MakeSabresGrr8Again

Sure ...add more players from a losing environment, just what we need. LOL

I will assume you meant Berglund but it seems you would change the whole line-up ....am I correct?

Who would you put against Bergeron's line.... 2nd line had Sheary(who played in his 1st game) and the rookie TT 3rd line has Mitts, also a rookie who hasn't shown much yet 4th line would be the likeliest but why give them the ice time and take away from the rest? He put what we thought was OUR best against THEIR best and said "show me".

Sorry, but I don't think that HCPH is the problem. Comparing him to Babcock, who's had a TON of talent to work with, has coached for a good amount of time with 2 talented teams, and has proven his abilities, is not the right thing to do. So you've proven maybe that he's not the best coach in the league but is he worse(and be able to prove) than all the other 29 coaches in the league? Most people here have posted that we played poorly BUT...most have said things like speed is improved, time spent in our own zone improved, etc. If there is improvement in some areas then maybe in time other areas will improve also. This team is full of 1st time with Sabres players and rookies and will need some time whether Housley is coaching it or Babcock or Trotz or ? I saw a team that didn't capitalize on some good opportunities, showed some good speed in 1st period, and crisp passing in 1st period. They somehow got away from all that as the game went on. I think we need to give them some time to gel and one game does not make a season. Besides, most don't think we were a playoff team anyhow and just wanted to see some steps forward. The positives mentioned in some of these posts ARE a step forward and I think we will see more small steps forward in time to come.

All reasonable arguments.......LET THE SEASON BEGIN!!!!!!

I think your assessment is pretty good but just a few comments i would like to make..... 1) your predictions IMO are conservative in some ways and I would consider them to be our low end production. 2) I think you are under-estimating on 2nd and 4th lines....Berglund paces at about 20g/yr and I think Sheary will get 20+...as long as they stay healthy. 3) E-Rod got that many points last year in only 48 games,so I would hope to add some to that and Pommer also. All together I would add 8-10 goals on 4th line. 4) If these are correct we are talking about another 15-20 goals which could push us at least another spot up in the division and like you said...contend for a playoff spot Nice job though with the predictions and my assessment IS just based on my opinion or my optimism?

I would think that has already been decided .....pending any acquisitions made in the office today.

With the rosters having to be set today, I think I'd rather have coaches and management making the more important decisions sitting on their butts in the office by the phones.

Coach Phil had this to say: "They've got some minor ailments," Housley said. "They're all day-to-day."

The bolded parts are why I don't necessarily agree with you, I understand your stance but don't agree. A few reasons why are as follows: You are concentrating too much on the first 10 games with the stance that the vets are the better option because you don't see the kids giving us an "appreciable difference" in wins. Do you honestly think that the skill and energy the kids could bring (Yes, with mistakes) would make that much a difference in the loss column? From your post I don't think you believe that either. So lets say the vets go 4-5-1 and the kids go 3-6-1 but get to develop with the players you want them to play with 10 games down the road. Most of these kids haven't played together very much or at all before (Mittlestadt, Asplund, Pilut, Thompson). Now you send them to Roch to develop (and Adjust) to a different environment and players you don't expect them to play with in the near future. Then call them up 10 games later to join yet another roster of players to adjust to. What kind of impact do you think it will have on the win column during the 2nd ten game segment of the season? Appreciable? I know we want to get off to a good start but there doesn't seem to be a real reason NOT to start the kids in your argument if you don't expect a real difference in the wins. It might send a better message to the other teams that we are more talented now and "here we come" instead of "their just the same old Sabres" With that said....I don't necessarily disagree whole-heartedly with you, I'm just trying to point out some things to you that you might not have considered.

As much as we would like to see this line of kids, I highly doubt it will happen so flip KO/Thompson and I would agree with this roster. One other exception.....I don't see Pilut going down to Roch and if he does it won't be long.

It has nothing to do with being a grammar **** and everything to do with the meaning of what you said. But forget it...you wouldn't understand. And how did you know I was German???

On the contrary,,,,if you're a Roch player would you want to be sent down? Ask Karabacek. If you're a Cinci player wouldn't you want to push your way up to at least the AHL? If you had said " they mean very little to the Sabres depth" I would have likely agreed.

Not quite what I was looking for but kudos for your imagination, lol

Just doesn't look like we have as much depth as we thought to the bottom of the organization. We're getting better though?

That is mentioned in the article on sabres.com also.

WOW....without the players that are still up in Buffalo, the line-up looks pretty bad .http://www.amerks.com/article/AMERKS ANNOUNCE 2018 TRAINING CAMP ROSTER

Now can we see a leap of faith? ?

Although Borgen is likely bound for Roch, I wouldn't count on him as the 7th D. He is very reliable and brings it physically, Phil will want to get a good look B4 sending him down.

Don't get me started again...LOL This is just another topic that adds to my previous post.

You're right about the Minnesota article being interesting. It at least starts to attempt to acknowledge some reasoning for the decline....economics and demographics. However; I'm sure they will find that it goes much deeper than that. Lifestyle and fear and pure laziness among other things will all factor into the equation. Not just in hockey but in all things we do nowadays. When I was a youngster we played outside with our friends....you know,riding our bikes, playing football in the nearest parking lot, street hockey, basketball, etc. Activities also included going to the roller rink and bowling alleys, all things that are now consumed on Xbox, iPad, phones, etc. When I was a kid a bunch of us from the neighborhood would get up in the morning and deliver our Courier Express papers then head to the park to play football 'til about 3pm. Then we deliver Buffalo News and head to the playground to play street hockey 'til dinner time. After dinner played basketball under the lights or went to the roller rink. Always active and competitive. Never sitting on our tushies playing games (until Atari came out...LOL). Dad worked 2-3 jobs while mom stayed home taking us anywhere we needed to go. Now with both parents working who has the time and energy to keep up? Bowling was $.25/game and an "open skate" at the roller rink was $1.00 or less for about 3 hours. Bowling alleys were everywhere and at one point I bowled in 8 leagues a week at 6 different lanes. Economics, lifestyle, laziness, technology, etc, etc,etc have all played a part in the demise of all real activity.

It could be Sam's Hockey IQ and how he plays without the puck that helps the teammates when he's on the ice. Doing the little things right goes along way and farther than most people think. That's what makes Sam a better player and more valuable than we think.

Nice job....but did you consider that 1/2 his goals (25 not 27) were on the PP as were almost half his point total? JBOT likely had an argument that he needs better 5v5 stats.

No practice today....everyone is off.

You left out Sobotka