LTS

And that always comes back to who? Who was the upgrade? I feel like all options have been debated and reasonably shown to not have been possible. Perhaps Husso, but no one knows if it was possible, just that the Sabres did not get him. Ullmark's name is thrown around and until this season was not the starter, did not have these numbers, and routinely was injured. No one would have projected Ullmark to be this, and if he was injured, then people would be complaining that the Sabres did not have ANOTHER goalie.

And therein lies the issue. Those who believe it was as an important a priority and what the organization actually planned for. But then again, the trick is identifying which goaltender would have been the Sabres savior. People tend to look at the positivity of this season and forget that even a year ago, or two years ago, and certainly three.. the Sabres were not a place where players would choose to go. We still debate whether players want to come here today. So.. who are they getting without overpaying.. and if they overpay, what impacts does that have on the current situation?

I was at that game.. sitting up high in the corner where the whole event took place. I still recall how the place erupted when Snow went over and tapped Barnaby with his stick...

This the thing people seem to be missing. The Jets D is ranked higher than the Bills D. They are quite legit.

Bear sucks.. simply suggesting he should have been an option undermines your take. Reilly, I think we all agree, was a tad confusing. This is so unlike the you I remember, even the angry you. There really wasn't anyone good who was available that would have solved the problem. Jake Allen... c'mon man. See my comment on Bear above. Jake Allen suuuuucks. Remember when the Sabres lit him up? Being near the top in scoring in the league is not moving forward? A team that has 109 goals right now after 28 games.. who had in 2013-14: 157 goals, the following season: 161 goals.. that's like 1.96 goals per game... right now they are at 3.89.. that's not progress. Oh right.. the record.. would you rather have the teams from 2013-2015 or this team? Yes, it's been a long time.. the fan carries that weight with them if they so choose. But there are reset buttons in sports franchises, it happens. It wasn't a priority. The priority was building the scoring talent along with the right D. That exists... now It's not so much the more.. but the experience. This team lacks experience to deal with the adversity. The more likely comes with a change in about 3-4 players from this current roster... and then the younger players end up staying in Rochester longer.

I had a 12U player start smacking a teammate in the head with his stick... when I told him to get off my bench he politely said "***** you". That was fun...

Perhaps.. as put above, Matthews was suspended. Then again, I doubt that last year Tage Thompson draws that "tripping" penalty from Crosby. It happens.

Cross-checks to the head.. and especially the face tend to earn a suspension of 2 games.. certainly I don't pay attention league wide, but I feel that's been fairly consistent the past few years.

It's a feature that people can choose to use, there's not really a need to disparage those who choose to do so.

Every time I see or hear this name.

Not only that.. but to me.. Thompson's goals are more exciting than Eichel's. At least to me... and yea.. the combination.. fuhgedaboutit

Wait.. I can watch this game? Nice! I am glad I am excited to watch this team play...

Well *****.. I will be there too. Didn't even realize. Sorry to all those who would be better off not knowing that.

I would bet that Adams would willingly move on from those players if there was a trade that made sense. We know they have little value, but so does everyone else. Could the Sabres get a player back in a trade that would fill those spots? Might be a stretch. I would bet they could for Olofsson, not so sure for Mitts. So if they had to fill the roster from the Amerks who's coming up? Biro, Bjork, Murray? They won't bring up Rosen, Kulich.. I doubt Rousek even. So perhaps its play them, knowing they aren't what you will keep and hope they improve to get a trade opened up.. or else its the off-season.. or hope someone waives someone else that would work better.

I'd say that Allen is the key only in the sense that if they lose him, they are done. However, I don't think they can necessarily win just because they have him and even if he performs well. We saw that last year. The defense however will be okay. It's never just a situation of sacking the QB and I think the line will still be formidable. It's a question of whether the secondary can cover the receivers properly and if the D can stop the run. Two things they've struggled with.. individually and together at times.

This is a helpful explanation and largely agree. But even then, do you have to account for factors like a front-loaded easier/harder schedule? That state of the opponent at the time? Take the teams that beat the Bills during periods of higher injuries.. do they get more credit than they deserve? So, yeah, at that point in time, given all the factors, they earned that. But the question is, if you don't consider all the factors, are you getting an accurate representation on which to base an opinion? The irrefutable fact is the record, I absolutely agree there.

