quinn and Krebs and Peterka are late getting back or are so out of position, that our D-men have to play things half-way and cover for the negligent forward play. The Defense on this team certainly is not elite. But they are much better than many give credit to. I do believe Krebs has improved from my list of above. But the other three, Cozens and Quinn mostly and sometimes Peterka: If they were replaced with forwards that were just average in terms of defensive coverage, our defense unit would look downright above-average.

What is the list of examples you speak of? Where a great team lost their great QB and then wasn't considerably worse?

Everywhere I look shows their numbers are not solid at all, but awful. This year when they play together, 5 on 5, their Corsi percentage, comparing corsi for vs corsi against (a number better than 50 is positive) and those 2 together are at 46.4. The rest of the team without either of them on the ice is 50.48. When I look up Fenwick percentage, I see them at 44.4. The rest of the team without them is 50.48. I personally consider Goals for percentage the single most telling of the advanced analytics. Cozens and Quinn together are at 39.13, just awful. The rest of the team when neither of them is on the ice actually have good numbers, playoff-level team numbers at 54.73. Expected goal percentage the 2 of them together are at 41.95. The rest of the team without either of them on the ice is at 48.46. High danger chances, high danger goals, the list goes on and on, they drag the entire team down considerably. The Sabres are a much better team in almost every analytical category, harder to play against, overall out-play their opponents, and they are actually a positive team in terms of goal differential when those 2 are not on the ice.

If that did happen, that is the biggest indictment of anyone associated with this team, and in my personal opinion why this lack of success all falls at the feet of Pegula. The blanket cries to fire Adams as GM mean nothing if the above is true and Pegula does not change his mind about it. Better to keep Adams and everyone else until things get so bad that Pegula changes his mind on it.

I was thinking of writing a response to this, central to what could have been different if they did name O'Reilly captain, but as I sat down to type it out, it just became too depressing.

I would disagree with your last statement. There are many examples, and few exceptions, of an elite QB making a team good-to-great every year, and when they are no longer there, the team quickly fades.

I guess I must learn my lesson to not bring up anything bad about the Buffalo Bills here. Let me repeat, I am not saying they are bad as the Sabres. What I am saying is I have read alot of talk about how they are a super-well run organization that does almost everything correctly. My point, as a somewhat outsider to football, is can they really be run that well when they have what many consider a top 5 player in the league and they have not even made a superbowl yet? In no way am I saying they should not be fun to watch for those who enjoy their games. I am not saying they are a bad team. I am simply saying that they have had quite a few years with Josh Allen giving them elite-level play, and as an organization have not been good enough to make the proper moves around him to reach a title game. That is it.

I am not saying they are poorly run. Just not quite at the top of the list as many people think. As I said, even with Josh Allen, not even one Superbowl appearance yet. The reason I brought it up is many think the Bills are an elite organization. I do not think so. They are a good organization, with a great QB ,Much better than the Sabres, yes. but not good enough yet.

In business, there is often a fine line between thinking the fans are your customers that you are providing a product/service for them, or thinking the fans are they to support your product and your vision. When a team is failing like the Sabres, Terry Pegula seems to run the franchise more as if this is his product, his toy to play with, and the fans are just the ones that fill up the seats and pay money to support his project.

Agree on the Bandits. With the Bills, one can take a different side of the argument than what is popular. Maybe, just maybe they are less of a success story than we think. How many times has a team had a Quarterback as good as Josh Allen has been and has yet to reach the superbowl let alone win one? I personally put him in a category that has 95% of Quarterbacks with his talent already at least making a superbowl appearance by this point of his career. Yes, Patrick Mahomes is in his way. But Brady did not stop Roethlisberger or Manning from reaching, and winning the Superbowl. If you were to make up a list of the greatest Quarterbacks of the past 25 years, Allen and Lamar Jackson are probably the only 2 that have not even made a Superbowl, let alone winning one. That might say something more about the organization around them. Remove the starting QB, and I think Kanas City, Philadelphia, San Francisco, the Rams, Pittsburgh, and recently the Vikings and Lions are better teams, and probably have been or are currently better run organiztions top to bottom.

