GDT: Penguins 🐧@ Sabres ⚔️🦬, 7pm, Feb. 5, 2026 (MSG, ESPN+, WGR-550)

[LGR4GM]

40 minutes ago, JohnC said:

 

I'm aware that I come off as a broken record but for now I'm sticking with my more positive view of Quinn than the crowd here. The same denigrating crowd wanted to cast away Sammy. They were wrong. And the same finger-pointing crowd wanted to dispatch Power. They were wrong. I'm open to him or anyone being moved if there is an upgrade. There's no need to continue to go back and forth on this issue. All I'm recommending is to be more patient and allow the Quinn scenario to play out longer. I simply see more potential in him than many others do. My recommendation is give him more time before making an definitive decision on him. TBD.   

Same crowd that was right about... oh God this will be a long list but: Leino, Ott, scadella, Sobotka, Myers, Stafford, E. Kane, Bogosian, Doan, McLeod, Savoie, Rossi, ... 

Samuelsson is the only one in recent memory. Power complaints are mostly about style and even with his better play, they remain. Quinn is producing points but his game is still questionable. 

Maybe don't pat yourself on the back so hard.

[...]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Let's face it. The Sabres are immature and the Penguins aren't. 

This is last night's game in the proverbial nutshell.

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Same crowd that was right about... oh God this will be a long list but: Leino, Ott, scadella, Sobotka, Myers, Stafford, E. Kane, Bogosian, Doan, McLeod, Savoie, Rossi, ... 

Samuelsson is the only one in recent memory. Power complaints are mostly about style and even with his better play, they remain. Quinn is producing points but his game is still questionable. 

The critical crowd that I brought up was related to their premature evaluations of Samuelsson and Power critics. Those were the examples that I brought up. The list that you brought up starting with Leino was not part of the discussion. I don't know why you think it was relevant to that specific discussion.

[K-9]

40 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

Imo Treating every game like a must win in February becomes a problem as soon as you lose the first one you “had” have. What do you tell yourself then? Even if they came out like their “hair was on fire”, wouldn’t it be rendered a waste if they laid an egg the next game? To me, I think I saw someone else mention it, the most important thing right now is not getting too high with the highs or too low with the lows. What made the streak actually special is that when we lost after it, it didn’t become a trend. We can afford to lose some games here and we are going to lose some games, here. Realistically if we mix is merely AS many wins as we do losses, we’ll make the playoffs. 

It’s still about playoffs for me. I like the idea of striving for more, honestly mostly because it creates a cushion to insure the playoff berth takes place. 

Yes it would be nice to have an extra million or two in playoff series wins but the first $100,000 that removes your debt and grants you the freedom to do whatever you want going forward is still by far the most value step forward. The rest really is gravy. Just make the playoffs. Need to shatter than obstacle. It’s still what defines this franchise - don’t make the mistake of thinking we are free until we are.

I’m also pretty convinced we are a good team now. Perhaps a really good team. I don’t think we are really an elite team though, even though the standings had been verging on saying that for a bit. That helps too with keeping the goal the same 

There’s a difference between must win games and winning statement games, which I considered last night’s game to be because there is a difference between being in 2nd place in the division vs being in a wild card slot. The loss was further magnified because they’ve now lost three of four including their last two at home and also including two teams they are chasing. 

I just can’t get on board with being merely satisfied to shatter the playoff obstacle. This team should aim much, much higher given what they’ve been able to accomplish. 

[PASabreFan]

Audience? AI is good but still needs trained up.

[PASabreFan]

17 hours ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Should have been icing 

It was tipped in the D zone by a Sabre and immediately waived off. Quinn still quit on the play getting back.

[LGR4GM]

7 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The critical crowd that I brought up was related to their premature evaluations of Samuelsson and Power critics. Those were the examples that I brought up. The list that you brought up starting with Leino was not part of the discussion. I don't know why you think it was relevant to that specific discussion.

