Sabres Lines September 23

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

If Berglund is still here, there was minimal to no cap savings in that deal.

And unless Botterill knew that Berglund would walk away midyear and then waste most of a year's newly found cap space, working the deal to free up cap doesn't seem accurate.

Short term. There was no savings short term.

I think Berglund was supposed to fill Johansson's role. 

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Short term. There was no savings short term.

I think Berglund was supposed to fill Johansson's role. 

But that still doesn't help your case because they are different players. Berglund walked away and Sobotka is bad. The trade was bad even if Johnasson is good because we only got Johansson because Berglund walked away not because we traded ROR. 

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

But that still doesn't help your case because they are different players. Berglund walked away and Sobotka is bad. The trade was bad even if Johnasson is good because we only got Johansson because Berglund walked away not because we traded ROR. 

Listen, I'm not going to litigate this whole thing right now. But we can do it in a few years and it'll all make sense.

[Taro T]

Just now, darksabre said:

Short term. There was no savings short term.

I think Berglund was supposed to fill Johansson's role. 

I'd agree Berglund was brought in for that role, but he never showed any inclination to actually assume the role.

And people here last year were hoping Botterill would trade in-season for Johansson (or others, but Johansson 's name was included) to keep from wasting being in 1st overall in late November.

To save a 2nd and a 4th round pick, Botterill threw last year away.  And it made a bad trade worse.

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

I'd agree Berglund was brought in for that role, but he never showed any inclination to actually assume the role.

And people here last year were hoping Botterill would trade in-season for Johansson (or others, but Johansson 's name was included) to keep from wasting being in 1st overall in late November.

To save a 2nd and a 4th round pick, Botterill threw last year away.  And it made a bad trade worse.

Like I said, let's talk about this again in a few years. I think it'll make more sense then.

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Like I said, let's talk about this again in a few years. I think it'll make more sense then.

No it won't. It was a bad trade unless Thompson actually hits and hits hard. 

[darksabre]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No it won't. It was a bad trade unless Thompson actually hits and hits hard. 

Wow what if that's a part of it and all this pants-shitting is premature?

 

[dudacek]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

No it won't. It was a bad trade unless Thompson actually hits and hits hard. 

 

If Johnson hits as 2nd pairing guy, Tage becomes a 20 goal man and Miller is what he had been, AND someone emerges as a 2nd line centre, we win the trade 

That’s a lot of “Ifs”?

 

Semi-related, has anyone else noticed how much Sam’s game so far has resembled O’Reilly’s?

He’s winning nearly every contested puck and playing with a pace we haven’t seen from him.

Easily the best Sabre in camp, IMO, for whatever that’s worth.

[Taro T]

8 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Like I said, let's talk about this again in a few years. I think it'll make more sense then.

Given the constraint to trade him before the bonus kicked in, he probably did get the best offer available.

And, WITH O'Reilly, they probably don't end up 5th from the bottom so they don't get Cozens.  But pulling Cozens out of the equation (as the Sabres finish last year is a true unknown), there is no way this team would be worse off with O'Reilly in it in 2 years.  He'll still be one of the best defensive forwards in the league and will still be able to contribute offensively. 

And the Sabres WILL be good next year and moving forward for the foreseeable future.  Agree that relitigating the trade is fruitless at this time.

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

If Johnson hits as 2nd pairing guy, Tage becomes a 20 goal man and Miller is what he had been, AND someone emerges as a 2nd line centre, we win the trade 

That’s a lot of “Ifs”?

 

Semi-related, has anyone else noticed how much Sam’s game so far has resembled O’Reilly’s?

He’s winning nearly every contested puck and playing with a pace we haven’t seen from him.

Easily the best Sabre in camp, IMO, for whatever that’s worth.

I have noticed that Reinhart appears different. This seems like a good summary. 

16 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Wow what if that's a part of it and all this pants-shitting is premature?

 

Than I guess I need to go shopping for new pants. 

[...]

21 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Semi-related, has anyone else noticed how much Sam’s game so far has resembled O’Reilly’s?

That very thought entered my head at some point during the game last night and I decided that it has to be something else.  But, he really did have a ROR going on.  It was...weird.  Welcome, but weird.

