Sabres Lines September 23

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

My own view is wait and see before judging. I personally have no problems with a better player taking his spot, but he has to be better. Give me the best 12 forwards, the best 4 lines for their assigned roles, the best chemistry they can find between players, and let them show us what they can do. If that's Sobodka I have no problem with it. If it's someone else, great. As long as we compete and hopefully win.

If it is Sobotka I have a major f-ing problem with it because it means that Botterill didn't acquire enough talent in the offseason to make Soboka irrelevant. I don't know a guy that is defensively meh and offensively complete trash.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

Your strawman of Moulson coming back is just absurd. 

And again, I'm not "expecting" anything.  I simply think that Krueger will fill the available roster spots based on what he sees, not what he's been told.

And if he sees anything indicating that having Sobotka in the lineup is a good thing (barring significant injuries), then what we are seeing is a coach with questionable personnel evaluative skills.

And Sobotka HASN'T been put in the regular season lineup yet; so hopefully this discussion is moot.

[#freejame]

I think what doohickie is getting at is if the Sabres go 82-0 with 18 Sobotkas he couldn’t care less that Sobotka is in.

[Randall Flagg]

8 minutes ago, #freejame said:

I think what doohickie is getting at is if the Sabres go 82-0 with 18 Sobotkas he couldn’t care less that Sobotka is in.

Perhaps, but what on earth kind of thought experiment is that 

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, #freejame said:

I think what doohickie is getting at is if the Sabres go 82-0 with 18 Sobotkas he couldn’t care less that Sobotka is in.

Neither does anybody else.  But when there are obviously better options than him and there is a tremendous likelihood that having him in the lineup WILL COST THE TEAM GAMES, how likely is a team with just 1 Sobotka in the lineup to make the playoffs versus 1 without?

[bob_sauve28]

Just now, Taro T said:

Neither does anybody else.  But when there are obviously better options than him and there is a tremendous likelihood that having him in the lineup WILL COST THE TEAM GAMES, how likely is a team with just 1 Sobotka in the lineup to make the playoffs versus 1 without?

The only way I can see him possibly getting in the line up is if both Mitts and Tage get sent down to get a lot of ice time. But even then I think I'd want Lazar in the line up. It would not surprise me if he just sits from now on, though. 

[Taro T]

4 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

The only way I can see him possibly getting in the line up is if both Mitts and Tage get sent down to get a lot of ice time. But even then I think I'd want Lazar in the line up. It would not surprise me if he just sits from now on, though. 

Yeah, pretty sure I'm out of this discussion unless & until Sobotka actually ends up in the lineup when the games count.

[LGR4GM]

15 hours ago, Taro T said:

Sheesh.  You make it seem like the Liger is never right.  He is sometimes. ?

(Just joshin' ya, Liger. ? )

THE GERMANS DIDN"T BOMB PEARL HARBOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

... sorry what happened, I had a flashback... Oh yea, Sobotka shouldn't be on the team. 

[PerreaultForever]

19 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

If it is Sobotka I have a major f-ing problem with it because it means that Botterill didn't acquire enough talent in the offseason to make Soboka irrelevant. I don't know a guy that is defensively meh and offensively complete trash.

Maybe. Probably. I'm just saying I'm going to trust in the coaching staff and their system until it proves faulty by results (or lack there of). Part of the problem with Housley's team was a lack of clearly defined roles and a lack of structure. Too much juggling of lines and pairings and players not knowing where they were supposed to be or what they were supposed to do - especially defensively. I am hoping this year it'll be different and this team will be better disciplined, roles will be clear, and some (if not all) players will be able to fill those roles adequately. In that context, I am hoping Sobodka can fill a role as a lower end checking forward. If he can't, there's the door, no problem.

As for multiple other players being better, lots of our forwards are mixed reviews. Good at one thing but lacking at another. I've said it before and will say it often, it's not just about scoring. we will see who the best fit is on this team.

I question the Skinner-Johanson-Okposo combo as perhaps trying too hard to spread out the scoring but maybe it's possible. Johanson is a great passer and a good playmaker so maybe paired with our top goal scorer isn't a bad idea. Kyle as the 3rd member might be stretching it and putting too much hope in a veteran regaining his touch. I personally found the Swedish Connection more intriguing, but the good news is Mitts is bumped down the roster either way. 