You decided to throw a bunch of other posters under the bus because you were right about 1 thing and are now using that to justify being right about other things. I listed a crapload of players this board was correct in their evaluation of to demonstrate that A. You're not some savant, others also get players correct and B. Quite a few posters have been right over the years. 

Here, I'll play your game. The Sabres drafted Jack Quinn instead of Seth Jarvis. Since I was high on Jarvis and he's better than Quinn, I'm always right about every other prospect I like. See, I'd never say that and I certainly don't ***** on ppl for seeing things and saying "hey that Quinn guy isn't playing good"

[Nacho Libre]

22 minutes ago, K-9 said:

There’s a difference between must win games and winning statement games, which I considered last night’s game to be because there is a difference between being in 2nd place in the division vs being in a wild card slot. The loss was further magnified because they’ve now lost three of four including their last two at home and also including two teams they are chasing. 

I just can’t get on board with being merely satisfied to shatter the playoff obstacle. This team should aim much, much higher given what they’ve been able to accomplish. 

It’s 2 months of accomplishment standing on the back of 168 demonstrating that making the playoffs is a worthy goal.

To each their own 

[Weave]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You may not be aware of it that I was responding to posts who responded to me.  I wasn't responding to you. If you are bothered by it just ignore them. 

No bother at all. 

[Pimlach]

24 minutes ago, K-9 said:

There’s a difference between must win games and winning statement games, which I considered last night’s game to be because there is a difference between being in 2nd place in the division vs being in a wild card slot. The loss was further magnified because they’ve now lost three of four including their last two at home and also including two teams they are chasing. 

I just can’t get on board with being merely satisfied to shatter the playoff obstacle. This team should aim much, much higher given what they’ve been able to accomplish. 

Good points.  The team missed an opportunity to make a statement and get 2 important points.   At the same time they are playing with a bunch of of guys that started the season in the AHL and every team is ready for them.  There are no more surprises.   When Matt Tkachuk says the Sabres have more skill than than Florida that tells us something.  

We will see if they have the mental and physical strength to finish the season strong and get the job done.  We will also see if Jarmo has the mojo to add the pieces we need to elevate the team. 

They have 25 games left and 50 points are on table.   The Atlantic Division and Eastern Conference will be a dog fight every night.  If they make it this year it will say a lot about the future - metal sharpens metal.  

[K-9]

59 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

It’s 2 months of accomplishment standing on the back of 168 demonstrating that making the playoffs is a worthy goal.

To each their own 

Where have I suggested that making the playoffs isn’t a worthy goal? My point is there are worthier goals and this team should aspire to them and play like it.
 

But like you said, to each their own. 

[TageMVP]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

 

I'm aware that I come off as a broken record but for now I'm sticking with my more positive view of Quinn than the crowd here. The same denigrating crowd wanted to cast away Sammy. They were wrong. And the same finger-pointing crowd wanted to dispatch Power. They were wrong. I'm open to him or anyone being moved if there is an upgrade. There's no need to continue to go back and forth on this issue. All I'm recommending is to be more patient and allow the Quinn scenario to play out longer. I simply see more potential in him than many others do. My recommendation is give him more time before making an definitive decision on him. TBD.   

Lol this has to be a bot. No one talks or speaks like this. He has a thousand different words ready to go like hes running his posts through a thesaurus generator. 

On top of that, his posts are never separated by paragraph or indentation or anything like that. It's just one giant run on sentence. 

He never actually addresses peoples comments against his thoughts, he defends his thoughts without any actual substance. Then tries to end the conversation when he feels his "points" are failing or not getting through, ignoring actual evidence presented to him 

Then the exact process repeats itself when he responds to another poster lol 

Guys a bot. 100% 

 

 

 

[Cityo'Rasmii]

go Sabres

Edited February 7 by Cityo'Rasmii
go Sabres

[SwampD]

6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Kekäläinen is off to Milan but I hope he's already got the short list of needs already so he can execute the team needs once he's back. Might be the only good part of losing this game. He and Bergevin have to see the obvious issues. 

I agree. This loss may have been the best outcome. It’s obvious that something is needed. There needs to some movement at the deadline. Not sure it would happen if they had won.

[LGR4GM]

37 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I agree. This loss may have been the best outcome. It’s obvious that something is needed. There needs to some movement at the deadline. Not sure it would happen if they had won.

I will say Bergevin interviewed with WGR the week after he was hired and made some comment about him and Jarmo agreeing the team had flaws. I wish I had the exact wording but the gist was that even by Christmas, they sounded like they were deciding on changes. 

[Taro T]

23 hours ago, TageMVP said:

Sounds like it shouldn't be that way 

Why not?

The reason offside exists is to keep players from entering the zone significantly ahead of the puck entering the zone so the game doesn't turn into a tennis match wtih both teams looking for "baseline shots" from their own goalline to a teammate hanging out near the other team's net.

You by definition aren't going to be more than a stick's length ahead of the play if the puck is on your stick.  All of your teammates need to be no more than a body length ahead of the puck as you enter the zone as they need to have at least a part of one skate on/above the blue line as the puck completely crosses the blue line.

Yeah, it looks weird, but it doesn't give the team entering the zone a significant advantage over the d as pretty much anyone but possibly McDavid is going to be entering the zone slower reaching back than they would skating forward at full speed.

Again, the reason the rule exists is to keep people from being significantly ahead of the puck entering the zone.  Allowing a skilled puck carrier to bring the puck in behind him as he's deking a defender doesn't leave the puck carrier significantly ahead of the puck entering the zone.

[TageMVP]

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Why not?

The reason offside exists is to keep players from entering the zone significantly ahead of the puck entering the zone so the game doesn't turn into a tennis match wtih both teams looking for "baseline shots" from their own goalline to a teammate hanging out near the other team's net.

You by definition aren't going to be more than a stick's length ahead of the play if the puck is on your stick.  All of your teammates need to be no more than a body length ahead of the puck as you enter the zone as they need to have at least a part of one skate on/above the blue line as the puck completely crosses the blue line.

Yeah, it looks weird, but it doesn't give the team entering the zone a significant advantage over the d as pretty much anyone but possibly McDavid is going to be entering the zone slower reaching back than they would skating forward at full speed.

Again, the reason the rule exists is to keep people from being significantly ahead of the puck entering the zone.  Allowing a skilled puck carrier to bring the puck in behind him as he's deking a defender doesn't leave the puck carrier significantly ahead of the puck entering the zone.

I dunno it looks weird and the basis of the rule states that the puck has to be in the zone before any offensive player attacking the zone. Seems obvious to me 

Does the rule actually state "significantly" regarding the puck and or player? 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

I agree. This loss may have been the best outcome. It’s obvious that something is needed. There needs to some movement at the deadline. Not sure it would happen if they had won.

 

40 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I will say Bergevin interviewed with WGR the week after he was hired and made some comment about him and Jarmo agreeing the team had flaws. I wish I had the exact wording but the gist was that even by Christmas, they sounded like they were deciding on changes. 

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/sports/sabres/bergevin-feels-coming-to-buffalo-is-great-opportunity

Found the audio. Looks like it was from January. Still, it's a good listen and I hope I didn't misrepresent what he said.

[Taro T]

6 minutes ago, TageMVP said:

I dunno it looks weird and the basis of the rule states that the puck has to be in the zone before any offensive player attacking the zone. Seems obvious to me 

Does the rule actually state "significantly" regarding the puck and or player? 

No, the rule doesn't state that obviously.  If it did, then we wouldn't see all these overturned goals due to a skater entering the offensive zone a full 1/2" ahead of the puck.

Again, look at what the POINT of the RULE is, it's designed to keep players from goalhanging.  Period.

And considering you're hung up on my use of the term "significantly" here's what the rule says when a player is carrying the puck: "(a) player controlling the puck who shall cross the line ahead of the puck shall not be considered “off-side,” provided he had possession and control of the puck prior to his skates crossing the leading edge of the blue line."

It's legal and has been so for a very long time.

[bunomatic]

2 hours ago, TageMVP said:

Lol this has to be a bot. No one talks or speaks like this. He has a thousand different words ready to go like hes running his posts through a thesaurus generator. 

On top of that, his posts are never separated by paragraph or indentation or anything like that. It's just one giant run on sentence. 

He never actually addresses peoples comments against his thoughts, he defends his thoughts without any actual substance. Then tries to end the conversation when he feels his "points" are failing or not getting through, ignoring actual evidence presented to him 

Then the exact process repeats itself when he responds to another poster lol 

Guys a bot. 100% 

 

 

 

But he’s our bot. Right John C3PO ?

[TageMVP]

56 minutes ago, Taro T said:

No, the rule doesn't state that obviously.  If it did, then we wouldn't see all these overturned goals due to a skater entering the offensive zone a full 1/2" ahead of the puck.

Again, look at what the POINT of the RULE is, it's designed to keep players from goalhanging.  Period.

And considering you're hung up on my use of the term "significantly" here's what the rule says when a player is carrying the puck: "(a) player controlling the puck who shall cross the line ahead of the puck shall not be considered “off-side,” provided he had possession and control of the puck prior to his skates crossing the leading edge of the blue line."

It's legal and has been so for a very long time.

Why do you seem angry about this lol 

[Taro T]

24 minutes ago, TageMVP said:

Why do you seem angry about this lol 

Is it because you are having difficulty determining tone via the written word?  Pretty sure that's what it would be because this kid ain't angry at all. 😉 

[TageMVP]

7 hours ago, Taro T said:

No, the rule doesn't state that obviously.  If it did, then we wouldn't see all these overturned goals due to a skater entering the offensive zone a full 1/2" ahead of the puck.

Again, look at what the POINT of the RULE is, it's designed to keep players from goalhanging.  Period.

And considering you're hung up on my use of the term "significantly" here's what the rule says when a player is carrying the puck: "(a) player controlling the puck who shall cross the line ahead of the puck shall not be considered “off-side,” provided he had possession and control of the puck prior to his skates crossing the leading edge of the blue line."

It's legal and has been so for a very long time.

How can I be hung up on the term "significantly" if YOUR the one who specifically mentioned it in your original explanation? Then when I asked you about that word you hate, you proceeded to say "significantly" is not part of your (own interpretation) of the rule. Sounds like your hung up on the word to add to your narrative of what the rule means. 

And I never said that the rule wasn't legal, I just said the rule was stupid. Completely different. Then you had a tantrum and pretended not to be mad. 

Lol 🤣 

Edited February 7 by TageMVP

[dudacek]

13 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I will say Bergevin interviewed with WGR the week after he was hired and made some comment about him and Jarmo agreeing the team had flaws. I wish I had the exact wording but the gist was that even by Christmas, they sounded like they were deciding on changes. 

Our new leaders clearly had opinions on the roster coming in, that it was talented but flawed.

They also certainly gave me the impression they were going to carefully look at the pieces to determine whether their preconceptions were correct.

Im really curious how the past 27 games have affected that process. How different are the pros in their thinking than a Sabrespacer?

Take Quinn and Power, for example:

The posters who don’t like them have spent much of the past month minimizing their play, saying “sure they’re playing better but I still don’t like their game - look at (insert play here) for example.”

Meanwhile, the guys who do like them have exaggerated their impact, concluding improved play means they are not only better, but that they are going to keep improving.

The Sabres are not as good as the past 2 months, but they are also better than people  thought. Can Jarmo and his team correctly identify what is real and what is illusion?

 

Edited February 7 by dudacek

[TageMVP]

JohnC

Posted January 18

  On 1/18/2026 at 2:28 PM, SwampD said:

Wuh?! Dude, that is exactly what you were arguing against.

All within this very post, as well.

Do you even realize you are doing it?

We’re going in futile circles. I don’t blame fans for being impatient. However, I don’t want that to be the driving force behind a decision. Enough on the issue.

 

The bolded is a particularly funny JohnCBot post. "Enough on the issue" lol angry bot