msw2112

What this says to me, is that, along with the arguably positive acquisitions of Zucker, McLeod and Malenstyn, that Adams did fine with the moves he DID make. The issue was the moves that he DIDN'T make. For what it's worth, I didn't like the Byram trade at the time, but it's aging well. The glaring lack of veteran DEFENSIVE defensemen is still the biggest problem with the team and went unaddressed by Adams.

I think it's mental. They've squandered so many leads that they mentally lose their focus and start running around like chickens with their heads cut off in their own zone, making passes directly to the other team, etc. rather than doing what they were coached to do. They panic. It really starts earlier in the third-period (pretty much when the 3rd period puck is dropped) and the mental issues are exacerbated when the opposing team pulls their goalie. Being the youngest team in the league without enough steady-handed and steady-minded veteran players, particularly on defense, also contributes to the problem.

Dahlin is a great hockey player and likely the best on the team. I personally did not see him as the best choice for captain. While he's an aggressive player, he comes across to me as more of a quiet guy that's not too vocal with the team. (That said, I have no idea how he is behind the scenes in the locker room, at practice, etc.) Tuch seems to me to be more of a guy who has a captain-like personality. In the past, I thought Cozens had captain-type vibes in his future, but with his drop-off in play the last couple of seasons, he's no longer viable. The bottom line, however, is that they gave the "C" to Dahlin and they have to live with it. To rip the "C" off of his chest at this point would embarrass and alienate the team's best player and would ruin whatever chemistry remains in the group. You only remove the "C" if you intend to trade the player and the Sabres would be fools to trade their best player (unless it was a Lindros-like haul in return). Captain or not, Dahlin is the type of player you build a team around, not one you trade away.

You may have failed to comprehend what I have written. I fully agree with you that Pegula has been an abject failure, to date, as a hockey owner. Looking at his record, how can one say otherwise? My position is that given a few factors, I believe that Pegula will eventually get the Sabres right and I strongly prefer him having the opportunity to do that rather than risk him selling to an outsider who could move the team to another market. These are the factors: 1. He has committed to the Buffalo and WNY markets and kept both pro sports franchises in the market. (Fact) Many other owners would not have done that. (Opinion) 2. He has been successful with another professional sports franchise. Even if it was by blind luck, it happened. (Fact) If it happened once, it could happen again. (Opinion) 3. He has very deep pockets. Deep enough to kept the team in Buffalo, despite low attendance, and deep enough to keep it there until things turn around. (Fact) 4. He is on record as being a long-time fan of the team. (Fact) In my opinion, he very badly wants the team to succeed. He's not simply looking it as a business venture. (Opinion) I have an opinion that I believe is well-reasoned. If you disagree, that's fine. You are entitled to have a different opinion.

The only thing we can do is stop buying tickets, stop watching games, and stop buying merchandise. We really don't have much say in the matter. We really don't "give him" time. But I'd personally give Adams and Ruff the rest of this season and then reassess. If the team ends up out with a losing record and out of the playoffs, a change in management is required.

Not to denigrate your post, but I didn't read it that carefully. Based on my very quick read, I thought you were making a legitimate criticism of the author. Apologies for my sarcasm meter being off. I noticed this inaccuracy in the article yesterday and was going to post something, but decided it wasn't that significant to warrant a post. Then I saw a pointing out an "inaccuracy" in the article, so it seemed to open the door to another one. Just another indicator that I need to get off the Sabres message board and get back to work!

So he was able to find the right coach & GM combination with the Bills in ONLY 3 YEARS, which speaks more favorably to Pegula than if it had taken him 17. With the Sabres, he's made SO MANY bad hires (over a long, painful 14 years) that maybe he'll try something different and get it right the next time. But you're right, there's no guarantee. In my opinion, which is heavily disputed on this board, his commitment to the City of Buffalo and Western New York, his success with the Bills (even if by pure luck), his deep pockets, and his previously expressed love for the Sabres give him the leeway to take another shot at getting it right. Note that that doesn't mean I think he's done a good job as the Sabres' owner. He's been terrible. I feel like some of those who have been critical of my position are missing that part of it.

