GDT Buffalo Sabres @ Florida Panthers Sat. 4/13 5pm ESPN+ MSG & WGR Radio

[Archie Lee]

48 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Identify the holes and fix them as best you can.

Call the above what you will (committed, urgent, methodical, purposeful). The next time Adams makes such moves with the specific conviction of making the playoffs in the upcoming season, will be his first time. 

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

Call the above what you will (committed, urgent, methodical, purposeful). The next time Adams makes such moves with the specific conviction of making the playoffs in the upcoming season, will be his first time. 

 

But Adams thought he was making the playoffs this season adding the players he did.

He's always told us his plan was collecting young talent and nurturing them toward success and promised us it will work.

By specific conviction, do you mean acquiring clearly better players to push the Peterkas, Quinns, Powers, Byrums and Bensons further down the depth chart, or even moving some of those players to acquire more established ones? Not arguing, just wanting you to expand on what you're actually hoping to see.

[Archie Lee]

31 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

But Adams thought he was making the playoffs this season adding the players he did.

He's always told us his plan was collecting young talent and nurturing them toward success and promised us it will work.

By specific conviction, do you mean acquiring clearly better players to push the Peterkas, Quinns, Powers, Byrums and Bensons further down the depth chart, or even moving some of those players to acquire more established ones? Not arguing, just wanting you to expand on what you're actually hoping to see.

I do not think Adams made moves last off-season with a conviction towards making the playoffs. At the end of last season, both Adams and Granato bristled when asked if they had missed an opportunity by falling short of the playoffs and also when asked if not making the playoffs this season would be considered failure. Note that I am not saying they are actively trying to lose.  Rather, that they have not shown, in my view, any sign of accepting that not being a playoff contender this season is an unacceptable outcome. 

I agree with you that Adams has made clear what his intended pathway to success is. I am not eager for him to be replaced and want to see him continue as GM. I do think though that there are moments in a team’s progression where there needs to be a clear directional shift from rebuilding to contending. I’m not talking about a hollow “drill more wells” or “the rebuild is over” statement. I mean actions that set the tone. Last off-season, the decision to not make any changes on the coaching staff, to not move Olofsson (who Granato had lost all faith in), to bring back Jost, to not bring in a replacement for Quinn and change the make-up of the forwards, to not utilize existing cap space or draft/prospect capital to get better talent, to then start the season by rolling out a struggling Levi for 4 straight games, sent a clear message that winning was not an urgent matter for Adams and Granato (and Pegula, to be fair). 

There is no specific individual I want replaced, fired, cut, traded. What I want is for the Sabres to operate like a team that expects to make the playoffs in the coming season. There are around 22 or so NHL teams that operate that way in any given year.  Not all are successful, obviously. We have not operated that way under Adams yet. My opinion is that he is a year overdue and that every year that he puts it off is a year that takes us further away and not closer to the goal. 

Edited April 14 by Archie Lee

[Weave]

I tend to agree that Adams off season moves last season were not with a conviction of making the playoffs.

Johnson was brought in to be a mentor, not a missing playoff peice.  Goalie was still a huge question mark and wasn’t addressed at all.  And Quinn’s production was not replaced when he got hurt in the offseason.

 

[dudacek]

18 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

I do not think Adams made moves last off-season with a conviction towards making the playoffs. At the end of last season, both Adams and Granato bristled when asked if they had missed an opportunity by falling short of the playoffs and also when asked if not making the playoffs this season would be considered failure. Note that I am not saying they are actively trying to lose.  Rather, that they have not shown, in my view, any sign of accepting that not being a playoff contender this season is an unacceptable outcome. 

I agree with you that Adams has made clear what his intended pathway to success is. I am not eager for him to be replaced and want to see him continue as GM. I do think though that there are moments in a team’s progression where there needs to be a clear directional shift from rebuilding to competing. I’m not talking about a hollow “drill more wells” or “the rebuild is over” statement. I mean actions that set the tone. Last off-season, the decision to not make any changes on the coaching staff, to not move Olofsson (who Granato had lost all faith in), to bring back Jost, to not bring in a replacement for Quinn and change the make-up of the forwards, to not utilize existing cap space or draft/prospect capital to get better talent, to then start the season by rolling out a struggling Levi for 4 straight games, sent a clear message that winning was not an urgent matter for Adams and Granato (and Pegula, to be fair). 

There is no specific individual I want replaced, fired, cut, traded. What I want is for the Sabres to operate like a team that expects to make the playoffs in the coming season. There are around 22 or so NHL teams that operate that way in any given year.  Not all are successful, obviously. We have not operated that way under Adams yet. My opinion is that he is a year overdue and that every year that he puts it off is a year that takes us further away and not closer to the goal. 

Some of this seems to be more hindsight though.

Last year’s team could score with the best of them, but couldn’t keep the puck out of its own net. It had just improved by 16 points.

Is that the context that cries for changing coaches?

Adams brought in Johnson and Clifton and Greenway to address the goals-against and penalty-killing issues.

He decided he was better off waiting for someone to emerge from his trio of goalies than bringing in an outsider.

And he (my opinion) bet that he could bring in Pat Kane to fill the Quinn hole while leaning on Olofsson as his backup plan.

He did not foresee his 4 top scorers all falling of as dramatically as they did, which - far more than any of the above - killed this year’s team.

To me, it’s an excuse to say Adams wasn’t trying to make the playoffs this year.

Semantics maybe, but in my opinion, his failures were failures of execution, not conviction.

Edited April 14 by dudacek

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, sabrefanday1 said:

The negativity on this board towards players is a big thing here. I agree we keep running players out of town only to see them do well elsewhere. I get that many are tired of hearing it, but the fact is this team is young (the youngest in the league in fact). Signing a bunch of veteran free agents like Detroit is not the answer. They are no better off out of playoffs and Stevie Y is suppose to be a genius. And no one can tel me that any of the Islanders, Pittsburg, Caps, Flyers or Wings have a more talented lineup then the Sabres. They do, however, have experienced coaching and some good veteran leadership (especially Pittburg).  

So let's address this point by point.

1) negativity to players comes from poor efforts and losing. They win and they get much love. They work hard and they get even more love. Nobody drives anybody out of town (we do not have that power). I've seen every Sabres game this year and every Bruins game. Bruins were booed by their own fans 3 times if I remember correctly. Once quite loudly. Nobody complained or left town. They worked harder. Sabres were booed a few more times, but not really much louder or much more often. Certainly not sustained. 

2)"elsewhere" players are treated better? You must be f'n kidding me. The bar is so incredibly low here. You want to see scorn for your own team and players go look in on a Flyers site sometime. Bruins fans are far more critical. The standard on other teams is much higher. At least most teams. Sabres media is incredibly soft as well. Softer than the team, and that's really soft. 

3)Detroit wrong? Detroit was 11 points behind us last year and they are still alive down to the wire (but will probably just miss). They passed us and they have not had the #1 overall draft pick once, not to mention twice. Best they've had is 4th overall. They are better than us. Not a lot better, but better. 

4)Young as an excuse? They CHOSE to be young. It was a management decision and thus they can be held accountable for it and they do not get to use a self fulfilling prophecy as an excuse. 

The reality is the team is poorly coached, the team is pampered and spoiled and not held accountable (the bar is too low), they keep hiring inexperienced management that learns on the job and makes mistakes. They keep changing plans and deconstructing and then reconstructing in a perpetual cycle. They play soft and have inconsistent efforts. They are simply a badly run organization and a bad hockey team and without  changes, they will be the exact same thing again next year.

[Weave]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Some of this seems to be more hindsight though.

Last year’s team could score with the best of them, but couldn’t keep the puck out of its own net. It had just improved by 16 points.

Is that the context that cries for changing coaches?

Adams brought in Johnson and Clifton and Greenway to address the goals-against and penalty-killing issues.

He decided he was better off waiting for someone to emerge from his trio of goalies than bringing in an outsider.

And he (my opinion) bet that he could bring in Pat Kane to fill the Quinn hole while leaning on Olofsson as his backup plan.

He did not foresee his 4 top scorers all falling of as dramatically as they did, which - far more than any of the above - killed this year’s team.

To me, it’s an excuse to say Adams wasn’t trying to make the playoffs this year.

Semantics maybe, but in my opinion, his failures were failures of execution, not conviction.

Teams essentially secure their playoff births before Christmas.  Even if KAs plan was to add Kane, he wouldn’t be available before Christmas. So if that was part if a playoff plan, it was a ***** stupid plan given the loss of Quinn’s offense.

Edited April 14 by Weave

[PerreaultForever]

14 minutes ago, Weave said:

I tend to agree that Adams off season moves last season were not with a conviction of making the playoffs.

Johnson was brought in to be a mentor, not a missing playoff peice.  Goalie was still a huge question mark and wasn’t addressed at all.  And Quinn’s production was not replaced when he got hurt in the offseason.

 

I said when he was hired and I first heard him speak I believed his timeline was much longer than ours and with the tear down his plan was playoffs in 5 years and then presumably perpetual playoffs like the Bruins and Leafs etc. now. I was hoping that was wrong, but it appears that the 5 years from when he was hired idea is more correct and IF they do make moves and add this off season it will look to be true.

It's either that or they are just BS artists and totally incompetent which is also quite possible. 

[Archie Lee]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Some of this seems to be more hindsight though.

Last year’s team could score with the best of them, but couldn’t keep the puck out of its own net. It had just improved by 16 points.

Is that the context that cries for changing coaches?

Adams brought in Johnson and Clifton and Greenway to address the goals-against and penalty-killing issues.

He decided he was better off waiting for someone to emerge from his trio of goalies than bringing in an outsider.

And he (my opinion) bet that he could bring in Pat Kane to fill the Quinn hole while leaning on Olofsson as his backup plan.

He did not foresee his 4 top scorers all falling of as dramatically as they did, which - far more than any of the above - killed this year’s team.

To me, it’s an excuse to say Adams wasn’t trying to make the playoffs this year.

Semantics maybe, but in my opinion, his failures were failures of execution, not conviction.

You are correct that much of my thoughts are “in hindsight”. I don’t know how else to evaluate the situation.  I was onboard with much of what he did and did not do last offseason. Now that the season is over it is time to evaluate the results.

In hindsight, what’s worse for the future: That Adams didn’t have the urgent conviction of getting this team to the playoffs?  Or that he so badly misunderstood where the team was that he thought Clifton and Johnson were the missing pieces?

Maybe I’m the optimistic one. I think the organization can shift its level of conviction and urgency this off-season. I’m not sure we can overcome a GM who thinks that what we needed to take the next step was to replace Lyubushkin and Stillman with Clifton and Johnson. 

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I said when he was hired and I first heard him speak I believed his timeline was much longer than ours and with the tear down his plan was playoffs in 5 years and then presumably perpetual playoffs like the Bruins and Leafs etc. now. I was hoping that was wrong, but it appears that the 5 years from when he was hired idea is more correct and IF they do make moves and add this off season it will look to be true.

It's either that or they are just BS artists and totally incompetent which is also quite possible. 

This.

I don’t think he put a number on it, but it was clear he was taking the long road of build from within.

This is often what that road looks like.

Carolina has made the playoffs 6 years in a row. Before that they missed for 9 straight years.

Aho, Teravainen, Pesce, Slavin, Staal and Necas were all part of the team that missed that last year that led them to draft Svechnikov.

Hanifan and Lindholm were also part of the team and were flipped (for Dougie Hamilton) kinda like Mittelstadt was flipped for Byrum.

They built a critical mass and an identity from within, then added around it.

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

You are correct that much of my thoughts are “in hindsight”. I don’t know how else to evaluate the situation.  I was onboard with much of what he did and did not do last offseason. Now that the season is over it is time to evaluate the results.

In hindsight, what’s worse for the future: That Adams didn’t have the urgent conviction of getting this team to the playoffs?  Or that he so badly misunderstood where the team was that he thought Clifton and Johnson were the missing pieces?

Maybe I’m the optimistic one. I think the organization can shift its level of conviction and urgency this off-season. I’m not sure we can overcome a GM who thinks that what we needed to take the next step was to replace Lyubushkin and Stillman with Clifton and Johnson. 

Fair enough.

What I want most from next season is a GM who is right about Thompson, and Quinn and Cozens and Power.

[PerreaultForever]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

This.

I don’t think he put a number on it, but it was clear he was taking the long road of build from within.

This is often what that road looks like.

Carolina has made the playoffs 6 years in a row. Before that they missed for 9 straight years.

Aho, Teravainen, Pesce, Slavin, Staal and Necas were all part of the team that missed that last year that led them to draft Svechnikov.

Hanifan and Lindholm were also part of the team and were flipped (for Dougie Hamilton) kinda like Mittelstadt was flipped for Byrum.

They built a critical mass and an identity from within, then added around it.

The optimist side of me (hanging on to life by a thread) wants to believe that Adams is following the Carolina model and we will get similar results. We see the connections, we've had the Brind'Amour conversation on the site, we look for the similarities. It's possible. 

This team just doesn't remind me of that team though. If we played more like them. If we had a current identity of a lesser version of them I might buy in to the idea but I'm skeptical. 

[dudacek]

37 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

So let's address this point by point.

1) negativity to players comes from poor efforts and losing. They win and they get much love. They work hard and they get even more love. Nobody drives anybody out of town (we do not have that power). I've seen every Sabres game this year and every Bruins game. Bruins were booed by their own fans 3 times if I remember correctly. Once quite loudly. Nobody complained or left town. They worked harder. Sabres were booed a few more times, but not really much louder or much more often. Certainly not sustained. 

2)"elsewhere" players are treated better? You must be f'n kidding me. The bar is so incredibly low here. You want to see scorn for your own team and players go look in on a Flyers site sometime. Bruins fans are far more critical. The standard on other teams is much higher. At least most teams. Sabres media is incredibly soft as well. Softer than the team, and that's really soft. 

3)Detroit wrong? Detroit was 11 points behind us last year and they are still alive down to the wire (but will probably just miss). They passed us and they have not had the #1 overall draft pick once, not to mention twice. Best they've had is 4th overall. They are better than us. Not a lot better, but better. 

4)Young as an excuse? They CHOSE to be young. It was a management decision and thus they can be held accountable for it and they do not get to use a self fulfilling prophecy as an excuse. 

The reality is the team is poorly coached, the team is pampered and spoiled and not held accountable (the bar is too low), they keep hiring inexperienced management that learns on the job and makes mistakes. They keep changing plans and deconstructing and then reconstructing in a perpetual cycle. They play soft and have inconsistent efforts. They are simply a badly run organization and a bad hockey team and without  changes, they will be the exact same thing again next year.

Theres a lot in here I agree with and some I don’t, but what I want to respond to is this:

They keep changing plans and deconstructing and then reconstructing in a perpetual cycle.

It’s the single-most destructive, damaging aspect of the Pegula reign and the one that is hardest to overcome. it’s why I really want to give Adams a chance to finish what he started.

[#freejame]

Any player or coach that gets so butthurt about posts on a message that they feel ran out of town is not a player or coach that I want on my team. 

[#freejame]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

This.

I don’t think he put a number on it, but it was clear he was taking the long road of build from within.

This is often what that road looks like.

Carolina has made the playoffs 6 years in a row. Before that they missed for 9 straight years.

Aho, Teravainen, Pesce, Slavin, Staal and Necas were all part of the team that missed that last year that led them to draft Svechnikov.

Hanifan and Lindholm were also part of the team and were flipped (for Dougie Hamilton) kinda like Mittelstadt was flipped for Byrum.

They built a critical mass and an identity from within, then added around it.

I don’t think any of our rebuilds can be compared to Carolina for the simple fact that they pretty much always had a 2006 Stanley Cup winner or winners on their roster. We quickly cut ties with anyone who had success in Buffalo during our first rebuild. 

[PASabreFan]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

This.

I don’t think he put a number on it, but it was clear he was taking the long road of build from within.

This is often what that road looks like.

Carolina has made the playoffs 6 years in a row. Before that they missed for 9 straight years.

Aho, Teravainen, Pesce, Slavin, Staal and Necas were all part of the team that missed that last year that led them to draft Svechnikov.

Hanifan and Lindholm were also part of the team and were flipped (for Dougie Hamilton) kinda like Mittelstadt was flipped for Byrum.

They built a critical mass and an identity from within, then added around it.

If it's often what it looks like, there must be other examples besides Carolina.

[DarthEbriate]

50 minutes ago, #freejame said:

I don’t think any of our rebuilds can be compared to Carolina for the simple fact that they pretty much always had a 2006 Stanley Cup winner or winners on their roster. We quickly cut ties with anyone who had success in Buffalo during our first rebuild. 

The other issues with Carolina vs this Sabres effort (thus far) is they were able to identify players (Skinner) who didn’t fit, regardless of production. And most importantly, the GM and coach were in lock step.

Is Mitts the Sabres’ Skinner comparison? Likely not, because his loss created a bigger hole in the roster.

Meanwhile, the Sabres non-fit was Olofsson. Coupled with Quinn being out half the season, they needed to get a middle six vet that replaced Quinn if HCDG was going to play Benson over VO. This was an incredible disconnect. It needed to happen before the season began. Then you have Benson on the 4th line, the vet with JJP/Cozens, and VO is on… San Jose or something. 

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

Theres a lot in here I agree with and some I don’t, but what I want to respond to is this:

They keep changing plans and deconstructing and then reconstructing in a perpetual cycle.

It’s the single-most destructive, damaging aspect of the Pegula reign and the one that is hardest to overcome. it’s why I really want to give Adams a chance to finish what he started.

I want to respond to the last sentence. Giving Adams a "chance to finish what he started" is okay if and only if there is a plan to finish things and the plan isn't simply to carry on until you get enough of your own draft picks to have a winning roster. 

I look at a trade like the Mitts Byram trade and I don't really see it filling a hole or making us better. I just see it as Adams avoiding a potential problem in signing Mitts and getting the best player that was available to get rid of Mitts and that problem. Byram is a highly skilled player, but he's not really the type of player we needed. We already have highly skilled D men with offensive skills. We need defenders. 

It's not like we have a diverse pipeline either. It's highly slanted towards fast, often small or smallish, skilled offensive forwards. To me it's like Adams plan is keep drafting the same guy and maybe if we do that odds are one or more of them will hit and be a star. It's time now to fill the needs of this roster so it's time to make some deals and/or sign some free agents. So if he does that, if things shift in that direction, maybe then I will join you in "letting him finish" but I do need to get a sense that there actually is a finishing plan. It's time. 

Lastly, the coach has to change. Granato may have been a decent development guy but he's not a good game management coach and he's not the coach we need to get to the level we want to be. Change there might also signal a finishing part of the plan. 

[dudacek]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I want to respond to the last sentence. Giving Adams a "chance to finish what he started" is okay if and only if there is a plan to finish things and the plan isn't simply to carry on until you get enough of your own draft picks to have a winning roster. 

I look at a trade like the Mitts Byram trade and I don't really see it filling a hole or making us better. I just see it as Adams avoiding a potential problem in signing Mitts and getting the best player that was available to get rid of Mitts and that problem. Byram is a highly skilled player, but he's not really the type of player we needed. We already have highly skilled D men with offensive skills. We need defenders. 

It's not like we have a diverse pipeline either. It's highly slanted towards fast, often small or smallish, skilled offensive forwards. To me it's like Adams plan is keep drafting the same guy and maybe if we do that odds are one or more of them will hit and be a star. It's time now to fill the needs of this roster so it's time to make some deals and/or sign some free agents. So if he does that, if things shift in that direction, maybe then I will join you in "letting him finish" but I do need to get a sense that there actually is a finishing plan. It's time. 

Lastly, the coach has to change. Granato may have been a decent development guy but he's not a good game management coach and he's not the coach we need to get to the level we want to be. Change there might also signal a finishing part of the plan. 

I know you and Adams don't like the same players and that makes it really difficult for you to endorse his plan.

But he's hardly building his roster solely through the draft. In the past 2 1/2 season he has acquired Tuch, Krebs, Lyubuskin, Comrie, Greenway, Clifton, Johnson and Byrum to augment his NHL roster and he'll almost certainly add a few more more over the next 2 or 3 months.

They've been a pretty mixed bag and you can rightfully criticize his choices. But it's wrong to imply he's not interested in adding from outside the organization, and Tuch and Byrum say it's wrong to say he's not willing to make bigger moves.

I don't think it's any secret what you don't like is that he has chosen to ice rookies like Benson and Quinn and Power instead of players who are better than those guys right now. But that wasn't the plan. And the plan isn't to keep adding more and more rookies.

The plan was to accelerate the development of Tage, Dahlin, Mittelstadt, Cozens, Quinn, Peterka, Krebs, Samuelsson and Power by letting them learn in the NHL and fill in the gaps in that core as needed.

Other than the 1st 3 players, the development part hasn't fully played out yet. Whether you like it or not, Mitts for Byrum was the first significant move to fill the gaps.

It's the plan itself you don't like and that can absolutely be supported by the facts.

But he hasn't finished what he started.

Edited April 15 by dudacek

[dudacek]

6 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

If it's often what it looks like, there must be other examples besides Carolina.

There are plenty.

Chicago, Colorado and Tampa cup winners seemed too obvious and too successful.

But they fit.

This year's Vancouver team fits. New Jersey.

The current Winnipeg Jets are product of this method. Ottawa is trying and thus far failing. Montreal has just started.

The Florida Panthers tried and failed in the years around when Pegula bought the Sabres (22 years without a playoff series win, 19 of those without the playoffs at all) and finally got good when they tried a different path

Sometimes it's just the darkness before dawn. Sometimes the sun doesn't rise at all.

Edited April 15 by dudacek

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I know you and Adams don't like the same players and that makes it really difficult for you to endorse his plan.

But he's hardly building his roster solely through the draft. In the past 2 1/2 season he has acquired Tuch, Krebs, Lyubuskin, Comrie, Greenway, Clifton, Johnson and Byrum to augment his NHL roster and he'll almost certainly add a few more more over the next 2 or 3 months.

They've been a pretty mixed bag and you can rightfully criticize his choices. But it's wrong to imply he's not interested in adding from outside the organization, and Tuch and Byrum say it's wrong to say he's not willing to make bigger moves.

I don't think it's any secret what you don't like is that he has chosen to ice rookies like Benson and Quinn and Power instead of players who are better than those guys right now. But that wasn't the plan. And the plan isn't to keep adding more and more rookies.

The plan was to accelerate the development of Tage, Dahlin, Mittelstadt, Cozens, Quinn, Peterka, Krebs, Samuelsson and Power by letting them learn in the NHL and fill in the gaps in that core as needed.

Other than the 1st 3 players, the development part hasn't fully played out yet. Whether you like it or not, Mitts for Byrum was the first significant move to fill the gaps.

It's the plan itself you don't like and that can absolutely be supported by the factss

But he hasn't finished what he started.

Well you're sort of right but only partly. No, I don't like the plan. But, while I do believe you build a winning team primarily via the draft, I think you have to build the culture FIRST. That's the part I disagree with. His idea that they grow into that culture collectively is, imo, inherently flawed. 

I also do not believe that just throwing players into the NHL and having them learn that way is the best way either. Most teams use the AHL to teach and players only make the big club when they are ready. Most teams aren't willing to sacrifice entire seasons for "development". I think a roster needs to be balanced between rookies, young players and veterans, pros. Young guys developing in the minors and working hard and pressing veterans for opportunities and jobs. It's the cycle of hockey life. 

When a pile of kids knows they have the jobs and they get pampered and given free reign to "grow" they don't learn that work ethic. They can instead get spoiled and lazy. The competitive pressure just isn't there. In any event I do not think throwing players into the NHL accelerates their development. They need to learn good habits early and they need the proper development paths. Look at Mitts and Thompson. They only started to come into their own AFTER being sent down and humbled.

As for the trades and signings, they are minimal. I do not see Byrum for Mitts filling a need. Perhaps you could explain that? I see it as creating a hole at center. We already have enough puck moving offensive D men. What we need is Samuelsson back and adding another defensive D man, not a Dahlin-lite. All he did was toss Montour away and now replaced him. Holes created and filled like rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. 

I was for the Clifton signing and I think it was fine. He's overpaid, but that's how we got him. That's how you get free agents. Greenway trade was fine, even if his inconsistency annoys me but it's fine. I can't count Tuch and Krebs as great acquisitions because we tossed Eichel away. So far we have less than we had. Maybe Adams had no choice, but it's not a great accomplishment in terms of a plan. There's more tear down than build up there (so far). 

Adams hasn't filled the holes we have and we are a team that imo underachieves due to the poor coaching and the lack of leadership and key veterans on the roster. There are simply far too many errors in the Pegula era and so far, we just swap parts and spin our wheels. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The Chicago, Colorado and Tampa cup winners seemed too obvious and too successful.

But they fit.

This year's Vancouver team fits. Last year's New Jersey team.

The current Winnipeg Jets are product of this method. Ottawa is trying and thus far failing. Montreal has just started.

I would argue that New Jersey is an example of what I mean by building the team backwards and the wrong way. They got the talent but didn't build the culture first and so it was fragile and fell apart as fast as it came together. I don't want that for Buffalo. They are trying to retool it now but it'll take them time and so they took a huge step backwards. 

[dudacek]

6 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Well you're sort of right but only partly. No, I don't like the plan. But, while I do believe you build a winning team primarily via the draft, I think you have to build the culture FIRST. That's the part I disagree with. His idea that they grow into that culture collectively is, imo, inherently flawed. 

I also do not believe that just throwing players into the NHL and having them learn that way is the best way either. Most teams use the AHL to teach and players only make the big club when they are ready. Most teams aren't willing to sacrifice entire seasons for "development". I think a roster needs to be balanced between rookies, young players and veterans, pros. Young guys developing in the minors and working hard and pressing veterans for opportunities and jobs. It's the cycle of hockey life. 

When a pile of kids knows they have the jobs and they get pampered and given free reign to "grow" they don't learn that work ethic. They can instead get spoiled and lazy. The competitive pressure just isn't there. In any event I do not think throwing players into the NHL accelerates their development. They need to learn good habits early and they need the proper development paths. Look at Mitts and Thompson. They only started to come into their own AFTER being sent down and humbled.

As for the trades and signings, they are minimal. I do not see Byrum for Mitts filling a need. Perhaps you could explain that? I see it as creating a hole at center. We already have enough puck moving offensive D men. What we need is Samuelsson back and adding another defensive D man, not a Dahlin-lite. All he did was toss Montour away and now replaced him. Holes created and filled like rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. 

I was for the Clifton signing and I think it was fine. He's overpaid, but that's how we got him. That's how you get free agents. Greenway trade was fine, even if his inconsistency annoys me but it's fine. I can't count Tuch and Krebs as great acquisitions because we tossed Eichel away. So far we have less than we had. Maybe Adams had no choice, but it's not a great accomplishment in terms of a plan. There's more tear down than build up there (so far). 

Adams hasn't filled the holes we have and we are a team that imo underachieves due to the poor coaching and the lack of leadership and key veterans on the roster. There are simply far too many errors in the Pegula era and so far, we just swap parts and spin our wheels. 

Like I said, you don't really like the plan and you really don't like the execution 😁.

My only point is that the hand hasn't fully played out yet.

As to the bold, I think we all wanted Adams to use his depth in young, talented forwards to acquire a top 4 defenceman

That's exactly what he did.

You might say (many did) "not that young, talented forward for that top 4 defenceman".

We shall see.

[Thorny]

12 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I do not think Adams made moves last off-season with a conviction towards making the playoffs. At the end of last season, both Adams and Granato bristled when asked if they had missed an opportunity by falling short of the playoffs and also when asked if not making the playoffs this season would be considered failure. Note that I am not saying they are actively trying to lose.  Rather, that they have not shown, in my view, any sign of accepting that not being a playoff contender this season is an unacceptable outcome. 

I agree with you that Adams has made clear what his intended pathway to success is. I am not eager for him to be replaced and want to see him continue as GM. I do think though that there are moments in a team’s progression where there needs to be a clear directional shift from rebuilding to contending. I’m not talking about a hollow “drill more wells” or “the rebuild is over” statement. I mean actions that set the tone. Last off-season, the decision to not make any changes on the coaching staff, to not move Olofsson (who Granato had lost all faith in), to bring back Jost, to not bring in a replacement for Quinn and change the make-up of the forwards, to not utilize existing cap space or draft/prospect capital to get better talent, to then start the season by rolling out a struggling Levi for 4 straight games, sent a clear message that winning was not an urgent matter for Adams and Granato (and Pegula, to be fair). 

There is no specific individual I want replaced, fired, cut, traded. What I want is for the Sabres to operate like a team that expects to make the playoffs in the coming season. There are around 22 or so NHL teams that operate that way in any given year.  Not all are successful, obviously. We have not operated that way under Adams yet. My opinion is that he is a year overdue and that every year that he puts it off is a year that takes us further away and not closer to the goal. 

Yes.

Basically, based on the current construction of the roster, Adams believe playoffs remain possible today even while the active prioritization is tomorrow.

It’s not that he doesn’t care about winning now, or doesn’t make moves to win now, it’s just that if there’s a conflict of interest during the process, between longer term and immediate interests, the long term interests are currently still always the definitive decision making factor.

People might think it’s the proper way to do it, the strategy will have its proponents, but I think it’s pretty accurate to say that more could be done for the now if some of the perceived future was sacrificed. Where my opinion comes in is, I think they should do it.

tldr - trade more draft picks

Edited April 15 by Thorny

[PerreaultForever]

56 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Like I said, you don't really like the plan and you really don't like the execution 😁.

My only point is that the hand hasn't fully played out yet.

As to the bold, I think we all wanted Adams to use his depth in young, talented forwards to acquire a top 4 defenceman

That's exactly what he did.

You might say (many did) "not that young, talented forward for that top 4 defenceman".

We shall see.

Wrong type of defenceman don't you see that?

I just want to make clear, I liked part of the plan in theory, but I think the plan as a whole is flawed - unless change to complete it is on the horizon.