Marvin

FYI: I remember hearing $7M getting kicked around in the rumour mill. I do not recall anything from any major media or otherwise quotable source.

Is this a testimony to the quality of Mike Bales?

IMHO, actions speak louder than words. (Not that "I have dreams about McDavid" did not announce it any more loudly.) XGMTM gets my contempt because he undermined the team at every turn by trading anyone playing well -- so obviously that players joked on the bench that if you were playing well, you were trying to get traded. I personally think that the team played out of their heads in part because they used the negative motivation from management. Ted Nolan was the perfect guy to turn that into something to drive them. And Arturs Irbe worked magic with whomever XGMTM brought in. The players, coaches, and normal fans were treated like crap and deserved better than learning how to habitually lose.

You can blame XGMTM for it too.

They have got to get 2 or 3 sage defencemen to mentor the youngsters. I like the young defencemen a lot, but they are way too young for my blood. I would like at least 1 experienced goaltender even if Ullmark is re-signed. If Sheahan and Reider are here, I want them to be reserves. And I want forwards 15-21 on the depth chart to be a mix of NHL-ready prospects with high-end AHLers and tweeners. If they are here next season, this is where I want Eakin and Caggiula. I think that we need a greater variety of forwards in that top 9. Having said that, the top-9 as-is isn't bad IF the 4th line can be like the LOG line the last few years because all the roughest minutes are accounted for and you could just have the other three lines take the offencive minutes. But unless you are raiding the 3rd lines of contenders for that 4th line, it would be crass stupidity to count on that.

Good on you. 🙂 2 games, 5 goals, 88 shots.

I just put that up there so that we can see what we are staring at going into the summer. My bias is to have 4 lines whom I could throw over the boards with alacrity; otherwise Eichel has someone other than Bjork on his wing. In real life, though: I expect Girgensons to be taken by Seattle. I expect Eakin and Caggiula to be in Rochester. I would like 2 forwards in the top 9 swapped out for different styles. Many would put Cozens in the top 6. That makes the line-up something like: Skinner-Eichel-Cozens Ruotsalainen-Reinhart-Olofsson Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson Bjork-Sheahan-Okposo I would want to swap out a couple of forwards for a greater variety of styles among linemates -- more Girgensons's style.

I was just thinking that. Wowee. This is what happens when you rile a team which outclasses you.

We are on the same page -- although I personally think that Seattle will take Girgensons regardless of who else we expose. Protecting Cozens a bit to help him develop his game appeals to me. Depending on how the wingers shake out for Eichel, Reinhart, and Mittlestadt, a 4th line of Girgensons-Cozens-Okposo could be very effective. That is is no ordinary 4th line. Assuming I am correct and Girgensons is chosen by Seattle, then we could satisfy Skinner haters and Skinner supporters by putting Skinner-Cozens-Okposo as a nominal 4th line. As we head into the off-season, we have, including FAs: Skinner-Eichel-Bjork Ruotsalainen-Reinhart-Olofsson Asplund-Mittlestadt-Thompson Girgensons-Cozens-Okposo Eakin-Sheahan-Caggiula You can object that Cozens has no business on the 4th line, etc., etc. Ask yourself now: what changes do you want to make? I would like a greater variety of styles in these 12 plus the 3 behind them.

Alle Alle Auch Sind Frei! Calling all goaltenders! Your chance to play in the NHL has come. Contact the Buffalo Sabres via sabres.com.

The unfortunate reason that the Eichel and Reinhart talk is relevant is that whom you draft depends on who is on your team. IMHO, if you have a shadow of a doubt about Eichel and Reinhart being here after next season, you draft the best centre you can.

One of the few things I have hope about is that Lazar remarked that the team has a positive belief in itself when he was traded. Moreover, there is a good vibe from the team overall; in particular, Sam Reinhart and Rasmus Ristolainen look less grim when they are out there. We have seen a bit more team chemistry when players get hit; I can barely recall the last time I saw the team respond to attempted intimidation this well. The team overall does not quit; they can be overwhelmed like they were in the second game against Boston, but they responded against the Islanders last night. It is the first time in a long time that the team has playing decently in the last month of a season (Bylsma's first season). Maybe that helps

One difference is his mindset: he is in a supporting role in Boston whereas he had a primary role here. He clearly seems to be more comfortable in that kind of role. In fact, I think he said so a few years ago, but I would not want to be quoted on that.

For the record: I have a preference for an experienced coach over Granato, all other things being equal. Based on what I know now? Gallant. The one problem I have with Gallant is a big one, however: he has only lasted 2.5 or so years at all 3 jobs. What I would like is someone who is as good with young players as Granato has been to be the next coach -- experienced enough to have the respect of veterans but knows how to develop youth. That is a tough needle to thread. (And as someone who sews his own repairs of non-work clothes, I know how hard that is.) Alain Vigenault? Gerard Gallant? Bruce Boudreau? John Tortorella? Bueller?

Who is our back-up again?

I notice you said, not the game, but practise. Not the game, not the game that he loves, but practise. 😉

I think everyone has a good point, but I wanted to single out these specific responses. @PerreaultForever Just because we prefer Granato to what we had does not mean that if we score an interview with Gallant and he seems to be better, then you hire Gallant. I like that we have moved forward AND I want stability, but it is far more important to have the right guy for the job. @pi2000 Has exactly the attitude we should have. @PASabreFan is correct -- we should be open to anything if it appears to improve the franchise. That includes management as well. (Terry, Kim -- please let the hockey people be hockey people.) As it is now, I would be OK with Granato as a coach, but I don't want the team to chintz on the search.

Congratulations, Michael Houser! You earnt this one. 🍻

I will say it: this team is demonstrably better under Granato than it was under Krueger. This team comes back to win every now and then. I like watching games so much more. Yes, Houser bailed them out somewhat tonight, but they did not quit either.

I was about to post this.

Some do take a long time to develop. I think they show signs of improvement every year, slow but sure. IMHO, Ristolainen has plateaued. WYSIWYG.

The difference is that we didn't keep trading them because they played too well. I am still upset at XGMTM for doing that crap. Aside from not icing a competent NHL team.

Gadzooks, "Scouching" looks like a portmanteau of "scouting from the couch."

MugWump.

I kept most of the core intact and didn't upend the management. I also would be understanding if not thrilled at keeping IHCDG. That's "stay the course" as I see it if your philosophy matches mine, "if you are standing still, then you are falling behind." JMO.