One other error is that it says that Zucker has been on the Sabres' first line for most of the season and that's incorrect. He spent most of the season on the 3rd line with Greenway and McLeod and they played really well together. After that, I think Zucker moved around a bit as Lindy shuffled lines trying to find some thing that would work. It's only recently that Zucker was promoted to the 1st line and I suspect it was because a) Peterka was in a slump and b) because the Quinn-Cozens-Peterka line was very productive in the past and they tried to recapture that magic. So the writer was a bit lazy in her research, but overall, the article was decent and accurate.

Why would the argument be lost? If Beane has a "free hand" it was given to him by his boss, Terry Pegula. Why can't a POHO or GM be hired by the Sabres that has the same "free hand" given by the same boss? Based on past history, I think it's very realistic that if a competent person is hired, that would be part of the deal. Maybe a Rick Dudley or a Ken Holland? As to Allen, you're not wrong that he's a generational player. That said, the Bills made the playoffs BEFORE Allen was drafted and have built a great culture into which Allen fits perfectly. The Bills without Allen would be structured differently, but would probably be a good team, whereas Allen makes them a great team. At this point, most of us would take a good team for the Sabres. Plus, Barkov, Tkachuk, and Reinhart are all excellent NHL players, but they're not McDavid, Ovechkin or Crosby level guys (not Josh Allen level guys) and they just won a Stanley Cup. A well-run hockey team can be a playoff team and contend for the Stanley Cup without a generational player on the roster. The 49ers went to the Super Bowl last year and nearly won the damn thing with Brock Purdy as their QB. But, first things first, let's just get a competent front office in place for the Sabres so they can become a playoff team. I love a good debate as much as the next guy, but I need to get back to work!

I don't know how old you are, but it's a fair point. It could take some time. A better question might be if TERRY will be alive before he is able to see it come to fruition. I believe it will happen in the next few years. Personally, I think the next administration after the Adams administration will be the right one. I believe that the league and others will advise Terry and he'll throw big money at the right guy. Maybe a POHO who steps in and hires a competent GM and coach. The cupboard is not bare. The Sabres have some good assets on the roster and more in the pipeline. They clearly need some quality veteran defensive defensemen (maybe 2) and some veteran forward with a little bit of scoring ability who play the game the right way (guys like Zucker). If Adams can't get that done, if the next guy is the right guy, he will.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said "he is not one of the all time worst NHL owners." What I said is that IT COULD BE WORSE. The former owners of the Arizona Coyotes were worse than Pegula (several of them, in fact) and now that market has NO NHL team. For what it's worth, the new owners in Utah are reported to be terrific. But yes, keeping the team in Buffalo is a big reason I put up with Pegula as owner. There are other reasons too. Because Pegula figured it out with the Bills on his 2nd or 3rd try and owns what is now considered a "model" NFL franchise, with a few more swings of the bat, I think he can accomplish the same in the NHL. Maybe it will be on his 5th or 6th try and we, as fans, will suffer until then, but life will go on and Buffalo will still have a NHL team, even if it plays more like it belongs in the AHL. Pegula also has very deep pockets and can sustain the team until the ship is righted. He also has a background and history as a Sabres fan, so he cares about the team and doesn't simply see it as a business asset. There are two reasons, in my opinion, that he's not spending money on the Sabres: a) he's spent money in the past and did not get the intended results, so he's trying a different path to improvement (draft and develop) than simply "throwing money at the problem" and b) there is some truth to the fact that free agents don't want to come to Buffalo and veteran players don't want to waive their No-Trade clauses to come to Buffalo. And it has nothing to do with palm trees and taxes, it's because the team sucks. If I had the choice of: a) Pegula sells the team and the new owner moves it to Houston, a much larger market where it can make a whole lot more money; or b) Pegula stays on as owner and the team stays in Buffalo I would choose b. If Pegula were to sell the team to a local owner who had the assets to properly operate a NHL franchise and an iron clad promise to keep the team in Buffalo, I'd be fine with that. I'm not aware of any parties that fit that category. Can the Jacobs family (Delaware North) buy the team while still owning the Bruins? Who else is there? And is that person any more competent in professional sports than Pegula? At least Terry has a track record of figuring it out with one other professional sports franchise after a couple of swings and misses. Pegula needs to hire a competent front office and things will be fine. He's tried and failed 3 or 4 times now, but eventually he'll find the right people. It might be next year or 3 years from now. By then may be you'll be gone and I'll be the only Sabres fan left. Nobody is forcing you or me to purchase tickets or watch the games on TV. Am I happy or satisfied with the current state of affairs with my favorite hockey team? Of course not. But, other than not buying tickets or not watching, there's not much I can do about it. I'm content to live my life and when the Sabres finally get the right management in place and turn the ship around, I'll be pretty damn excited.