I agree. The truth to me is that Jack Eichel is a better player overall in Vegas than he was in Buffalo. Some of the reason for that may be coaching, it may be the position he was put in. Most of it is that he had a little growing up to do, like many young players. The organization and fan base lifted him up as a chosen one, so he did not have as much incentive on his own to do that growing up. I put that a little on him, a tad bit on the coaching, but mostly in the entire organization at a management level.

Dylan Cozens effect. He almost single-handedly negates the positive analytics of many of the players. In many analytical categories, put a player with Dylan Cozens and they are a lot worse. Most players are positive players, meaning they are on the ice for more goals scored than goals against, except for Dylan Cozens and Jack Quinn. Even last year and the year before, he has a negative impact on many more players than the has a positive impact. It is not just even strength either. Someone else, I think mjd1001, posted an interesting fact and I went back and verified it. In the games before he got hurt against Philadelphia last year, Dylan Cozens was on every single powerplay and the Sabres went multiple games without a power play goal. He got hurt, missed a couple games and the Sabres scored a Powerplay goal in every game he missed. He came back and the next few games he was back on every single powerplay and they failed to score in any of those next 3-4 games. He is a boat anchor that drags the entire team down. He needs to immediately and drastically change his play or he needs to go.

This has been brought up before: Despite all the high draft picks, the team is lacking a truly exciting, get the fans out of their seat, elite talent. Tage Thompson can be that at times, but not all the time. With all their top 5 picks, They had 2 guys that are now superstars at forward they traded away in Eichel and Reinhart. With the other 2 picks you got Dahlin who can be/is great, but not as exciting as an elite forward, and Power who we are still waiting on. There have been plenty of teams that have had multiple top 5 picks overall picks when they were bad, such as Pittsburgh, Chicago, New Jersey, Edmonton, and others. Most ended up with a superstar, or multiple game changing superstars up front. Malkin, Crosby, Patrick Kane, Hischier, Hughes, McDavid, and others. Maybe Dahlin in the long run will make this team better. But a failing of this organization is with 4 top 2 picks, they didn't end up with one forward they kept that is both exciting and game changing on this roster.

It is not optimal. However, I do not think it is a disaster. A USA-Finland final will be tuned in by almost as many hardcore hockey fans than if it was Canada, and many of the casual fans that tune in will just want to see the USA win.

If you are 53, it is likely that, if the team remains in Buffalo, that the Sabres will have a new owner before you are gone. Is that looking on the bright side?

I think the only pressure that Adams will respond to will be from Pegula. If Pegula wants him to make a deal, he will make a deal. The question therefore becomes, is the fan and media pressure getting to Pegula?

To be fair, is it not the point of this thread to post things like he posted? To tell them to 'let em be' and to say someone sounds like a grumpy hater, is that not the same in spirit as telling one to not complain about things in the complaint thread?

Michelle Obama Celebrates 'Galentine's Day' with Her Friends https://people.com/politics/michelle-obama-celebrates-galentines-day-parks-and-rec/

Lets not forget about ad revenue. How much money does the NHL make from their regional network suscribers or their national contract that is on Cable TV? I would be interested to find out how much revenue that is per game. Then let us suppose many of the games were available on a free app. No cable subscription. No pricey app. Just a free game and your revenue per game is what you can sell in ads. I would think giving the game away for free with many more viewers might not be all that far behind the other revenue generated per game. So take that 2nd free option where you get the ad revenue. Maybe charge a small fee for the app, like $10 per month. Project how many more fans you will have on the long term going to games and buying merch. I would think in the long run the 2nd model may not be all that bad. The owners want that guaranteed income generated the old fashioned way. They also seem to not want to give away their product for free. It may generate more revenue long term but some of those crusty old owners do not want anyone to get over on them and get their product without paying something. Cable companies and networks are nothing but a way to distribute your game. The need for them is less now than it was before put more games on the NHL network and make games free on streaming. Oh, and make sure its easy to take those games streaming on a pc or phone or tablet and cast them to a full sized tv. Why not cut out the middle-man cable company/network totally? The cable companies and networks have to make money off the games, why not take that profit, keep it for yourself, or keep some of it for yourself and use the other to grow your fan base by making your games more available?

Most sides of this argument make good points. I tend to agree with the above more than not. Terry Pegula can both care too much and not enough. How is that? He can put the franchise on auto-run much of the time, but on the few occasions he does show up, he wants to 'catch up' and gets too involved at those times. Kevyn Adams might be the day to day issue with the team, but that can also fall at the feet of Terry Pegula. It is possible, in my opinion likely, that Pegula can have made a bad hire or hires to run his hockey department and is letting them make bad decisions, all the while the reason he did make that bad hire is that he did not want to pay top dollar for a higher priced hockey department while he was still paying many members or previous staff. As far as conspiracy theories go, often times the best way to defend our point of view, or conspiracy theory, is to call an opposing point of view to your own a conspiracy theory. In my short time posting on this forum, I do find that behavior happens a lot on this forum when people disagree.

If a trade were available involving Dylan Cozens for a player of similar skill and production to McLeod, that would make the team better than it is now. Not because McLeod type players are game changes, but rather a player like him brings only a fraction of the negatives that Dylan Cozens does. If you take raw emotion out of the equation, then Adams is not a bad person to be making roster moves. The last big trade he made looks darn good right now, in the Mittlestadt for Byram move. Offseason acquisitions have been hit and miss like most teams, but there are some good ones in there. A handful of other posters point out that the issue with Adams is he does not make enough moves. It is not that he makes bad moves. His record does seem to show if he makes a move with Cozens there is probably an equal chance it will or will not be a good move for the team in the long run. The indictment of Adams is that move has not been made yet, and that indictment will be justified even further if no move is made with him at all. When people say they do not want Adams making a move because he is bad at moves, that criticism is misplaced to me. It is not the quality of the moves he makes, it is the lack of moves or waiting too long to make those moves.

What are the raw skills anyway? He is an above average skater as far as speed. But yet he can be clumsy on his skates in traffic. His shot looks good, maybe his release, but it is pretty inaccurate and he's not blasting 100mph shots. He is 6'3" tall, but well under 200 lbs. He is willing to hit, but he's not laying out people and lets not even talk about his fighting. He does not stick handle well, losing the puck in traffic quite a bit. He does not have the willingness or the ability to block shots. He does not sense open linemates and certainly is not a master of stick to stick passes. Many people on this board talk about his raw skill and talent, even those who don't like him cite his raw talent. But other than 1 or two areas out of many (above average straight line speed and 6'3 tall), where is the excess of raw talent he has that is just waiting to be harnessed?

It does not make any sense to change or remove letters mid season. What end does it serve? If the players in question are that much of an issue, bench them, trade them. Make the letter moves in the offseason.

At times companies and ad companies get too cute with their commercials. I guess their strategy works. For me a good commercial is one that opens with telling me what I am watching the commercial for, tells me the benefits of the product, and then ends reminding me what the product is for. Every so often I will watch a commercial and I have no idea what it is for. Even if the finally tell us at the very end of the commercial what the product is, it is not as effective. If I commercial starts to air and they keep the product a mystery, then the whole time I watch it I am not 'taking in' the commercial, instead I'm thinking for the first 28 seconds of it, what is this for? For me the worst are the drug company ads. I feel like I see them so much that I can hum, if not recite the jingles from them. And no, I am not going to go to my doctor and tell him the medication I want because I saw an advertisement for it. Gambling site ads are a close 2nd.