PerreaultForever

That seems pretty smurf-like to me. NHL average is over 200 lbs and at 6 ft. he should weigh more by now. Clearly isn't adding muscle.

IFF we are looking at old guys I'd rather sign Matt Martin than Mark Giordano. (but really neither)

I like Benson too. he was a refreshing change for me. Definitely has a future.

Benson's too young. If we had a veteran to hold it for Benson, that'd be ideal, but we don't.

true. The coaching changes brought in different philosophies as well. The rosters have never been deep though. Bottom 6 has often been a mish mash of garbage. We were so thin on D when JBot got here he messed up royally just throwing darts trying to find a D man. Ended up with a pile of meh D men. Lack of continuity has definitely been a thing and still is unless this new roster clicks under Ruff.

You can add me to that list. I've been on the bubble for a few years and just haven't managed to give up totally yet. Cynical as can be, but still there like a fool. Pegula would try to hire "the next" Bill Zito rather than an actual Bill Zito though. He probably thought he did that with Murray and JBott. If we miss the playoffs this year I expect Adams will be fired, Ruff's future will be left in the next GM's hands but unfortunately the GM will probably just be someone like Forton.

Well I certainly think you should spend to the cap every year but I doubt that changes anything if they don't improve under Ruff.

It's not just about picking the "right players" though. We supposedly picked the wrong ones, but one by one they all went on to win cups elsewhere. So they weren't wrong, they were just wrong in Buffalo. All of those teams @dudacek mentioned built through the draft (as did others) but where we differ is in hiring inexperienced or inept coaches and GMs. With Ruff we finally have an NHL veteran coach and we will see if that works, but the organization top to bottom has been flawed for over a decade now and if this does not work what then?

Tuch and Dahlin are obvious. You can argue for either as C or A but the two of them are always in the conversation and fairly obvious. The second A is an odd one though. So few veterans, so few leaders, people want to toss it to Cozens and I had high hopes but what has he actually done to earn a letter? I don't see it. Thompson on talent but leadership? idk. Unless you're handing out letters on the hope they become something I honestly don't know who you give it to.

The argument is a lot like political debates. Without picking a side, you create a problem and then you bitch about the problem being a problem. The Sabres were not a team that people didn't want to come to before Terry bought it so if any of them make the argument that it's hard to make the Sabres better because people don't want to come it's a self fulfilling one.

Well since we were talking Krebs only the forwards matter. I suspect Krebs is 13th forward, but he might not want to be.

It's a cumulative thing. You see it over the year in attitude, comments, practices, changes in the next game, maybe even taking out their frustrations on an opponent. What the team does after a loss. There's a ton of things and you add them all up. If it changes I am pretty sure you will notice it easily.

No. In simplest terms I mean no country club, no excuses, a higher standard and constant work ethic. A team that hates to lose more than wants to win. (everybody wants to win) Comradery is fine, but what I want to see is a higher standard. Goatheads actually. I've said that before.

The thing is you have to define "better". Much like Lazar, Krebs can be an adequate bottom end player who does just about everything okay but doesn't do anything particularly well. So if you want that, he's your guy. But if you want a role player who maybe doesn't do everything as well but does one or two things better then he has no place. Ultimately we have to wait to see what Ruff will do with the line up. Who plays with who might be a surprise still.

Why should I give it a rest? I want to see evidence of a cultural shift and so far there isn't any. Will there be? maybe. I will credit it if and when it happens. and if it doesn't change I will continue to critique it as a problem, because it has been, for years. and I will continue to critique you and your numbers games too because after all these years, you still don't get it. This is what I was pointing out last year in prospect discussions. He has a very different build from most of the "small" guys we have drafted who are slight of frame like Östlund for example.

I suppose anything's possible but it seems unlikely. I will be really surprised if the 4th line isn't the 3 new guys. So none of the prospects are ready?

Except, where does he play? Who is he kicking out of the line up?

Nice for them to hang out and bond. It would be even nicer if they'd all come from the rink where they were skating and working out.

I agree, and it would be nice, and he'd be a better player if he did, but I think it's a lot like with Tage. It's just not in their DNA. Big guys who at any given moment COULD step up, but in general they are not going to be instigators.

Except why would he add the mean streak? He's shown little sign of that being his game so far in his career.

Do you really think that's it (not toxic) or is it because he's from Toronto and he wouldn't have to move. Also yes, I'm sure he's thinking he could be deadline flipped and even if we weren't a "joke" and were in the running for the playoffs we could still flip him if we wanted to and let a younger guy play. bringing him in would be strange, but he is a veteran leader with a good work ethic.

No real leverage other than disgruntled distraction. Players who want out usually get their wish.

Well I'm still grading it even assuming Östlund is an NHL player (which is not guaranteed). I don't count any mitigating circumstances. It just is what it is and I do remember people claiming Adams was winning trades (which imo he has not done since Risto). idk about Krebs but I could see him trying to force their hand if they don't sign him. I mean wouldn't you?

I imagine Adams has tried to trade him. I also suspect he asks too much for him (probably wants a first or a second and he's being offered 3rd or 4ths or a marginal AHL prospect at best) and hence no deal. Krebs probably wants to be paid like a 3C and Adams is probably offering him around league minimum. Krebs is being quiet and professional but I wouldn't be surprised if he publicly asks for a trade if he's still unsigned at camp. I honestly don't care what happens to him but I think it's clear now that Adams lost the Eichel trade.

I don't doubt that this is true. It definitely FEELS true, but at this time I've still never seen anything concrete to confirm it as factually true.