Jump to content
dudacek

Botterill’s makeover

2018 trades  

64 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you like what Jason Botterill has done to the roster?

    • No, O’Reilly and/or Kane were part of the solution, not part of the problem
    • No, he didn’t get enough value or the right pieces back
    • Yes, this team finally has some NHL depth and a strong pipeline
    • Yes, the dressing room needed a flush


Recommended Posts

A net recap of Botterill’s 2018 trades:

O’Reilly, Kane, Pu, Fasching, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 6th for 

Skinner, Sheary, Berglund, Sobotka, Thompson, Hickey, O’Regan, Hunwick and two 1sts, 2nd, 4th.

He also effectively swapped Lehner for Hutton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you put it that way, it looks like a wash, so maybe I'm more in NS' cold-eyed camp. What I'm hoping for is addition by subtraction — taking out potential lockerroom problems ROR, EK and Rockin' Robin will hurry up the culture change that is so badly needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't have a strong opinion yet, but I'm checking box 4 because I think a culture change was needed and the moves he has made appear to address that. Whether the talent will pan out depends a lot on the younger players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the second no.  Approach is fine but the execution leaves a bit to be desired.  I, imho, believe you add Berglund/ Sobotka types outside of major deals.  I think they could have been had for less.  If we paid the bonus, maybe the deal is Skinner/ Faulk for ROR and that pkg of ++.  I applaud the Skinner deal in the abstract as it was a good use of assets.  Just not sure where all the pieces fit if they do. Plus this team may score more but I shudder to think how they will fare when it gets nasty and the refs put the whistles in their pockets. Goaltending has not been upgraded just different bodies wearing the laundry.  If the experiment goes awry, and not saying it will as gt is very fickle from year to year, I am concerned about the bench boss being able to utilize the roster to minimize that weakness.  I do agree we will watch a different brand of hockey that should be more entertaining but whether it will lead to a better result in the standings is uncertain.  Go Sabres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need a choice for liked some of the moves, didn’t like others.  At best I’m neutral on the ROR trade.  Love the Skinner trade.  Not a fan of the Kane trade.

I will say this, I am very happy that we’re making hockey trades and not jettisoning good talent for lottery tickets.  Gives me some measure of hope anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From an asset management perspective Kane for Skinner is fair value. ROR for two firsts, Thompson and Sheary is fair value. Berglund for Pu and Sobotka for a 3rd probably fair value as well.

So overall I think he did a decent job on the value chart.

I prefer O’Reilly and Kane on the ice to Skinner and Sheary, but appreciate the need for speed and the way Botterill was able to improve NHL depth and add quality to the pipeline at the same time.

Ultimately, it’s about team building and the NHL pieces last year simply did not fit. So I voted four. We still live or die on the development of our last six first-rounders. Hopefully the changes made will allow them to shine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kane and Skinner is a wash...but I'll take O'Reilly over the package they got for him every single time. (*Tage Thompson better be VERY GOOD.)

They should've tried giving O'Reilly a winger like Skinner or Sheary before they gave up on him.

(It's just weird how soon people forget that O'Reilly was mentoring the kids every day after practice, then they found their egos and stopped showing up.)

Edited by Dank Dangleson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dank Dangleson said:


(It's just weird how soon people forget that O'Reilly was mentoring the kids every day after practice, then they found their egos and stopped showing up.)

Maybe the kids were on to something? 

Maybe the mentoring wasn’t helping. Maybe O’Reilly’s methods of self-flagellation aren’t for everyone?

I love O’Reilly as a player, but I don’t pretend to know how his personality affected culture. All I know is the GM talked culture change and O’Reilly, Kane and Lehner were the players shipped out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, dudacek said:

From an asset management perspective Kane for Skinner is fair value. ROR for two firsts, Thompson and Sheary is fair value. Berglund for Pu and Sobotka for a 3rd probably fair value as well.

So overall I think he did a decent job on the value chart.

I prefer O’Reilly and Kane on the ice to Skinner and Sheary, but appreciate the need for speed and the way Botterill was able to improve NHL depth and add quality to the pipeline at the same time.

Ultimately, it’s about team building and the NHL pieces last year simply did not fit. So I voted four. We still live or die on the development of our last six first-rounders. Hopefully the changes made will allow them to shine.

Not a fan of the efficient markets theory I see.  In the aggregate it looks like a wash.  But you can’t look at it that way in mho.  Each transaction is done at a point in time under different market conditions.  So when Kane goes you can’t say we got Skinner in return.  We got a magic box that can be possibly be used next year as likely not until 2020.  Same with the Blues magic box.  That it turned into a definite 2019 in the case of the Sharks is irrelevant.  You cant say Sheary without Hunwick.  Sheary good, Hunwick bad.  And why do we not get the benefit of appreciation, i.e. if we somehow dump Hunwick which Pitt couldn’t do, we pay a higher premium?  And Berglund and Sobotka were not traded for Pu +.   That we got Skinner for Pu + is what makes it a good use of assets.  