[LGR4GM]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Maybe. Probably. I'm just saying I'm going to trust in the coaching staff and their system until it proves faulty by results (or lack there of). Part of the problem with Housley's team was a lack of clearly defined roles and a lack of structure. Too much juggling of lines and pairings and players not knowing where they were supposed to be or what they were supposed to do - especially defensively. I am hoping this year it'll be different and this team will be better disciplined, roles will be clear, and some (if not all) players will be able to fill those roles adequately. In that context, I am hoping Sobodka can fill a role as a lower end checking forward. If he can't, there's the door, no problem.

As for multiple other players being better, lots of our forwards are mixed reviews. Good at one thing but lacking at another. I've said it before and will say it often, it's not just about scoring. we will see who the best fit is on this team.

I question the Skinner-Johanson-Okposo combo as perhaps trying too hard to spread out the scoring but maybe it's possible. Johanson is a great passer and a good playmaker so maybe paired with our top goal scorer isn't a bad idea. Kyle as the 3rd member might be stretching it and putting too much hope in a veteran regaining his touch. I personally found the Swedish Connection more intriguing, but the good news is Mitts is bumped down the roster either way. 

I actually am tired of this narrative because good players succeed regardless. 

Risto has been bad under multiple coaches. Sobotka was bad in St Louis and simply worse here. Maybe the problem isn't just the system but having players that simply aren't good at hockey (Sobotka). 

[Doohickie]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Sobotka was bad in St Louis and simply worse here.

I actually am tired of this narrative.  He was meh, not awful, in St. Louis.  The worst season of his career was last year.

[Randall Flagg]

6 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I actually am tired of this narrative.  He was meh, not awful, in St. Louis.  The worst season of his career was last year.

No, his last year in St. Louis was bad, and had all St. Louis fans writing him out of the lineup for the following season before the trade ever happened. I know this because I went over there towards the end of that season to inquire about how much it'd cost to get depth like Sobotka, since we needed depth so bad. The message was clear: he's shot, don't bother, look elsewhere, because he's not a good hockey player anymore. I was surprised, because I had remembered him as a PITA to play against. 

Of course, nobody here liked when I told that story, and they talked about how Phil's system would help and how he'd be good in the proper role here, and then this season happened.

And now we're again talking about how he might be fine! 

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by Randall Flagg

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I actually am tired of this narrative.  He was meh, not awful, in St. Louis.  The worst season of his career was last year.

No he was bad in St Louis his last year and atrocious in Buffalo. Just because a turd stinks more than another turd doesn't make it a cookie. 

9 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

No, his last year in St. Louis was bad, and had all St. Louis fans writing him out of the lineup for the following season before the trade ever happened. I know this because I went over there towards the end of that season to inquire about how much it'd cost to get depth like Sobotka, since we needed depth so bad. The message was clear: he's shot, don't bother, look elsewhere, because he's not a good hockey player anymore. I was surprised, because I had remembered him as a PITA to play against. 

Of course, nobody here liked when I told that story, and they talked about how Phil's system would help and how he'd be good in the proper role here, and then this season happened.

And now we're again talking about how he might be fine! 

 

Hold up, I said the trade was garbage and Sobotka and Berglund were essential cap dumps. 

[Doohickie]

Oh, I think we knew from the get-go that Sobotka and Berglund were cap dumps.

and for the record, I realize that Sobotka is probably hot trash this year as he was last year.  My only point was that if he shows up and earns his job, I don't care what his past history is.

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Doohickie said:

Oh, I think we knew from the get-go that Sobotka and Berglund were cap dumps.

I knew the cap played a role, but I also thought they were going to help our forward depth. Sobotka had 30 points that season and played a fair amount of minutes on a good team, Berglund was a good soldier capable of scoring 20 goals.

It was good reminder of how a look at a stat sheet and memories of a handful of games where a player left a positive impression is no substitute for actual recent scouting.

The parallels between these two and Vesey and Johansson are kinda scary.

[Weave]

40 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Just because a turd stinks more than another turd doesn't make it a cookie.

Mmmmmm..... relative cookies

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

Mmmmmm..... relative cookies

Did DNA testing confirm this?

[Doohickie]

35 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The parallels between these two and Vesey and Johansson are kinda scary.

Vesey seems to be hustling and bringing the energy so far in pre-season.  He's on the upswing of his career still (hopefully) and Mojo at this point is who he is and probably isn't going to get better.  And so far in preseason I don't see any evidence that he is more than JAG.  He might be another Berglotka.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Doohickie

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Vesey seems to be hustling and bringing the energy so far in pre-season.  He's on the upswing of his career still (hopefully) and Mojo at this point is who he is and probably isn't going to get better.  And so far in preseason I don't see any evidence that he is more than JAG.  He might be another Berglotka.

