TrueBlueGED
-
Posts
29,076 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TrueBlueGED
-
-
3 minutes ago, dudacek said:
You see it too, eh?
I just find it hard to believe that after last year's disastrous forward performance that anyone could add Johansson and Vesey and call it a day. Turris is as likely as anyone to be that third addition due to (likely) cheap availability.
-
4 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Assuming Bogo is going to be ready to play around the beginning of the season, what are the chances that either he or Scandella is flipped for some centre depth to a team that needs some blueline depth?
Im thinking veteran stopgap moves, like Perreault or Bonino.
Separately, if JBot is unable to flip Risto for a bigger fish, I still think the most likely move is that Kyle Turris will be a Sabre.
I continue to dislike you.
-
30 minutes ago, shrader said:
I noticed this report from yesterday on TSN about Nashville signing Colton Sissons to a 7 year deal for a total of $20 million dollars. That has to be the smallest amount of money we've seen for one of these long term deals. I don't remember every seeing one of the non-top guys locking up for 7 years.
Must be a Nashville thing. They signed Jarnkrok a few years back to a 6-year deal for low money.
-
7 hours ago, Tondas said:
I'm sort of serious with the offer sheet to Marner thing. If someone offer sheeted him now, wouldn't the Leafs have to match it now and the LTIR wouldn't work since they would need to be under the Cap before the season started, thereby making the LTIR moot, or at least putting the Leafs in jam.
Well sure, but it takes two. There isn't any indication Marner wants to leave.
-
Twitter thread on how the move helps the Leafs' cap situation with re-signing Marner.
-
19 minutes ago, dudacek said:
Not interested in litigating the ROR trade again.
For those who are, Botterill traded him for Patrik Berglund, Vlad Sobotka, Tage Thompson, Colin Miller and Ryan Johnson.
No, he didn't. What the trade turned into with assets isn't the same thing as what it was. This line of reasoning also implicitly assumes we wouldn't have gotten Miller without trading ROR. It's probably a stretch to think we couldn't have gotten it done any other way. There's also the not so minor detail of time and flushing away a season in part due to one of the worst center situations in the league.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, WildCard said:
Professional odds maker
I think I'd take the over with about 10% confidence.
-
14 minutes ago, Zamboni said:
I didn’t think Scheifele was thought of as on the same level as Eichel in most circles. I always viewed him as a great player but a step below Eichel. ?♂️
I expect 26 year old Eichel to be clearly better than 26 year old Scheifele, but I think it's a tough argument to say there's much separation between them right now. And Scheifele is making almost $4M less for the next 5 years.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Zamboni said:
Risto, Mitts, Borgen, 2021 1st, 2022 2nd for Scheifele
Would you take an equivalent to that package for Eichel?
-
15 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
I'd still prefer making a move with a Florida team versus sending Risto to the peg.
Me too, since any deal with Winnipeg isn't solving our center problem. On the other hand, I'd be surprised if we were to get a better hockey player elsewhere than Ehlers (if that would be the deal). S
-
1
-
-
Just now, Thorny said:
I don’t have much of an issue with the return from trading of an expiring-contract Kane through the prism of the time it was made, and absolutely have no issue with it currently through the prism of today where we ended up with our best RHD because of it.
Risto falls into a nice area where the perception from outside (fingers crossed) is that we are moving significant talent along the lines of a ROR when we know that to not be the case.
Neither do I. Market dictated a crap return. I'm just saying, if I were a fan of another team looking to do business with him, I'd probably use it as a reason to expect to get an asset for cheap.
-
2 hours ago, erickompositör72 said:
Ask people in any front office around the league about ROR’s life off the ice. Everyone knows.
You can’t say “oh, we don’t know that for sure, but we know for sure JBott is a moron for trading him.”
Can’t have your cake & eat it, too
We could just leave it in the realm of things we know, ya know? Like, he's a tremendous hockey player so trading him for the return we got was stupid. There doesn't have to be a good reason otherwise to defend Botterill...he would hardly be the first GM to simply make a poor evaluation and get worked in a subsequent trade.
-
3 minutes ago, Thorny said:
Well most are viewing specifically through the prism of their own fandom so would be focusing on Sabres/Jets dealings of the past specifically. As mentioned, the last one was all the rage here in Winnipeg for a time.
Botterill certainly has more trades appearing to be on the “good” side of the ledger currently with one notable exception, of course.
Well, Botterill's good trades involve bringing talent in, not shipping it out. If I were a fan of another team, I'd look at both the ROR and Kane trades and probably think he's ripe for the taking.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Thorny said:
I read (re: Andrew Copp) that only “official” NHL stats are admissible in arbitration hearings, so some of the advanced stuff, to Copp’s and Rodrigues’ disadvantage, won’t be able to be factored in.
I don’t think Rodrigues will have a strong case.
Well, have the official stats allowed expanded since the NHL's partnership with SAP?
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
Jets fans have it ingrained in their minds that the Sabres are easy pickings for trades due to the previous administration.
Funnily enough, even the “best trade ever” left the Jets with less to show for it than the Sabres ended up with.
You’ll have to forgive them as they’ve had a very rough summer.
Are you sure it's due to the previous administration and not the current one?
-
5 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:
OF COURSE results ultimately dictate a manager's employment status, but for the purposes of following, analyzing, and discussing a team's (or any organization, for that matter) performance and approach (like we're doing here), we can discuss things QUALITATIVELY. Otherwise, what's there to say? Why bother?
There was a qualitative response. The only forward Botterill has brought in to this point who has been unquestionably good is Skinner. If his solution to his own mess is Marcus Johansson and Jimmy Vesey, then he has failed. Full stop.
10 hours ago, Curt said:I don’t know. That team basically self destructed. Rifts between coach and players. Rifts between amongst the players. It fell apart.
I understand that Botterill’s Sabres need to deliver some better results, but I think that Sabres team at the end of Murray’s tenure was absolutely broken.
And yet, that broken team was better than, or at least as good as, Botterill's second season. What does that say about the current state of the team?
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Tondas said:
It is frustrating. But there is no "NHL GM for Dummies" book written yet. I think progress (80+ points) this year gives JBOT another year to use the cap dollars he will get with the UFAs leaving. next year I'd rather risk another year with JBOT than start the GM lather rinse repeat cycle that we'd be in again.
The fact that progress is defined as matching Tim Murray's first post-tank season is maddening. That's not progress. I also disagree that changing GMs results in another 4-year rebuild. I guess it could, but there's no reason for that to be the expectation.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Thorny said:
If one could somehow ask anyone on this board at the time Botterill was hired what they would think if we went the first 3 seasons of Botterill's tenure failing to even come close to a playoffs appearance, I think the answers would be pretty uniform. Big fail.
We need big things this season and Botterill knows that, and it's why he'll make a trade for a 2C.
....please!
Right. This whole "he has the team built the right way for the long term" is such nonsense. Just because "development" is every other word out of his mouth doesn't actually mean he knows what he's doing. It's year 3. He took over a flawed team and made it worst. It's time for some results.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Tondas said:
Fair point Blue. But we're not sure he did break it. We can either give him a 4th year to find out or fire him after 3. If we fire JBOT after 3 years, then we are now 4.5 years out to fixing the problem. It's a good discussion. The kind of discussion that Terry should have but is not experienced enough in hockey to make a proper decision. This is why I think the Sabres need a Pres of Hockey Ops.
If we miss the playoffs by a whisker, I'm fine keeping him. That would represent real progress. But if we're not even close again, then cya. Over half the teams in the NHL make the playoffs. We have a legit #1 center and fell backwards into a franchise defenseman. There is simply no reason that we should have to keep waiting years to be a playoff team.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Tondas said:
3 years seems to be the standard to turnaround a franchise these days. I have turned around many businesses in my 30 year career and have found that it takes about 50% of the time that it was broken to fix it. So if the Sabres have not made the playoffs in 8 years (broken), it will take about 4 years to see success. So I would give JBOT 4 years. But I agree, I think that sniffing the playoffs this year is a good barometer.
That's the thing, though: the Sabres weren't broken. One could argue Botterill broke them, if going by team record in his first season.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Thorny said:
You still on the playoff-bubble or bust (canning) bandwagon?
100% yes. There were issues with the roster when he took over, sure, but not so bad that 3 years isn't enough to even sniff the playoffs.
-
2
-
-
On 7/18/2019 at 5:40 PM, dudacek said:
Here’s something no on seems to mention when they talk about Risto dragging his partner’s down:
Isn’t it generally accepted that Risto gets overloaded with the toughest minutes on the team? And wouldn’t that mean that ever player that gets partnered with Risto is being moved into tougher situations? Wouldn't it therefore stand to reason that their numbers would go down after the move?
Or is that all accounted for by the fancystats guys?
The regression models incorporate this stuff, but the plain corsi etc. don't. That said, I feel the need to emphasize, the impact of quality of competition on shot metrics is grossly overstated by most. There is some effect, but hockey is fluid and everyone plays everyone, so the difference in how often Risto versus Bogo line up against the top lines isn't that large. This same work generally shows that quality of teammates is significant on individual performance, quite a bit more so than quality of competition. So yea, the Dmen who skate with Risto face tougher matchups, but if Risto was the guy many seem to think he is, that should matter more than who the other team puts on the ice.
-
15 hours ago, nfreeman said:
I wanted another credible #1 goalie possibility brought in this summer, and at this point I assume it's not going to happen.
This is another factor that it will be fair to evaluate JB on.
Did you ever think it was going to happen? Hope sure, but not for a single second did I think Botterill was going to bring someone in. He gave Hutton 3 years and an asset to protect Ullmark. No way was he bailing on that plan after one season. He's banking on a new goalie coach fixing it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 7/17/2019 at 6:45 PM, Curt said:
What if there are no other big moves this offseason? No big trade to acquire a top-6 forward. What would everyone’s reaction be?
I believe that Botterill wants to trade Risto, but what if the good deal he is looking for just doesn’t materialize this summer? What if it doesn’t materialize until mid season? I feel like Botterill is pretty patient so I could see it happening. Just curious about how everyone would handle that.
My reaction would simply be Botterill has failed until the record at game 82 says he hasn't.
6 minutes ago, dudacek said:I think the plan is for Asplund to take Larson’s spot sometime in the next year.
Just like the plan is to have Borgen take Bogosian’s.
I think Jason has a chart in his office with these moves all planned out and he sticks with them.
Where do you think his own unemployment is marked out?
-
1
-
Non Sabres Deadline Trades/Rumors
in The Aud Club
Posted
I can't say I'd be enthusiastic, but if you get get 50% retention, then Turris at $3M makes a lot more sense.