[Drunkard]

41 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Like I said, let's talk about this again in a few years. I think it'll make more sense then.

A few more years, huh? Good to know that we're already planning on wasting the ELC of Cozens to go along with Eichel, Reinhart, and Dahlin.

We're like the Bad News Bears except "just wait till next year" in more like "just wait till 2-3 years from now, then we'll show you"! The only reason I honestly think things will get better in 2 or 3 years is because Botterill won't be here.

 

[LGR4GM]

7 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

A few more years, huh? Good to know that we're already planning on wasting the ELC of Cozens to go along with Eichel, Reinhart, and Dahlin.

We're like the Bad News Bears except "just wait till next year" in more like "just wait till 2-3 years from now, then we'll show you"! 

 

Hey I agree with half of your post! 

We can't keep doing this a few more years thing. The year is now. 

[darksabre]

14 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

A few more years, huh? Good to know that we're already planning on wasting the ELC of Cozens to go along with Eichel, Reinhart, and Dahlin.

We're like the Bad News Bears except "just wait till next year" in more like "just wait till 2-3 years from now, then we'll show you"! The only reason I honestly think things will get better in 2 or 3 years is because Botterill won't be here.

 

It's like people wake up every year completely forgetting that sports doesn't care about their impatience.

[Drunkard]

36 minutes ago, darksabre said:

It's like people wake up every year completely forgetting that sports doesn't care about their impatience.

I'm not saying they have to do it for me at all. I stopped giving this team my money years ago and I fully understand that even if I was still funneling my money to them, it doesn't entitle me to a vote on how they do things. They need a dose of impatience because the athletes they pay millions of dollars to have a shelf like. They just gave Skinner a ton of money and he's likely approaching the end of his prime soon. If they intend sit around scratching their ***** and sniffing their fingers for another few years Skinner will be in decline (but still hold a full NMC for huge money) and all the supposed cap space they free up from losing the dead weight from Bogosian, Sobotka, etc. is going to get eaten up by giving Dahlin a boat load of cash and giving Reinhart a raise over his bridge deal.

Pegula seems to want to emulate the Penguins but I'm pretty sure they managed to turn things around in a shorter time frame than you would use to track glaciers. I'm pretty sure they went from trash to actually making the playoffs once or twice while Crosby was still on his ELC. We piss away the cheap years of our tank fruit like a rebuild can last a decade when in reality a decade is longer than 95% of the league will even play in the league. Patience is fine, but this isn't like season mode in video games where you can just waste year after year. If they have that type of mindset they may run the risk of turning the fan base into one like Carolina's where the arena is 75% empty most of the time unless they are in the playoffs.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Drunkard

[Randall Flagg]

43 minutes ago, darksabre said:

It's like people wake up every year completely forgetting that sports doesn't care about their impatience.

Sports doesn't care about their impatience, but the idea that our team is just logically being patient over the last [x] years is nonsense at this point. 

x can be 2.5, 5, 7, whatever you want it to be. 

Botterill is mediocre-to-awful at his  job at this point, even if he somehow GETS better, and then has a better team in the future because of it.

And fans talking about that mediocrity in detail with frustrated undertones doesn't mean we think that we can change things or that we know better than all the smart hockey people in the world

Edited September 26, 2019 by Randall Flagg

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

6 hours ago, Drunkard said:

So far, Botterill's "best" moves seem to be completely predicated on luck.

1) Winning the lottery after a last place finish

2) Getting lucky that Skinner was only willing to be traded to Toronto or Buffalo with Toronto not having the cap space after signing Tavares.

3) San Jose re-signing Kane turning that conditional second into a first.

 

It all depends on how you look at things (the underlined).

1) The bolded.....Botts got to last place  and had the best odds without the great hole he created. He got there WITH ROR, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, Lehner, etc.....best chance of winning the lottery given to him by the same players you're mad he got rid of. That core of players already had a slight dip (81pts - 78pts) prior to Botts arrival (and Housley). Besides having the best odds in that lottery, the odds were even more in our favor after losing the other lotteries. I would consider Chicago "lucky" moving all the way down to 3rd pick. Has it worked out that Edmonton was "lucky" winning the lottery?

2) If the Skinner contract becomes an anchor like you say it will.....was Botts "lucky"?

3) Botts got "some" value for a player he wasn't gonna sign. San Jose was the "lucky" one. They got the production out of Kane that they hoped for and re-signed him to boot. If they didn't re-sign him they would've lost Kane, a 2nd rd pick, and O'Regan. All for what....17games?

None of this means that I agree nor disagree with your take on the matter, just a different way of looking at things. It's all a crapshoot no matter how you look at it just as life itself. You might enjoy a beer when you come home from work and if it helps you pass a kidney stone you might consider yourself "lucky" you drank the beer. If you end up with liver problems 2yrs from now because of the alcohol will you still be "lucky" or have you created a giant hole you can't seem to get out of?

Or are you using the word "lucky" like some use the word "tiny". I'm sure you know "tiny"....the 6'11"/ 350lb guy who's a "teddy bear".

 

[Curt]

The O’Reilly trade was bad.  End of discussion.  The Sabres traded a very good player on a reasonable contract for a bunch of pieces that have not worked out yet.  If some of those pieces work out in the future, the trade could conceivably turn out ok-ish, but it’s never going to be notably good.

After Botterill took over he changed out parts of the team that he did not like, sort of setting things back a bit in the process.  It’s what almost every new GM coming to a bad team does.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

2 minutes ago, Curt said:

The O’Reilly trade was bad.  End of discussion.  The Sabres traded a very good player on a reasonable contract for a bunch of pieces that have not worked out yet.  If some of those pieces work out in the future, the trade could conceivably turn out ok-ish, but it’s never going to be notably good.

After Botterill took over he changed out parts of the team that he did not like, sort of setting things back a bit in the process.  It’s what almost every new GM coming to a bad team does.

And yet WITH ROR we finished DFL and 1yr removed(and about $25M less paid out), here we are back at the same point before Botts got here (76pts vs 78pts in the standings).

[Curt]

13 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

And yet WITH ROR we finished DFL and 1yr removed(and about $25M less paid out), here we are back at the same point before Botts got here (76pts vs 78pts in the standings).

Yep.  I’m not saying that it was wrong to move him.  Maybe he didn’t want to be here and management felt they didn’t want that around a young team.  That’s a valid rationale, but it seems that the trade was handled poorly.  Buffalo did not get good value for him, especially when considering the fact that paying $6M and waiting a day would have definitely resulted in a better return.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

30 minutes ago, Curt said:

Yep.  I’m not saying that it was wrong to move him.  Maybe he didn’t want to be here and management felt they didn’t want that around a young team.  That’s a valid rationale, but it seems that the trade was handled poorly.  Buffalo did not get good value for him, especially when considering the fact that paying $6M and waiting a day would have definitely resulted in a better return.

His signing bonus would've been $7.5M.....just how much more do you think the return would've been, Tarasenko at least?

[Curt]

1 hour ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

His signing bonus would've been $7.5M.....just how much more do you think the return would've been, Tarasenko at least?

I don’t know exactly, but I think it’s public knowledge that multiple other teams were interested but unwilling to pay the bonus.  I believe CAR was offering Elias Lindholm if I remember correctly.

[Brawndo]

18 minutes ago, Curt said:

I don’t know exactly, but I think it’s public knowledge that multiple other teams were interested but unwilling to pay the bonus.  I believe CAR was offering Elias Lindholm if I remember correctly.

 

This trade had someone else’s fingerprints all over it 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Brawndo

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

12 minutes ago, Curt said:

I don’t know exactly, but I think it’s public knowledge that multiple other teams were interested but unwilling to pay the bonus.  I believe CAR was offering Elias Lindholm if I remember correctly.

And the bolded is okay. Nobody has all the facts and everyone is entitled to an opinion. Facts are that we finished last w/ ROR. ROR was traded. We are where we were before Botts got here and w/o ROR. ROR won a couple trophies after leaving (good for him). We saved money. We don't know what other offers were tendered to be able to evaluate what the best offer was. We now have a hole that needs to be filled. 

Oh, and Botts should've been a weatherman.....'cuz he's never right, LOL.

[triumph_communes]

ROREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE