Thorny Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, nfreeman said: I don't think @GASabresIUFANwas claiming that JB shouldn't be held accountable for the ROR trade -- only that JB thought he was getting players consistent with the "moneypuck" approach. The first bolded is ridiculous on its face. "At least the Chicago fire helped clear some real estate plots." "At least Black Sunday helped the Sabres stay under the cap." "At least my hand doesn't itch any longer since that car accident in which I lost my arm." As to the 2nd bolded -- here is how @GASabresIUFANconcluded his post: So it seems pretty clear that GA was describing what he sees as JB's overall philosophy/plan, but also stating that the plan needs to start delivering results -- not just apologizing for him and ignoring bad moves. Is what he thought they were really relevant if he was wrong? It's the same thing as saying you want to build a team full of guys who can score, trading for guys you think can score, then when they don't, giving the GM credit for having a plan consistent with attempting to bring in talent. Who cares. Every GM thinks all of their moves are in tune with their specific strategy. I don't want to get in on the whole tank thing, and I'm not arguing one side or the other, but I don't think it's that ridiculous to claim the tank brought in good players (Eichel, etc), at least in so far as the story isn't finished being written. If Jack Conn Smythe's the Sabres to a cup. there will be a different line of thinking surrounding the tank, at least to some. As of now though, it has not yielded tangible results and in fact we've largely gone backward, so I'm in agreement there. Edited June 26, 2019 by Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, nfreeman said: The first bolded is ridiculous on its face. "At least the Chicago fire helped clear some real estate plots." "At least Black Sunday helped the Sabres stay under the cap." "At least my hand doesn't itch any longer since that car accident in which I lost my arm.” This is obnoxious. Edited June 26, 2019 by Hoss 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 13 minutes ago, nfreeman said: I don't think @GASabresIUFANwas claiming that JB shouldn't be held accountable for the ROR trade -- only that JB thought he was getting players consistent with the "moneypuck" approach. The first bolded is ridiculous on its face. "At least the Chicago fire helped clear some real estate plots." "At least Black Sunday helped the Sabres stay under the cap." "At least my hand doesn't itch any longer since that car accident in which I lost my arm." As to the 2nd bolded -- here is how @GASabresIUFANconcluded his post: So it seems pretty clear that GA was describing what he sees as JB's overall philosophy/plan, but also stating that the plan needs to start delivering results -- not just apologizing for him and ignoring bad moves. That's fine, I just happen to disagree. Nothing wrong with that. If everyone agreed this board would be boring to read. I think he's a poor evaluator of talent and that's why he tends to rely move on volume. I'm pretty sure he described it himself as throwing enough darts to hit some bulls eyes but I can't find the quote and I'm limited in my ability to search because I'm at work and half the links I click on are blocked. People ripped on Evander Kane for playing that way, but apparently it's a good philosophy for the guy running the team? I'd prefer a different GM that focused on quality instead of quantity. We have enough mediocre and bad players. We don't need any more guys like Sobotka or Danny O'Regan. Bums like that can be picked up on waivers all the time, but that's what quantity gets you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 26, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) @nfreeman Thank you! You are exactly right. I am not excusing Jbot but I do support what I see as his plan, but the plan is useless if we don't see vast improvement and soon. I by the way have was a very vocal critic of the Kane trade and his lack of action to support last year's team following Bergy's departure and the end of the streak. Getting Montour was way to little and way to late. As to Berglund, getting him, is exactly moneypuck. Sadly not every deal or move works out, but the reason for taking Bergy was to get a serviceable middle six center to shelter Mitts for a year or two. It didn't work in the end, but it actually had a pretty good start. The Sabres were 12-7-4 during Bergy's brief tenure with the club. While he only had 4 pts in those 23 games, he was starting in the D or neutral zone 80% of the time. Freeing Mitts to play in the offensive zone. This off-season all of us are praying that Jbot finds a serviceable middle center to take the load off Casey. Think we'll find a serviceable middle six center for as little as $3.5 mill we were supposed to pay Berglund? What if Bergy stays and gets it going like he was/is capable of? We were 12-7-4 with him and 21-32-6 without. If he had played to his potential, my guess is we make the playoffs and although we'd all still be annoyed for ROR's success, I doubt we'd have the Queen of Hearts chorus for Jbot we've been hearing for weeks. Edited June 26, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: @nfreeman Thank you! You are exactly right. I am not excusing Jbot but I do support what I see as