He's what? 26. Age curve says this will be his best year or the start of his decline. 

[TrueBlueGED]

51 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I knew the cap played a role, but I also thought they were going to help our forward depth. Sobotka had 30 points that season and played a fair amount of minutes on a good team, Berglund was a good soldier capable of scoring 20 goals.

It was good reminder of how a look at a stat sheet and memories of a handful of games where a player left a positive impression is no substitute for actual recent scouting.

The parallels between these two and Vesey and Johansson are kinda scary.

I genuinely appreciate your ability to be honest with what you thought at the time. I remember some knock-down arguments on this forum at the time of the trade revolving around whether Sobotka and Berglund were cap dumps or had hockey value. 

[Radar]

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I genuinely appreciate your ability to be honest with what you thought at the time. I remember some knock-down arguments on this forum at the time of the trade revolving around whether Sobotka and Berglund were cap dumps or had hockey value. 

I think most of us here are quite upset by the ROR trade. I know I was and was elated when we got him. Serious question. If we could blot that out of our minds what is your view of Botterill?  If I don't take that bad trade into consideration I honestly don't think he's doing that bad. Not great but acceptable. He's building our depth and I have no reason to feel he's missed making any moves he could have improved our team with.

[TrueBlueGED]

4 minutes ago, Radar said:

I think most of us here are quite upset by the ROR trade. I know I was and was elated when we got him. Serious question. If we could blot that out of our minds what is your view of Botterill?  If I don't take that bad trade into consideration I honestly don't think he's doing that bad. Not great but acceptable. He's building our depth and I have no reason to feel he's missed making any moves he could have improved our team with.

He's entering season #3 and the team isn't any better in the standings than when he took over. I'm to the point where I don't care about individual moves much compared to the whole product. And the whole product says he's done a poor job. 

[Drunkard]

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I genuinely appreciate your ability to be honest with what you thought at the time. I remember some knock-down arguments on this forum at the time of the trade revolving around whether Sobotka and Berglund were cap dumps or had hockey value. 

Yeah, the revisionist history is getting thick in these parts. Lots of people defended the trade and tried to view it and fatter Pugsley in the best possible light.

First it was all about the valuable depth! we got for a single player. Then when it was obvious that Berglund and Sobotka sucked and Thompson wasn't ready for the NHL the narrative switched to how the trade was still smart because look how great we are doing without him and how O'Reilly was a cancer, just look how badly St. Louis is doing because of him. Once those trends started reversing and Berglund quit suddenly it became about how shrewd Botterill was in acquiring valuable cap space like he tricked Berglund into quitting when it was just dumb luck on his end. Eventually everyone came around to realize/admit it was a horrible trade and now suddenly everyone knew they were cap dumps.

I look forward to fatter Pugsley getting fired so 6 months later everyone can agree on how much he sucks.

[Radar]

4 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

He's entering season #3 and the team isn't any better in the standings than when he took over. I'm to the point where I don't care about individual moves much compared to the whole product. And the whole product says he's done a poor job. 

Fair enough but what could he have done that he hasn't. I guess the real question is how long reasonably speaking does it take to take a last place team to a playoff competitor?  Maybe our long standing frustration has made us unrealistic in our expectations. Hey, I'm not getting any younger so I want it turned around as quickly as anyone but what's realistic timing for a new management team to get it turned?

[TrueBlueGED]

27 minutes ago, Radar said:

Fair enough but what could he have done that he hasn't. I guess the real question is how long reasonably speaking does it take to take a last place team to a playoff competitor?  Maybe our long standing frustration has made us unrealistic in our expectations. Hey, I'm not getting any younger so I want it turned around as quickly as anyone but what's realistic timing for a new management team to get it turned?

We don't know what we don't know, ya know? I can't say he should have done X or Y, but he didn't take over the worst team in the league. The team had coaching, blue line, and forward depth issues, to be sure. But it wasn't like he took over the tank team--they just had seasons of 81 and 78 points. He proceeded to turn over the majority of the roster, and iced two teams worse than the team he took over (62 and 76 points, with worse goal differentials both years), while needing to fire his coach. 

I don't know there's a general "this is how long it takes to build a playoff team" number that exists as it's all so context-dependent. But I'm very confident the team wasn't in such bad shape that they had to take two steps backward before a single step forward.