There's some irony to this comment. Look at the Michigan hockey roster from 1994-95, featuring a former Sabres GM as Knuble's teammate. That team also featured long-time NHL player Brendan Morrison and Mike Legg, who is famous for "the Michigan" (the circus goal from behind the net with the puck flat on the stick tucked into the top corner - ESPN did a feature story on it).

It actually could be worse. Ask the fans of the Arizona Coyotes (I mean Utah Hockey Club). I'm one of them (The 'Yotes were formerly my 2nd favorite team, after the Sabres). There are lots of cities that would love to have a NHL team, and even better if they could do it without paying an expansion fee (Houston, Kansas City, Quebec City, etc.) Salt Lake City was one of those cities. My comment isn't to say that Pegula has been a great hockey owner - the evidence is clearly to the contrary - but, yes, it could be worse. The situation in Buffalo can be fixed. See the current Buffalo Bills, who after a 17 year playoff drought, are one of the perennial favorites in the league and are considered a model franchise. Pegula needs to find the right people to run the team and then (more or less) get out of the way. After failures with the likes of Russ Brandon and Rex Ryan, he got it right with the Bills. He's had a whole lot more swings and misses on the hockey side, but eventually, he'll get it right with the Sabres. I'm not arguing that it's been a long and painful journey that is still going, but eventually, he'll get the right team in place. Maybe it's just the case of the blind squirrel finding the nut, but it will happen eventually. I understand and empathize with Sabres fans who have suffered for 14+ years (I'm one of them too) and have had enough, but the current situation is better than having an owner who cashes out and simply sells to the highest bidder or who bungles the arena situation so badly that the team has no place to play and is forced to sell by the league. This is not hyperbole, it's exactly what happened in Arizona.

I'm guessing sports hernia, as I've heard it was a MBI "middle body injury." Those can take a couple of months to recover from and are common injures among athletes, particularly hockey players.

Outside of the obvious (having a competent GM and coach and stability), I struggle to see the difference between Pegula spending on the Bills and the Sabres. If anyone watched the Bills game yesterday, you saw that Von Miller was put into the game just so that he could get one sack to achieve a bonus of $1.5M. He got that sack in the 1st quarter and then did not see the field again. The punter punted on a 4th down that was a makeable field goal, and because it was downed inside the 20 yard line, the punter got a bonus ($100K, I believe). They appeared to try and get other players their bonuses and the announcers made a big deal out of it. I assume that Pegula signed off on this approach in an otherwise meaningless game (as playoff seed was already set prior to the game). It was said that the Bills wanted to "take care of their guys" to show the rest of the league how attractive it is to play for the Buffalo Bills. What could the Sabres do with that $1.5M? Would that pay the salary of a competent assistant coach? Would it pay a portion of the salary of a veteran stay-at-home defenseman? I guess it boggles the mind that the SAME OWNER could have one of the best franchises in the business in one league and one of the worst in the other. He's willing to spend freely in one, but tightens the belt in the other. Yes, the Bills are a cash cow and the Sabres are not, but ultimately, all the money comes from the same place. Why not send more of it toward hockey? Maybe it's true that the Sabres are willing to spend on veteran players, but the refuse to come to Buffalo....Or maybe Terry sees a return on his investment in football and has been burned when he spent freely on the Sabres?

The losing streak was rough, but they certainly ended it in style. While there are certainly many negatives about the Sabres, I'd like to focus on a few positives. First, Quinn has been playing much better of late, so maybe he's worked through whatever mental issues he's been having. Second, Kulich played his best game a Sabre last night. He made several plays, showing both tenacity (which this team sorely needs) and goal scoring ability (which every team needs). His quick release and hard shot could at some point be recognized as among the best in the league, once the rest of his game rounds out. It's a rare talent and it was great to see it on display last night. I'll add a third-star to Malenstyn whose speed and determined style has finally resulted in a couple of goals in recent games. Happy Holidays to all!

Ray seems like a good guy, but honestly, I think Biron is a better color guy. My only issue with Biron (and it's a big one) is that he is not a native English speaker, so his English is highly accented and slightly hard to follow at times, but I like his analysis and his tone better than Ray's. Ray also needs to buy some new shirts and/or longer ties. Being that he's on television, the least he could do is button his top button and properly tie his tie. Alternatively, just don't wear a tie. It's 2024 (and almost 2025), so a tie is not necessarily required, but if you're going to wear one, wear it properly and don't look sloppy on camera. It shocks me that the producers of the broadcast don't say something to correct this. The Sabres are bush-league enough, no need to make it worse with something that's so easy to fix. But hey, they had a big win last night and got the monkey off their backs. Should make for a more enjoyable holiday for the team and the fans.

I did not know they were playing tonight. Then I look at Sabrespace and see the gameday thread.... Sabrespace, why do you do this to me? I cringe because I know I'm going to watch. I shouldn't, but I can't help myself. I'll be cursing myself later for wasting a couple of hours only to walk away disappointed. I guess it's become somewhat of a gawker's delight.

I had the game on in the background while doing other things, so I didn't really focus on it. At one point, I was actually picked up and started reading a book, as it was more interesting than the game. What might happen in Chapter 32 was more interesting than the 3rd period. It's the middle ground before I get to the point of not watching at all, which I'm very close to....As such, I did not see this particular play, but based on what I did see, I'm not surprised and it's pretty sad.

I agree that the drop pass on the PP rush seems ridiculous. That said, in the last few years, every single NHL and major college hockey team that I've watched uses it. It's certainly not a Sabres thing.

I have no inside knowledge, but I believe that the team would have been willing to spend on some veteran free agents, but those players were not interested in playing for Buffalo. Not because of palm trees or taxes, but because of the teams lengthy and ongoing lack of success. The same may apply to trades for veterans who have no-trade clauses/lists in their contracts. I don't think that's a false narrative being pushed by Adams. I also think that Adams and the team are a bit guy-shy about trading away young, talented, (presumably) ascending players. They're concerned about getting low value in exchange for young guys who will blossom and succeed elsewhere, as Reinhart and Eichel have. Part of the reason that Reinhart and Eichel have succeeded where they are is because of the veteran players/leaders that were already on those teams, who took the pressure off of them and allowed them to blend in and grow and develop their games. So it's a conundrum - trade away the young talent to bring in the veterans to help steer the ship while they (those who remain) develop and lose out on the upside that you've cultivated for several years or hang onto the young talent, but potentially see it never develop because of the lack of leadership/mentorship - but one of the Sabres' own making. By way of example, I believe that Dylan Cozens will be a very good NHL player and a productive top-6 forward. I don't know if it will happen in Buffalo. In order to acquire talented veterans to push Cozens down to the 3rd line where he belongs and can properly develop (with the benefit of their mentorship), you have to trade players LIKE Cozens.

I don't see it that way. Lindy is a veteran coach and he has a struggling team. Rather than going through the ordinary routine (which does not seem to be working), he's trying a different approach. Will it work? Who knows, but at least Lindy recognizes there's a problem and is trying to do something about it. Maybe he's showing the players video and breaking it down to show them where they need to improve, tearing them new ones as he does. Maybe they're under so much pressure to break the losing streak that they're wound too tightly and they're going to go bowling and have a pizza party to take their minds off of things so they can play looser. I don't know. What I do know is that the regular routine was not working, so trying something different is a good idea. I don't see anything cowardly about it. While he might be protecting his young players from public scrutiny, Lindy Ruff is not afraid of the media. He's not dodging the media because he's scared. He's simply trying to find some new and different buttons to push to get his team out of a rut.

I thought Johnson played pretty well when he was with the Sabres. Even though he was a rookie, he held his own and didn't look out of place. I think he's in Rochester right now because they wanted to go with veterans players with a physical presence (Clifton and Gilbert) and because he can, as far as I know, go up and down without having to clear waivers. Rather than being the 7th defenseman in Buffalo, he's better off getting a lot of playing time and development time in Rochester. I could see him as a trade asset, given the acquisition of Byram, whose skill set is somewhat similar to Johnson's. They already also have young puck-moving defensemen in Dahlin and Power as well. I could also see the team moving on from Jokihairu and Johnson filling that slot. Bryson has also been somewhat of a pleasant surprise since the later part of last season, and after being left for dead, also giving them the "luxury" of developing Johnson in the AHL. Truth be told, I don't follow the Amerks very much, so I don't know how Johnson has played there, but he played pretty well in Buffalo.

I think we are agreeing more than you think. My post praised Zucker and also the Savoie for McLeod trade. What I said was that I didn't want to see the team make a "major deal" like trading off regular players like Cozens, Quinn, etc. I also said that I'd be comfortable trading a 2nd round pick and/or additional lower picks to acquire some veteran players. What I don't want to see is Adams blowing up the roster, now that we've FINALLY started to see some progress. Other than Quinn (who may be coming along and still has a lot of upside), most of the younger players have improved this season and they seem to be getting used to Lindy's system. Adding a couple of quality veterans for "prospects, picks or fringe players and not for key roster pieces" is fine, although I'd rather trade picks (and fringe players) than prospects. The prospect pipeline is looking pretty good right now, so picks might be more valuable to a team that doesn't have a very deep prospect pool and could be flipped for veteran assets. I think that the current team, with Lindy as coach, and with Thompson and Greenway coming back, is in a better position to MAKE the playoffs by a point or two rather the MISS by a point or two. That said, success is fragile. Despite a great game by Reimer the other night, if UPL goes down with a significant injury, a lot of this changes. Levi will be sharper and better after playing regularly in Rochester, but I'm not sure that he and Reimer could get the job done. One more thing to add is that the trade deadline is a long ways away. We'll have a much better picture of what the team looks like by then. Will they be buyers or sellers? I don't know, but I'd like to see the current roster marinate with the new Ruff system for a little bit longer before shaking things up. Bring in a veteran for a 2nd round pick? Sure. Blow it up by dealing major roster pieces - not what I want to see.

That would be a reasonable trade. The Sabres have three great young puck-moving defensemen (Dahlin, Power, Byrum). Some teams don't, and need that type of player. Maybe another team has a surplus of stay-at-home defensemen. I'd be fine with swapping Joki for a player of similar value that was more of a stay-at-home type of defensive defenseman. Joki is a former first-round pick with some good skating ability and a lot of NHL experience, so he has some value in the league, but he's not what the Sabres need right now. That's the kind of trade that could help improve the current roster without a huge cost and without mortgaging any future assets.