his plan, but the plan is useless if we don't see vast improvement and soon. I by the way have was a very vocal critic of the Kane trade and his lack of action to support last year's team following Bergy's departure and the end of the streak. Getting Montour was way to little and way to late. As to Berglund, getting him, is exactly moneypuck. Sadly not every deal or move works out, but the reason for taking Bergy was to get a serviceable middle six center to shelter Mitts for a year or two. It didn't work in the end, but it actually has a pretty good start. The Sabres were 12-7-4 during Bergy's brief tenure with the club. This off-season all of us are praying that Jbot finds a serviceable middle center to take the load off Casey. Think we'll find a serviceable middle six center for as little as $3.5 mill we were supposed to pay Berglund? What if Bergy stays and gets it going like he was/is capable of? We were 12-7-4 with him and 21-32-6 without. If he had played to his potential, my guess is we make the playoffs and although we'd all still be annoyed for ROR's success, I doubt we'd have the Queen of Hearts chorus for Jbot we've been hearing for weeks. This is such a broad brush and ignores so many miles of context that I'd go as far as calling it a completely dishonest way to frame the way this season played out. Edited June 26, 2019 by Randall Flagg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 26, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said: This is such a broad brush and ignores so many miles of context that I'd go as far as calling it a completely dishonest way to frame the way this season played out. Read my edited post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 17 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: Read my edited post. I don't see a difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 26, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said: I don't see a difference Quote The Sabres were 12-7-4 during Bergy's brief tenure with the club. While he only had 4 pts in those 23 games, he was starting in the D or neutral zone 80% of the time. Freeing Mitts to play in the offensive zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 25 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said: This is such a broad brush and ignores so many miles of context that I'd go as far as calling it a completely dishonest way to frame the way this season played out. Exactly. It's just as bad as the argument that we finished in last with O'Reilly so losing him was no real loss. Not sure why that argument doesn't apply to Eichel, Reinhart, or anyone else on the team but it seems to get pulled out selectively and never applied across the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: Larry and Zemgus kept up those splits after Berglund left, and Mitts remained a top 3 most offensively used forward all season long. Before and after Berglund, Mitts was overwhelmed with that situation. And while Berglund was here, our middle six pulled a 12 game stretch of combining for just one goal. We were kept afloat during that time with regular .980 performances from the goalies, and Jack/Jeff pacing for 100pts/60 goals. We started the deterioration while Berglund was here, winning just 3 of his final 11 games in a Sabre uniform before he used his elite leadership and locker room skills to quit on the team 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 45 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: @nfreeman Thank you! You are exactly right. I am not excusing Jbot but I do support what I see as his plan, but the plan is useless if we don't see vast improvement and soon. I by the way have was a very vocal critic of the Kane trade and his lack of action to support last year's team following Bergy's departure and the end of the streak. Getting Montour was way to little and way to late. As to Berglund, getting him, is exactly moneypuck. Sadly not every deal or move works out, but the reason for taking Bergy was to get a serviceable middle six center to shelter Mitts for a year or two. It didn't work in the end, but it actually had a pretty good start. The Sabres were 12-7-4 during Bergy's brief tenure with the club. While he only had 4 pts in those 23 games, he was starting in the D or neutral zone 80% of the time. Freeing Mitts to play in the offensive zone. This off-season all of us are praying that Jbot finds a serviceable middle center to take the load off Casey. Think we'll find a serviceable middle six center for as little as $3.5 mill we were supposed to pay Berglund? What if Bergy stays and gets it going like he was/is capable of? We were 12-7-4 with him and 21-32-6 without. If he had played to his potential, my guess is we make the playoffs and although we'd all still be annoyed for ROR's success, I doubt we'd have the Queen of Hearts chorus for Jbot we've been hearing for weeks. No, it wasn't moneypuck. Berglund was terrible as a Sabre, Blues fans knew he was toast, and his wasn't even playing center anymore in St. Louis. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) 24 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said: 17 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said: Larry and Zemgus kept up those splits after Berglund left, and Mitts remained a top 3 most offensively used forward all season long. Before and after Berglund, Mitts was overwhelmed with that situation. And while Berglund was here, our middle six pulled a 12 game stretch of combining for just one goal. We were kept afloat during that time with regular .980 performances from the goalies, and Jack/Jeff pacing for 100pts/60 goals. We started the deterioration while Berglund was here, winning just 3 of his final 11 games in a Sabre uniform before he used his elite leadership and locker room skills to quit on the team Good post Randy. Had a long response typed out along similar lines that disappeared into the ether. Cliff notes version: Though Berglund was brought in to play 2C, he was used a lot as 4RW and was most effective there. THAT usage didn't shelter Mittelstadt at all as he was never going to be used in that role. Had Bergy stayed, there was no reason to expect Housley would finally leave that studly 4th line alone and even less reason to expect Bergy would get another crack at 2C nor that he'd have played well in that role as he hadn't earlier when given the chance. (Heck, there wasn't even reason to believe Housley would've taken him out of the press box rotation he'd found himself in towards the end of his stay.) But should Bergy have gotten his game back, GA was likely correct and that would've gotten the Sabres in the playoffs. Still believe there was a better chance to make them by Botterill using his unexpected cap space do-over to bring in an actual 2C when Bergy quit. Edited June 26, 2019 by Taro T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) Some chatter on Twitter that Ruotsalainen could be an option at 2C. ? Edited June 26, 2019 by Thorny 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 Chatter by whom? @Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 Just now, Randall Flagg said: Chatter by whom? @Thorny Twitter yokels. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 6 minutes ago, Thorny said: Some chatter on Twitter that Ruotsalainen could be an option at 2C. ? The kid at development camp? How many years from now are they expecting that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 20 minutes ago, Taro T said: The kid at development camp? How many years from now are they expecting that? He is going to be 22 next season and performed well in Liiga last season, so he should be near NHL ready. Not that I’m advocating for him to be 2C. That would probably be a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 40 minutes ago, Curtisp5286 said: He is going to be 22 next season and performed well in Liiga last season, so he should be near NHL ready. Not that I’m advocating for him to be 2C. That would probably be a stretch. He is why I think the team is confident staying where they are and running Samson out as 2C. You get to see if Samson hacks it full time at the pivot then if he doesn’t you toy with your latest foreign free agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, Hoss said: He is why I think the team is confident staying where they are and running Samson out as 2C. You get to see if Samson hacks it full time at the pivot then if he doesn’t you toy with your latest foreign free agent. Botterill seemed to indicate Reinhart would be staying at wing, but if what you propose is his plan, it's a bad plan. Edited June 27, 2019 by Thorny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 3 hours ago, Thorny said: Botterill seemed to indicate Reinhart would be staying at wing, but if what you propose is his plan, it's a bad plan. Certainly. Vogl has been pushing all summer that the team may very well want Samson to anchor his own line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Hoss said: Certainly. Vogl has been pushing all summer that the team may very well want Samson to anchor his own line. The team should want Samson to anchor his own line. The team should not plan on him doing that from the center position. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 All Jbot is seeing right now, hence why no action Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 Sound very much like the plan is to keep Sam on wing and get him someone he can feed. We’ve seen glimpses of another gear with Sam when he wants the puck more and is not deferring to Jack. But he needs better than Sheary to work with. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, dudacek said: Sound very much like the plan is to keep Sam on wing and get him someone he can feed. We’ve seen glimpses of another gear with Sam when he wants the puck more and is not deferring to Jack. But he needs better than Sheary to work with. I heard from my super secret source that JB has his eyes on these babies. Rumor has it, he's just slightly uncomfortable with giving up a prime piece for the full set, but if they throw in a late 1st in 2022 he may just pull the trigger. Edited June 27, 2019 by Drunkard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 What I want the forward line-up to look like: Skinner - Eichel - Donskoi Mittelstadt - Stastny - Reinhart Sheary - Rodrigues - Olofsson Girgensons - Larsson - Okposo (Donskoi could be a different UFA, also potentially switch Donskoi and Oloffson depending on how VO progresses) What I am worried it will look like: Skinner - Eichel - Olofsson Mittelstadt - Rodrigues - Reinhart Sheary - Larsson - Okposo Girgensons - Wilson - Thompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts