2025 Stanley Cup Playoffs, Rnd 3

[Taro T]

50 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

If Edmonton wins and Skinner gets a cup that means the big line that was supposed to launch us forward (and did have a 10 game winning streak where we all got excited) will have sequentially (in terms of decreasing talent) won the cup. Eichel-Reinhart-Skinner. 

I guess you'd argue that we've always had top talent, we just can't build a proper roster around it. 

Pretty sure a more accurate description is, unlike the Eulers who let their "big 2" and the guys they identified as key (Nugent-Hopkins and Nurse) additional pieces of their core actually grow into men, who pretty much "all of a sudden" became good enough to actually build around though they weren't when they were kids, the Sabres gave up on the idea right about the time that Eichel and Reinhart (and McCabe and Montour and ...) were entering their primes.

NEVER should've traded away O'Reilly.  Keep O'Reilly and build around O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin, and McCabe and still bring in Montour.  That would be a really good basis for a team today and for the past couple of years.  Skinner never gets brought it as they'd've already added Sheary and wouldn't have the money for both Sheary and Skinner with O'Reilly still around.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Pretty sure a more accurate description is, unlike the Eulers who let their "big 2" and the guys they identified as key (Nugent-Hopkins and Nurse) additional pieces of their core actually grow into men, who pretty much "all of a sudden" became good enough to actually build around though they weren't when they were kids, the Sabres gave up on the idea right about the time that Eichel and Reinhart (and McCabe and Montour and ...) were entering their primes.

NEVER should've traded away O'Reilly.  Keep O'Reilly and build around O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin, and McCabe and still bring in Montour.  That would be a really good basis for a team today and for the past couple of years.  Skinner never gets brought it as they'd've already added Sheary and wouldn't have the money for both Sheary and Skinner with O'Reilly still around.

Well in fairness Skinner is really just a depth black ace with Edmonton and he wouldn't even see the ice if not for the Hyman injury. 

Montour's a funny one. Very specific skill set and he needs to be on a highly structured team for real success. We were a loose wide open mess and so he looked seriously flawed here and constantly out of position. He was not great in Seattle that also lacks that Florida structure. 

I think Dahlin could win a cup in Toronto. He's the piece they are truly missing. Reilly is not the PP QB they need. I'm not suggesting anything just looking at where he'd fit or be needed most among contenders if he insisted on getting out. 

[DarthEbriate]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

NEVER should've traded away O'Reilly.  Keep O'Reilly and build around O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin, and McCabe and still bring in Montour.  That would be a really good basis for a team today and for the past couple of years.  Skinner never gets brought it as they'd've already added Sheary and wouldn't have the money for both Sheary and Skinner with O'Reilly still around.

ROR and Dahlin never even got to play together. ROR might've regained some love of the game with a summer to cool off and bringing in kid-Rasmus and a new PP. With Ullmark, that's not a terrible core and Eichel improving every season. Instead, yet another monster hole appeared in the lineup. 

[...]

5 hours ago, Taro T said:

 

NEVER should've traded away O'Reilly.  Keep O'Reilly and build around O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin, and McCabe and still bring in Montour.  That would be a really good basis for a team today and for the past couple of years.  Skinner never gets brought it as they'd've already added Sheary and wouldn't have the money for both Sheary and Skinner with O'Reilly still around.

Lots of "in a perfect world" in this statement.

Not a one of those forwards plays a heavy SCF type of game. They all require a person on their line that relishes playing that way. Dahlin is the only one with all of the skillz including taking pleasure in playing mean. Montour was next closest. McCabe hits but, as I see it, doesn't enjoy it and he is a middling, or maybe slightly better, playoff D man.

Put this way, we actually managed to retain the meanest of the bunch in Dahlin.

When they were here, only ROR and, to some extent, Montour had the two-way game that eventually developed to help them win their Cups.

You'd need to have a coaching staff, supporting players and especially a goalie to make it work, as we all know.

Of all of them I think Reinhart would have been best to keep assuming his development arc remains as it has been - which is impossible without Maurice and Barkov.

 

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, ... said:

Lots of "in a perfect world" in this statement.

Not a one of those forwards plays a heavy SCF type of game. They all require a person on their line that relishes playing that way. Dahlin is the only one with all of the skillz including taking pleasure in playing mean. Montour was next closest. McCabe hits but, as I see it, doesn't enjoy it and he is a middling, or maybe slightly better, playoff D man.

Put this way, we actually managed to retain the meanest of the bunch in Dahlin.

When they were here, only ROR and, to some extent, Montour had the two-way game that eventually developed to help them win their Cups.

You'd need to have a coaching staff, supporting players and especially a goalie to make it work, as we all know.

Of all of them I think Reinhart would have been best to keep assuming his development arc remains as it has been - which is impossible without Maurice and Barkov.

 

No "perfect world" at all there.  Well, O'Reilly handing the keys to somebody else the night he decided to create a new drive thru at Timmy Ho's, but that's the only item necessary to let the rest of it play out.  And, does it REALLY take a perfect world to have a decision that seemingly insignificant at the time to have been made differently.  (And yes, that decision could've had much more tragic results, but it didn't.)  Btw, they HAD a goalie - Ullmark.  One more key piece allowed to simply walk out the door.

And, yes, that core would need players added around it.  Obviously.  But that core about 2 years ago would've been in a position to be winning a round or 2 and when you have that who knows how the chips may fall through the rest of it.  And had it actually been allowed to play together it should've been able to at least get to the dance earlier than that.  Remember, winning the lottery after Housley's last year gave Botterill the ability to "pivot" so we never saw O'Reilly and Dahlin play together as teammates.

But, literally, the reason this team is on a 14 year playoff drought is because they not only decided to tank but decided after that to switch direction at minimum 3 times and arguably at least 4 times and with each major reset you take a couple of steps back before you can just get back to where you were.

[OverPowerYou]

there is way too long of a wait between these playoff series. At most it used to be 4 days 

[French Collection]

Just now, OverPowerYou said:

there is way too long of a wait between these playoff series. At most it used to be 4 days 

I believe the delay is due to arena bookings from the previous round. They book and assume each series will go 7 games. If things end earlier, they don’t seem to change any dates.

[...]

8 hours ago, Taro T said:

But, literally, the reason this team is on a 14 year playoff drought is because they not only decided to tank but decided after that to switch direction at minimum 3 times and arguably at least 4 times and with each major reset you take a couple of steps back before you can just get back to where you were.

This I agree with. 

Each regime since Eichel didn't know how to - or wasn't allowed to - build a competitive team. Those players you mentioned, none of them were going to be placed in the correct environment with a competent roster which, as history has proven, is exactly what they needed to succeed (who doesn't?). 

We know Pegula has been meddling. Strike one. Therefore, we know they would never assemble a proper roster. Strike two. And, we also know a capable coaching/front-office regime would never manifest during this period. Strike three. 

All of the above aside, IMHO none of those players is the kind of character that can drag a team into the SCFs, let alone the play-offs (history proves this, too). And, sorry, we've also seen what Ullmark would look like in a play-off series. Assuming one of the players in question remained with the team and we made it into the play-offs with Ullmark, we'd still be talking about goal-tending.

The only thing we'd have is a break in the play-off drought. We'd also have a roster and regime that no one wants to mess with because - at least - it got us a round in the play-offs despite its faults.

I suppose my error here - my "perfect world" failure - is that I'm thinking of this as if we had an owner that learns from past mistakes.

[Taro T]

24 minutes ago, ... said:

This I agree with. 

Each regime since Eichel didn't know how to - or wasn't allowed to - build a competitive team. Those players you mentioned, none of them were going to be placed in the correct environment with a competent roster which, as history has proven, is exactly what they needed to succeed (who doesn't?). 

We know Pegula has been meddling. Strike one. Therefore, we know they would never assemble a proper roster. Strike two. And, we also know a capable coaching/front-office regime would never manifest during this period. Strike three. 

All of the above aside, IMHO none of those players is the kind of character that can drag a team into the SCFs, let alone the play-offs (history proves this, too). And, sorry, we've also seen what Ullmark would look like in a play-off series. Assuming one of the players in question remained with the team and we made it into the play-offs with Ullmark, we'd still be talking about goal-tending.

The only thing we'd have is a break in the play-off drought. We'd also have a roster and regime that no one wants to mess with because - at least - it got us a round in the play-offs despite its faults.

I suppose my error here - my "perfect world" failure - is that I'm thinking of this as if we had an owner that learns from past mistakes.

We do agree that the playoff drought would've ended.  How much more than that they'd accomplish is pretty much impossible to say.  Were Botterill still the GM, and in a world where he doesn't punt O'Reilly (as he did with ownership's blessing at a minimum if not their prodding) he very likely would've been retained longer, doubt the team would be a true contender though do expect they'd've won at least a series or 2 by now.  It's a team that would have a perennial Selke candidate on it, a perennial Norris candidate on it, a Vezina candidate on it, and as it turns out 2 other F's that can play pretty responsibly in their own end now that they're actually adults.

But ownership very well may have tired of Botterill.  Thing is, with all that on the roster, you aren't compelled to move Kevyn Adams into that role when Kim and Terry decide it's time to move on from J-Botts.  If we get lucky and they tire of him when they did, Bill Zito is still available, and considering he was interested 3 years earlier and the Sabres "tank fruit" are finally ripening there's no reason to believe he wouldn't still be intertested in the job.  (We know he likes a BUNCH of Sabres from that era.)

It's all what ifs and conjecture and there really isn't much point to the exercise, but not much else going on now as we have absolutely no idea what Kekalainen is recommending to Adams and likely won't until close to the end of the month when the draft finally arrives.  (And am VERY much looking forward to the day when the draft is something that we don't really put a whole lot of energy nor interest in as picks in the 20's and 30's definitely aren't expected to help out for at minimum 2 more years and more likely 3 or 4 more years.

[OverPowerYou]

7 hours ago, French Collection said:

I believe the delay is due to arena bookings from the previous round. They book and assume each series will go 7 games. If things end earlier, they don’t seem to change any dates.

It’s crazy. I remember 10+ years ago the Stanley cup finals started around the end of May 

Edited 19 hours ago by OverPowerYou

[Jorcus]

22 hours ago, Taro T said:

Pretty sure a more accurate description is, unlike the Eulers who let their "big 2" and the guys they identified as key (Nugent-Hopkins and Nurse) additional pieces of their core actually grow into men, who pretty much "all of a sudden" became good enough to actually build around though they weren't when they were kids, the Sabres gave up on the idea right about the time that Eichel and Reinhart (and McCabe and Montour and ...) were entering their primes.

NEVER should've traded away O'Reilly.  Keep O'Reilly and build around O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin, and McCabe and still bring in Montour.  That would be a really good basis for a team today and for the past couple of years.  Skinner never gets brought it as they'd've already added Sheary and wouldn't have the money for both Sheary and Skinner with O'Reilly still around.

 

The problem with the look back of the players at that time is that the 2017-2018 season was such a train wreck that keeping everyone was almost out of the question. 62 points when not tanking lead to compounding errors. The end of that season was a mess. I don't think the Sabres could take the heat at the time. Now were so used to not meeting expectations that they can get away with not making big changes.  

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Jorcus said:

 

The problem with the look back of the players at that time is that the 2017-2018 season was such a train wreck that keeping everyone was almost out of the question. 62 points when not tanking lead to compounding errors. The end of that season was a mess. I don't think the Sabres could take the heat at the time. Now were so used to not meeting expectations that they can get away with not making big changes.  

STILL to this day believe the actual reason the Pegulas wanted O'Reilly gone wasn't because of his sads at losing his love for hockey.  It was because they were embarrassed that just about the very 1st thing their 3 big prize of that off-season when the instruction went from tank to try to win (to go with Eichel & Lehner) was drive his truck into a Timmy Ho's.  Rich folks can take most anything you throw at them (:eyeroll:) but they really hate getting embarrassed.

 

And they had several GOOD pieces there.  But they really needed to get rid of a horrible HC and they did (with one nearly as horrible, d'oh!) and they were about to add Dahlin to supplement the core they already had in place.  But instead of adding to the core, they replaced a piece that was in his prime at the time for one that finally is in his prime.

Lather, rinse, repeat.