I agree what we had wasn’t working, but I heard the same thing last year with Blowu and poolsnot et al.  So I will reserve judgement.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted the first yes. I love the Sheary and Skinner trades. Maybe I would have preferred more from the O'Reilly and Kane trades, but I'm not privy to any league-wide sentiments toward those two, so I have to believe that Botterill maximized what he could get back. The Scandella trade was solid. The rest of his trades at the moment look to have provided decent organizational depth. Even the Beaulieu trade wasn't so bad when you consider what 3rd rounders typically provide a franchise anyway. Hutton was a nice free agent additon, and when it comes to the NHL free agent market, it's more about who Botterill didn't choose to sign than who he added which makes me content with his efforts so far.

I did not vote the second yes because I'm not remotely convinced the locker room rot has been sufficiently cleaned out. Botterill apparently gave the 26-and-over vets one season to show that they belonged and can capably lead, and all but 5 technically failed (Scandella, Bogo, Okposo, Pominville, Moulson). Actually, only Scandella likely passed. The other 4 are still with the organization solely due to their ridiculous, unmoveable contracts. A large percentage of the under-26 crowd are still here and are being given a second year to prove they are not locker room malcontents. This is a decision I'm okay with because of their perceived plasticity and on-ice potential, but many of them may not even get a second full season of evaluation (Beaulieu, Risto, McCabe, Reinhart, Baptiste, Bailey, Larsson, Girgensons, Nylander).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do a comparison.  Take out a sheet of paper or create a spreadsheet.  

First create the forward lineup as is abd then create one with re-signing Kane, keeping ROR  and maybe acquiring Sheary.  Which one is deeper, faster and better 5 on 5 scoring.  I think you’ll find the Jbot team better then the status quo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for 3 and 4.  The poller does allow multiple votes.  Later I will see how many times I can vote.  It's like the good old days.

That said, I am not happy with the fact that we lost 2 of our better players for ones that are not as good, on paper anyway.  I want to see what happens during the season.  We all know that it is not always the most talented team that wins, but often the team that puts it all together and works well together.  The Sabres were not that team the last few years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Do a comparison.  Take out a sheet of paper or create a spreadsheet.  

First create the forward lineup as is abd then create one with re-signing Kane, keeping ROR  and maybe acquiring Sheary.  Which one is deeper, faster and better 5 on 5 scoring.  I think you’ll find the Jbot team better then the status quo.  

Goal differential is the key.  Score more and give up more and the status quo remains.  Nothing indicates that we have addressed goal differerential other than possibly increasing one side of the ledger while also increasing the other.  That story will unfold come October.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't click any of those yet. I think it was a bad offseason until he added another top 6 body on Thursday. Now, it appears he accomplished a goal, but I won't like it or hate it until I see it play. At least he did stuff to a last place team, eh?

 

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Maybe the kids were on to something? 

Maybe the mentoring wasn’t helping. Maybe O’Reilly’s methods of self-flagellation aren’t for everyone?

I love O’Reilly as a player, but I don’t pretend to know how his personality affected culture. All I know is the GM talked culture change and O’Reilly, Kane and Lehner were the players shipped out.

I understand your broader point, but applying it to the practices is a little strange. It's not as if they stayed after for verbal berating. I know you've followed Samson with an incredibly close eye, so you must remember the muffin shot of October 2015, and how it transformed by the time he scored that hat trick in Winnipeg (watch the first goal he scored again), and what Samson focused on in the ROR practices. Even the suggestion that the kids were 'onto something' with respect to not showing up to skill-building exercises reeks of building justifications post-trade out of thin air like Buffalo fans are so fond of doing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey everybody,

Flagg is back and he is angry.

🚾 (this thingie is a European toilet and I use it for everyting ... in this case it replaces the 'winkie' thingie)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point regarding Botteril's makeover, it absolutely, 100% hinges on Mittlestadt being ready for a significant role on the team at center ice.  If Casey falters, we'll have one scoring line.  That's a pretty substantial bet.  If he works out this season, the moves should be enough to get us significant improvement.  If Casey can't make it happen this season, losing ROR is going to be extremely painful.

11 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I can't click any of those yet. I think it was a bad offseason until he added another top 6 body on Thursday. Now, it appears he accomplished a goal, but I won't like it or hate it until I see it play. At least he did stuff to a last place team, eh?

 

I understand your broader point, but applying it to the practices is a little strange. It's not as if they stayed after for verbal berating. I know you've followed Samson with an incredibly close eye, so you must remember the muffin shot of October 2015, and how it transformed by the time he scored that hat trick in Winnipeg (watch the first goal he scored again), and what Samson focused on in the ROR practices. Even the suggestion that the kids were 'onto something' with respect to not showing up to skill-building exercises reeks of building justifications post-trade out of thin air like Buffalo fans are so fond of doing.

 

It's not a Buffalo thing.  I'm sure every fanbase does it. Other than that, I agree with you generally here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Weave said:

Another point regarding Botteril's makeover, it absolutely, 100% hinges on Mittlestadt being ready for a significant role on the team at center ice.  If Casey falters, we'll have one scoring line.  That's a pretty substantial bet.  If he works out this season, the moves should be enough to get us significant improvement.  If Casey can't make it happen this season, losing ROR is going to be extremely painful.

I believe you are correct in that bet concerning Mittlestadt playing a big role.

The Sabres will miss ROR (and Kane for that matter) regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I understand your broader point, but applying it to the practices is a little strange. It's not as if they stayed after for verbal berating. I know you've followed Samson with an incredibly close eye, so you must remember the muffin shot of October 2015, and how it transformed by the time he scored that hat trick in Winnipeg (watch the first goal he scored again), and what Samson focused on in the ROR practices. Even the suggestion that the kids were 'onto something' with respect to not showing up to skill-building exercises reeks of building justifications post-trade out of thin air like Buffalo fans are so fond of doing.

Fair for what I wrote, but that's not what I intended. I absolutely think Sam and Jack and Risto need to grow up and be accountable for the team performance.

But I was trying to make a point about O'Reilly's sessions themselves, not the kids' reaction to it. We have no reason to assume they were inherently worthwhile any more than they weren't. We've all had #### coaches and teachers.

Separately, why do you think O'Reilly was auctioned off to the highest bidder?

33 minutes ago, Weave said:

Another point regarding Botteril's makeover, it absolutely, 100% hinges on Mittlestadt being ready for a significant role on the team at center ice.  If Casey falters, we'll have one scoring line.  That's a pretty substantial bet.  If he works out this season, the moves should be enough to get us significant improvement.  If Casey can't make it happen this season, losing ROR is going to be extremely painful.

This 100 %. It's Botterill's most dangerous bet.

Edited by dudacek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Weave said:

Another point regarding Botteril's makeover, it absolutely, 100% hinges on Mittlestadt being ready for a significant role on the team at center ice.  If Casey falters, we'll have one scoring line.  That's a pretty substantial bet.  If he works out this season, the moves should be enough to get us significant improvement.  If Casey can't make it happen this season, losing ROR is going to be extremely painful.

It's not a Buffalo thing.  I'm sure every fanbase does it. Other than that, I agree with you generally here.

Which is why I think he should be paired with Reinhart on his right and Sheary on his left.  Both of them are steady and can help bring him around.

Jack and Skinner will have to learn to play nice together and put the next best RW with them that can fit in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Caseys performance this year is a big question mark, but in his short stint last year he got like what, 5 points in 6 games?

With another year under his belt & with how hard he's been working to get ready, I'm pretty confident he'll be okay. Im not as worried about it as some of you are.

I'm more afraid of him getting hurt, since we don't really have that enforcer type of player on our roster to help protect him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cheektorado said:

Which is why I think he should be paired with Reinhart on his right and Sheary on his left.  Both of them are steady and can help bring him around.

Jack and Skinner will have to learn to play nice together and put the next best RW with them that can fit in.

I wouldn't define Reinhart as steady.  He was on vacation for the 1st half of last season.  Put one of the heady, grizzled vets on his right wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's not an appropriate option for me.  I don't like what he got back for Kane, happenstance (a first next year) being what it is.  I don't hate the O'Reilly trade, but I don't love it, either.  But I love the Skinner deal, who wouldn't?  I am very much in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Eleven said:

There's not an appropriate option for me.  I don't like what he got back for Kane, happenstance (a first next year) being what it is.  I don't hate the O'Reilly trade, but I don't love it, either.  But I love the Skinner deal, who wouldn't?  I am very much in the middle.

It's like we compared notes....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it really is too early to tell but its the offseason so we ask these questions. But we really need to see how these guys play. If Thompson is a failure or if he becomes a success, then that obviously impacts grading the trade. Same goes with the players we get with the draft picks. Whether JBots trades them or selects players, we need to see what becomes of them before we can truly grade the trade. Come December we'll have a better idea of where we are.

But I voted #3, we have better depth & talent in the pipeline. I dont see how people can be overly critical of the moves JBotts made.

He inherited crap. Its hard to turn crap into gold. Getting rid of the Pu should help turn our team into a Skinner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×