As many as they want... the only question is how many you want to give them. Apparently you're willing to give them a lot of corners as well.

Yes, for the simple minded "you are what your record is" is true. And for that moment in time, its accurate. It does nothing to reflect what will happen in the future, even so far as 1 day further. I am sure we all live our lives thinking, "Today I am healthy. Therefore, I am healthy." naturally 5 minutes after saying that you could trip over a cat, smack your head and die.

In order to block a shot you have to be in position to do so. We've talked about the Sabres defensive zone coverage issues. Good teams usually don't have to block as many shots because they don't give up as many shots. Look at things in terms of shot block percentage and not number of shots blocked. Blocking a high number of shots would indicate that you are giving a high amount of shooting opportunities. Blocking shots is important, but there's a lot that goes into that number, including skill.

if you are building a house it's not a house until it's done.. but it doesn't mean you aren't working towards having a house. There's no snap your fingers and get there option. And that's the deeper thought.. because if I walked about the frame of a house..no one around, nothing happening. Would I know if they are building or if they quit and it was actually being left to fall apart? I would have to infer from the information around the house. That's deeper thinking, but on the surface the one thing everyone can agree on.. it's not a house yet. But, will it become a house? That's the thinking part. And yet they said it.

And he is part of a well respected hockey family, etc. The guy is about as "IN" hockey as you can be. There's a world of difference between can't and won't and even more so between can't and have not yet because that wasn't in the plan. You are imposing your plan onto their plan. It's pointless to do so. Your plan is irrelevant. You can debate whether their plan is the right one, but they absolutely are following their plan. So it's not CAN'T.. it's have not yet. The discussion of a limited payroll Where is the basis of it? If you wanted they could have paid Thompson $13M a year. Would that have made you happy? They could go potentially go overpay on free agents, how does that EVER work out for teams? Where are they supposed to spend this money? Every, single, argument that comes up with regards to this team comes down to "Get a goaltender." And every response is "Who?" and every time.. every, single, time... there isn't one that fits the argument. The UFA goalies can choose where they want to go and making a trade only works if you have a trade partner, and an option that makes sense. UFAs don't usually go to young teams that have not established they can win. Why would they? Do you think OBJ would have the Bills on his list of teams if this were 7 years ago? 100% not. It has nothing to do with the city, it has to do with having put in their time in the league and earning the right to control their destiny. And even UFAs get it wrong. People keep arguing "Do something." and then conveniently ignore three simple things: 1. In order to do something, there has to be something to do. 2. If there's something to do, it has to be a good hockey move. 3. If it's a good hockey move, it has to fit with the plan.

Yep.. the owner came in and wanted to win right away. He tried that strategy.. failed. So the turnaround time elongated. He tried another strategy and failed. He tried a third.. and failed. Each all playing into the time it takes to get to this point. Now they are trying a different strategy that relies upon a multi-year plan. The plan includes a focus on winning, but it also includes putting a team together that grows into that focus. They are not at the win at all costs stage, or even manipulate the roster to win stage. They are at the development stage. No one is going anywhere yet. At some point they will, at some point that plan will be evaluated against the results and someone will make a decision. As you say, at some point... and the key is, that point is not now. They're not even trying to hide from that and yet people want to tear them down. But, going back to football.. if you failed 3 times in football you could at least still turn things around in 1-2 seasons. Not so much with hockey.

No way in hell I would forego pads.. nope.. not with some of the wackjobs that play.

It's interesting, I think it was only a few years ago around here people clamored about having a team that would be exciting, that would add fun and entertainment, that even if they lost at least they would lose in an entertaining fashion. They claimed that would be enough to make them happy. Now that team is here and people are unhappy. That's right, they do. But not every idiosyncrasy is the same, nor the injuries. You can look at a record as point in time snapshot of a team but it won't give you an indication of whether they will trend up or down in the future. That's the point of looking deeper.

Yup.. but not for long because my gym teacher was my varsity volleyball coach and I was soon moved to a different sport during the volleyball segments of gym class because I was endangering others... 🙂 I also played club level through college. Likewise.. and my nearly 50 year old body now tells me to stop blocking shots in men's league but it's a subconscious reaction.